Author Topic: Trump outrage of the day  (Read 500409 times)

John Galt incarnate!

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
  • Location: On Cloud Nine
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6600 on: January 07, 2021, 03:30:09 PM »


As of the last list I saw, only one Republican has signed on to impeach and remove. How is this a partisan issue?!

Congress is populated by  too many  craven careerists or careerist cravens.

Take your pick.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 03:32:40 PM by John Galt incarnate! »

Montecarlo

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6601 on: January 07, 2021, 03:55:20 PM »
@GuitarStv As I said before, I think seditionares is a good word (is that really the plural?  Thatís what my dictionary says).

Terrorism is a word fraught with connotation.  You know as well as I do communication is half transmitting and half receiving.  You have to take into account the receivers likely perception.

Letís just take the violence element.  Brandishing weapons and shoving people can be considered violent.  So can mowing people down with AK-47s and flying planes into buildings. 

I was 15 when 9/11 happened.  My first introduction to terrorism.  More recently we have Pulse nightclub and Christchurch and Manchester.  Calling these people terrorists will feel like equating them to hijackers who fly planes into buildings to many receivers, I donít think Iím particularly unique.

Itís a very inflammatory word, and right now we need the exact opposite.

Put these people in jail, charge them with breaking and entering, assault, sedition, hell criminally negligent homicide or felony murder.  Donít call them terrorists.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2916
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6602 on: January 07, 2021, 03:56:54 PM »
If their bombs had gone off could we call them terrorists? Or do we have to wait until they get really good tans?

ysette9

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7306
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
    • The Best Is Yet To Come
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6603 on: January 07, 2021, 04:04:35 PM »
@GuitarStv As I said before, I think seditionares is a good word (is that really the plural?  Thatís what my dictionary says).

Terrorism is a word fraught with connotation.  You know as well as I do communication is half transmitting and half receiving.  You have to take into account the receivers likely perception.

Letís just take the violence element.  Brandishing weapons and shoving people can be considered violent.  So can mowing people down with AK-47s and flying planes into buildings. 

I was 15 when 9/11 happened.  My first introduction to terrorism.  More recently we have Pulse nightclub and Christchurch and Manchester.  Calling these people terrorists will feel like equating them to hijackers who fly planes into buildings to many receivers, I donít think Iím particularly unique.

Itís a very inflammatory word, and right now we need the exact opposite.

Put these people in jail, charge them with breaking and entering, assault, sedition, hell criminally negligent homicide or felony murder.  Donít call them terrorists.
Bullshit. We shouldnít give these people a pass because they are white or homegrown. If the definition of terrorism fits, we should use it.

MudPuppy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 871
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6604 on: January 07, 2021, 04:07:19 PM »
Just because the terrorists arrived in a swarm doesnít mean they werenít, by and large, terrorists.


I do think there was a subset of the crowd that (somehow) genuinely believed they had arrived for a protest. Betcha those folks had the sense not to storm the building.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 17354
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6605 on: January 07, 2021, 04:13:03 PM »
@GuitarStv As I said before, I think seditionares is a good word (is that really the plural?  Thatís what my dictionary says).

Terrorism is a word fraught with connotation.  You know as well as I do communication is half transmitting and half receiving.  You have to take into account the receivers likely perception.

Letís just take the violence element.  Brandishing weapons and shoving people can be considered violent.  So can mowing people down with AK-47s and flying planes into buildings. 

I was 15 when 9/11 happened.  My first introduction to terrorism.  More recently we have Pulse nightclub and Christchurch and Manchester.  Calling these people terrorists will feel like equating them to hijackers who fly planes into buildings to many receivers, I donít think Iím particularly unique.

Itís a very inflammatory word, and right now we need the exact opposite.

Put these people in jail, charge them with breaking and entering, assault, sedition, hell criminally negligent homicide or felony murder.  Donít call them terrorists.

Did you have trouble understanding my meaning in the previous post?

If not, then I think we can put to bed the argument that using the dictionary definition of words is too confusing to convey meaning.

Do you consider American Airlines Flight 63 a terrorist attack?  I do.  The number of dead don't determine whether or not something is terrorism.  It's very clear in the definition: Terrorism - the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.  I reject the argument that a high body count must be achieved for something to count as terrorism.

dandarc

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4283
  • Age: 38
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6606 on: January 07, 2021, 04:14:46 PM »
You guys are being way too polite to MC.

Montecarlo

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6607 on: January 07, 2021, 04:14:50 PM »

Bullshit. We shouldnít give these people a pass because they are white or homegrown. If the definition of terrorism fits, we should use it.

Who said anything about race or origin?  Are you trying to bait me?

Montecarlo

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6608 on: January 07, 2021, 04:21:50 PM »
@GuitarStv I understand you and I think I was sufficiently respectful of your position while explaining mine.

Connotation is not something I am making up... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/connotation

John Galt incarnate!

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
  • Location: On Cloud Nine
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6609 on: January 07, 2021, 04:22:56 PM »

IDK anything about the training of  the police officers  on duty at yesterday's storming of  the Capitol building.

Given the rise  of domestic terrorism and mass shootings, and the fact the police  are on duty in the Capitol, a place  that is a quintessentially  target-rich environment attractive to terrorists,  I would think  their training  included many hypothetical scenarios about when or when not to shoot an attacker.

I know that sometimes people who climb over the fencing around the White House are tackled instead of being  shot. Of course, a single person is much different than an attacking mob.

Initially, I was undecided about the shooting of Babbitt.

Was it necessary?

Or a disproportionate use of deadly force?

That she was wearing a backpack was the deciding factor for me.

She could have been a suicidal bomber so I think shooting her was justified.

I'm sorry she was shot and killed.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 05:26:24 PM by John Galt incarnate! »

OzzieandHarriet

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 490
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6610 on: January 07, 2021, 04:23:07 PM »
Not terrorists?

Quote
Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, was among two dozen hiding behind the railing of the chamberís upper gallery, where they had gathered to watch the historic proceedings below.

Escobar could hear the mob outside. Police shouted, ďGet down!Ē

ďI crouched down with my colleagues,Ē said Escobar, who is from El Paso. ďI heard Capitol Police yelling, ĎPut your weapons down. Back away from the door!í I saw them pointing their guns toward the door, and on the other side of that thin, little door was an angry mob and a group of domestic terrorists intent on doing harm.Ē

She thought of the mass shooting in an El Paso Walmart in 2019 and a video from that day showing people crouched under tables as a declared white supremacist shot and killed 23 people.
ďAnd I was literally thinking about that video when I heard shots fired,Ē Escobar said. ďAnd I thought, I donít know if weíre going to get out of here.Ē

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/01/07/how-did-they-get-into-capitol-lawmakers-congress-feared-death/6583304002/

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2003
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6611 on: January 07, 2021, 04:28:02 PM »
@GuitarStv I understand you and I think I was sufficiently respectful of your position while explaining mine.

Connotation is not something I am making up... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/connotation

Of course connotation exists. But just because people don't think of guys who look like they are from Duck Dynasty as possible terrorists, that's all the more reason that we call them terrorists when they DO the definition of terrorism. To change the connotations so they will be more accurate!

Cool Friend

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 375
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6612 on: January 07, 2021, 04:31:21 PM »
@GuitarStv As I said before, I think seditionares is a good word (is that really the plural?  Thatís what my dictionary says).

Terrorism is a word fraught with connotation.  You know as well as I do communication is half transmitting and half receiving.  You have to take into account the receivers likely perception.

Letís just take the violence element.  Brandishing weapons and shoving people can be considered violent.  So can mowing people down with AK-47s and flying planes into buildings. 

I was 15 when 9/11 happened.  My first introduction to terrorism.  More recently we have Pulse nightclub and Christchurch and Manchester.  Calling these people terrorists will feel like equating them to hijackers who fly planes into buildings to many receivers, I donít think Iím particularly unique.

Itís a very inflammatory word, and right now we need the exact opposite.

Put these people in jail, charge them with breaking and entering, assault, sedition, hell criminally negligent homicide or felony murder.  Donít call them terrorists.

What the fuck is this idiot talking about?

Montecarlo

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6613 on: January 07, 2021, 04:33:18 PM »


IDK anything about the training of  the police officers  on duty at yesterday's storming of  the Capitol building.

Given the rise  of domestic terrorism and mass shootings, and the fact that they are on duty in the Capitol, a place  that is a quintessentially  target-rich environment attractive to terrorists,  I would think  their training  included many hypothetical scenarios about when or when not to shoot an attacker.

I know that sometimes people who climb over the fencing around the White House are tackled instead of being  shot. Of course, a single person is much different than an attacking mob.

Initially, I was undecided about the shooting of Babbitt.

Was it necessary?

Or a disproportionate use of deadly force?

That she was wearing a backpack was the deciding factor for me.

She could have been a suicide bomber so I think shooting her was justified.

I'm sorry she was shot and killed.

I felt the same way

WhiteTrashCash

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1708
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6614 on: January 07, 2021, 04:45:49 PM »
@GuitarStv As I said before, I think seditionares is a good word (is that really the plural?  Thatís what my dictionary says).

Terrorism is a word fraught with connotation.  You know as well as I do communication is half transmitting and half receiving.  You have to take into account the receivers likely perception.

Letís just take the violence element.  Brandishing weapons and shoving people can be considered violent.  So can mowing people down with AK-47s and flying planes into buildings. 

I was 15 when 9/11 happened.  My first introduction to terrorism.  More recently we have Pulse nightclub and Christchurch and Manchester.  Calling these people terrorists will feel like equating them to hijackers who fly planes into buildings to many receivers, I donít think Iím particularly unique.

Itís a very inflammatory word, and right now we need the exact opposite.

Put these people in jail, charge them with breaking and entering, assault, sedition, hell criminally negligent homicide or felony murder.  Donít call them terrorists.

What the fuck is this idiot talking about?

We certainly shouldnít use inflammatory terms for people who storm the US Capitol and attempt to murder government officials. That would be insensitive. /s

Montecarlo

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6615 on: January 07, 2021, 04:54:56 PM »
Sometimes itís too easy for me to get addicted to these discussions.  I think Iíve stated my positions, and I think I was respectful to those who disagree with me.  Iím not sure I will have anything new to add.

I donít expect anyone to agree with me or change my mind, but I do hope you can try to see it from a different angle.  Understanding is not agreeing, I donít ask anyone to change their beliefs.

Really going to try to disengage this time.

John Galt incarnate!

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
  • Location: On Cloud Nine
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6616 on: January 07, 2021, 05:11:31 PM »

I JUST HEARD TRUMP IS DISCUSSING PARDONING HIMSELF BECAUSE  WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TOLD HIM HE MAY BE IN LEGAL JEOPARDY FOR ENCOURAGING YESTERDAY'S ATTACK ON THE CAPITOL BUILDING.




Trump mulling self-pardon, sources say - ABC Newsabcnews.go.com õ trump-mulling-pardon-sources õ story
2 hours ago ó However, following the riots Trump's White House Counsel, Pat Cipollone, advised the president that he could face legal jeopardy for ...



Trump Is Said to Have Discussed Pardoning Himself - The ...www.nytimes.com õ U.S. õ Politics
20 mins ago ó President Trump has suggested to aides he wants to pardon himself in the ... because they did not believe they were in legal jeopardy and thought that ... the White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, warned Mr. Trump that he



« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 05:15:25 PM by John Galt incarnate! »

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4333
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6617 on: January 07, 2021, 05:15:02 PM »
It is regretful that she got shot. However I entirely respect the fact that the police officer was in his right to shoot. There was an extremely angry mob who was previously yelling "hang pence" and she was breaking through while wearing a backpack, honestly they could think this was a mass casualty situation. The police have to use their best judgement and are responsible for the safety of the people in that building.
 
« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 05:22:00 PM by partgypsy »

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4221
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6618 on: January 07, 2021, 05:25:58 PM »
@GuitarStv As I said before, I think seditionares is a good word (is that really the plural?  Thatís what my dictionary says).

Terrorism is a word fraught with connotation.  You know as well as I do communication is half transmitting and half receiving.  You have to take into account the receivers likely perception.

Letís just take the violence element.  Brandishing weapons and shoving people can be considered violent.  So can mowing people down with AK-47s and flying planes into buildings. 

I was 15 when 9/11 happened.  My first introduction to terrorism.  More recently we have Pulse nightclub and Christchurch and Manchester.  Calling these people terrorists will feel like equating them to hijackers who fly planes into buildings to many receivers, I donít think Iím particularly unique.

Itís a very inflammatory word, and right now we need the exact opposite.

Put these people in jail, charge them with breaking and entering, assault, sedition, hell criminally negligent homicide or felony murder.  Donít call them terrorists.

I was 23 when 9/11 happened. Listened to it in real time, like I did yesterday. A dear friend has lived in Christchurch since before the big quakes (and certainly through the mosque massacre). What happened yesterday was terrorism.

Watchmaker

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 875
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6619 on: January 07, 2021, 05:30:52 PM »
@GuitarStvDonít call them terrorists.

They are terrorists, plain and simple. The fact that some would object to calling them that makes it all the more important to call them out for what they are.

They are also seditionists and traitors, if we need more names for them.

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4221
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6620 on: January 07, 2021, 05:46:16 PM »
@GuitarStvDonít call them terrorists.

They are terrorists, plain and simple. The fact that some would object to calling them that makes it all the more important to call them out for what they are.

They are also seditionists and traitors, if we need more names for them.

All of those names fit. I'm a professional editor. Words have meaning.

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3490
  • Location: South Korea
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6621 on: January 07, 2021, 05:49:58 PM »
Re: Terrorism.

This entire event was planned. It was centrally organized, had identifiable leadership, has its own websites, and declared exactly what they planned to do and then did it. On those same websites right now are people who claim to have been there and are angry that they didn't start a shooting war with the police. They feel betrayed that Trump ordered them to march on the capitol, and then just a couple hours later to go home.  They argue they'd still be there occupying the city and battling it out if only Trump had given the word.  Too bad if the word 'terrorism' is inflammatory to you. If the shoe fits, wear it.

And before anybody tries to argue "well it was just a handful of them who got violent," if I witness somebody announce "I'm going to Washington D.C. on 6 Jan and conduct political violence" and all indications are that they're serious and I say nothing, I'm complicit in whatever crimes they carry out.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6622 on: January 07, 2021, 06:06:24 PM »
Damn just watched the videos

That looked like an extremely dangerous situation with a lynch mob ready to use whatever force it wanted. Mob mentality is dangerous and needs to be suppressed. The police did well to only shoot one person.

ender

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5946
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6623 on: January 07, 2021, 06:09:44 PM »
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title22/chapter38&edition=prelim


Quote
(2) the term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;


I'm not really sure how you could argue this doesn't fit.

Unless the argument is "violence" requires multiple people being harmed (only 1 police officer so far has died, so it's "just" one person who has died as a result - ignoring property damage) it certainly reads like a clear cut example of terrorism.

It was violence.

It was premeditated.

It was politically motivated.

It was against noncombatant targets (congress).

It was done by a subnational group.

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2854
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6624 on: January 07, 2021, 06:16:20 PM »

I JUST HEARD TRUMP IS DISCUSSING PARDONING HIMSELF BECAUSE  WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TOLD HIM HE MAY BE IN LEGAL JEOPARDY FOR ENCOURAGING YESTERDAY'S ATTACK ON THE CAPITOL BUILDING.




Trump mulling self-pardon, sources say - ABC Newsabcnews.go.com õ trump-mulling-pardon-sources õ story
2 hours ago ó However, following the riots Trump's White House Counsel, Pat Cipollone, advised the president that he could face legal jeopardy for ...



Trump Is Said to Have Discussed Pardoning Himself - The ...www.nytimes.com õ U.S. õ Politics
20 mins ago ó President Trump has suggested to aides he wants to pardon himself in the ... because they did not believe they were in legal jeopardy and thought that ... the White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, warned Mr. Trump that he

This is the most alarmed I've seen you be on this forum. If he attempts this, it will be both an admission of guilt (as you have pointed out in similar contexts), but will also up the ante on the potential constitutional crisis. Pence has indicated (via NYT reporting) that he is not amenable to using the 25th Amendment. I suspect Pelosi will move forward with impeachment in the house using a streamlined process. The constitution does not require a lot of process other than a vote on the matter. This will put the Senate in an awkward spot, and the floor vote in the House is likely to be blustery from the 140-something reps that just voted to try and overturn the election to favor Trump. What a mess.

frugalnacho

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4554
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Madison Heights, Michigan
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6625 on: January 07, 2021, 06:33:23 PM »
Not sure if posted yet, but a police officer has been taken off life support. Now it's 5 people dead I'm aware of.

We all understand the negative connotation associated with the word terrorist, which is precisely why I used it. 

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2854
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6626 on: January 07, 2021, 06:53:47 PM »
Not sure if posted yet, but a police officer has been taken off life support. Now it's 5 people dead I'm aware of.

We all understand the negative connotation associated with the word terrorist, which is precisely why I used it.

TBD: NPR reporting that this is not correct.
https://www.npr.org/sections/congress-electoral-college-tally-live-updates/2021/01/07/954333542/four-dead-police-injured-dozens-arrested-after-siege-at-the-u-s-capitol

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2854
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6627 on: January 07, 2021, 06:58:09 PM »
Quote
ďTrump is a political David Koresh,Ē said Billy Piper, a former chief of staff to the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, referring to the cult leader who died with his followers during an F.B.I. siege in Waco, Texas. ďHe sees the end coming and wants to burn it all down and take as many with him as possible.Ē

Omy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 694
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6628 on: January 07, 2021, 07:15:22 PM »
Trump outrage today: Trump has conceded and is calling for healing and unity.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5879
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6629 on: January 07, 2021, 07:16:41 PM »
Devos just resigned. Cowardly cabinet member rats abandoning a sinking ship.

John Galt incarnate!

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
  • Location: On Cloud Nine
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6630 on: January 07, 2021, 07:17:49 PM »

I JUST HEARD TRUMP IS DISCUSSING PARDONING HIMSELF BECAUSE  WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TOLD HIM HE MAY BE IN LEGAL JEOPARDY FOR ENCOURAGING YESTERDAY'S ATTACK ON THE CAPITOL BUILDING.




Trump mulling self-pardon, sources say - ABC Newsabcnews.go.com õ trump-mulling-pardon-sources õ story
2 hours ago ó However, following the riots Trump's White House Counsel, Pat Cipollone, advised the president that he could face legal jeopardy for ...



Trump Is Said to Have Discussed Pardoning Himself - The ...www.nytimes.com õ U.S. õ Politics
20 mins ago ó President Trump has suggested to aides he wants to pardon himself in the ... because they did not believe they were in legal jeopardy and thought that ... the White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, warned Mr. Trump that he

This is the most alarmed I've seen you be on this forum. If he attempts this, it will be both an admission of guilt (as you have pointed out in similar contexts), but will also up the ante on the potential constitutional crisis. Pence has indicated (via NYT reporting) that he is not amenable to using the 25th Amendment. I suspect Pelosi will move forward with impeachment in the house using a streamlined process. The constitution does not require a lot of process other than a vote on the matter. This will put the Senate in an awkward spot, and the floor vote in the House is likely to be blustery from the 140-something reps that just voted to try and overturn the election to favor Trump. What a mess.

Only Trump, a devious sociopath,  could cause this abominable, executive-branch turmoil.

The filthiness of his profanation of the institution of the presidency is revolting.

Congress must punish him for he deserves it.




I am not familiar with the arcana of congressional procedures.

I gather that the House of Representatives has a rule that allows certain resolutions a special, expedited status  so they can be debated and voted on very quickly.

Is an unprecedented, emergency-driven, second impeachment of Trump in the offing?

I believe so.

The House ought to do it.

The House must do it.

At the very least Trump's  ignominious  record  will be stained once again with another,  infamous, indelible"I" of impeachment.

« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 07:24:47 PM by John Galt incarnate! »

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6631 on: January 07, 2021, 07:18:29 PM »
One of the youtube comments was: "This is the worst production of Les Mis I've ever seen."

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2638
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6632 on: January 07, 2021, 07:23:28 PM »
Trump outrage today: Trump has conceded and is calling for healing and unity.

At first I ignored this because I assumed it was sarcasm

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/president-trump-concedes-condemns-supporters-rioted-75122489

John Galt incarnate!

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
  • Location: On Cloud Nine
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6633 on: January 07, 2021, 07:31:10 PM »
Devos just resigned. Cowardly cabinet member rats abandoning a sinking ship.

Senator McConnell's wife, Secretary of Transportation Elaine  Chow, also resigned today.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 07:33:07 PM by John Galt incarnate! »

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6634 on: January 07, 2021, 07:31:44 PM »
Trump's apology was a little scattershot to say the least.

Am I the only one annoyed by journalists' editorialising of Trump pieces? This is from The Guardian's blog:

Quote
More than 24 hours after he incited a violent mob to attack the US Capitol in support of his unconstitutional efforts to overturn the presidential election, Donald Trump finally conceded that ďa new administration will be inaugurated on January 20Ē and promised a ďsmooth, orderly and seamlessĒ transfer of power.

The video statement was posted on Twitter, one of the only social media platforms to which the president still has access following his unprecedented and egregious encouragement of rioters bent on insurrection.

None of the bolded should have been written.

As much as Trump's actions are deplorable, and as much as the bolded segments are well-justified comments, they are still comments.

News reporting should avoid personal commentary. It is a matter of self-restraint and intellectual honesty.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2916
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6635 on: January 07, 2021, 07:35:04 PM »
Trump's apology was a little scattershot to say the least.

Am I the only one annoyed by journalists' editorialising of Trump pieces? This is from The Guardian's blog:

Quote
More than 24 hours after he incited a violent mob to attack the US Capitol in support of his unconstitutional efforts to overturn the presidential election, Donald Trump finally conceded that ďa new administration will be inaugurated on January 20Ē and promised a ďsmooth, orderly and seamlessĒ transfer of power.

The video statement was posted on Twitter, one of the only social media platforms to which the president still has access following his unprecedented and egregious encouragement of rioters bent on insurrection.

None of the bolded should have been written.

As much as Trump's actions are deplorable, and as much as the bolded segments are well-justified comments, they are still comments.

News reporting should avoid personal commentary. It is a matter of self-restraint and intellectual honesty.

Why did you include "violent"? The mob was indeed violent, that is a statement of fact.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6636 on: January 07, 2021, 07:39:44 PM »
Mobs are violent or contain the potential for violence by definition.

I don't know why journalists think they have to over-explain and descend into spoon-feeding readers.

Trump may well be a hypocritical idiot who's ruining the country, but only a poor journalist would write that; for it is not the journalist's role to state conclusions - only facts.


Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3490
  • Location: South Korea
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6637 on: January 07, 2021, 07:40:01 PM »
Trump outrage today: Trump has conceded and is calling for healing and unity.

No he didn't. He did not say "I lost." All he said was "there will be somebody else here." He lied out his comb-over once again declaring he did everything he did to ensure a fair election rather than spend two months trying to engineer a coup.  That crap about "emotions and tensions" were entirely of his making. He told them flat out to be angry and they got angry. 

edit: he also took credit for mobilizing the Guard. Bullshit. He was still patting the rioters on the head when Pence picked up the phone and called them in.

Meanwhile Ted Cruz is on the air saying he's not sorry one bit for his role in this, but also absolving himself of the violence. Somehow beating the drums of a coup attempt for weeks and it actually happening conveys no responsibility.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 10:53:14 PM by Travis »

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3490
  • Location: South Korea
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6638 on: January 07, 2021, 07:45:06 PM »
Mobs are violent or contain the potential for violence by definition.

I don't know why journalists think they have to over-explain and descend into spoon-feeding readers.

Trump may well be a hypocritical idiot who's ruining the country, but only a poor journalist would write that; for it is not the journalist's role to state conclusions - only facts.

Because there's still a significant amount of the population who saw nothing wrong with what happened yesterday.

"finally" - two months after he lost the election

"egregious" - another word for shocking. He didn't just get on the podium and say "I was robbed." He instructed the crowd to go do something about it.

"insurrection" - a riot is just a mob of people causing vandalism. Insurrection is the explicit goal of overthrowing the legitimate government. It bears repeating that this wasn't just a protest that got a little out of hand. This was deliberate with a specific goal.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6639 on: January 07, 2021, 07:49:25 PM »
You missed my point (even though I explicitly said it) which is not that I take issue with the characterisations, but that the characterisations do not belong in straight news reporting.

As a matter of intellectual honesty, I like my journalism dry and fact based. I have no need to know a journalist's personal opinions on anything, whether I disagree or agree with those opinions.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2916
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6640 on: January 07, 2021, 07:50:40 PM »
You missed my point (even though I explicitly said it) which is not that I take issue with the characterisations, but that the characterisations do not belong in straight news reporting.

As a matter of intellectual honesty, I like my journalism dry and fact based. I have no need to know a journalist's personal opinions on anything, whether I disagree or agree with those opinions.

Yes, the word "violent" does belong in straight news reporting. It isn't a personal opinion.

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4221
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6641 on: January 07, 2021, 07:51:41 PM »
Mobs are violent or contain the potential for violence by definition.

I don't know why journalists think they have to over-explain and descend into spoon-feeding readers.

Trump may well be a hypocritical idiot who's ruining the country, but only a poor journalist would write that; for it is not the journalist's role to state conclusions - only facts.

Because there's still a significant amount of the population who saw nothing wrong with what happened yesterday.

"finally" - two months after he lost the election

"egregious" - another word for shocking. He didn't just get on the podium and say "I was robbed." He instructed the crowd to go do something about it.

"insurrection" - a riot is just a mob of people causing vandalism. Insurrection is the explicit goal of overthrowing the legitimate government. It bears repeating that this wasn't just a protest that got a little out of hand. This was deliberate with a specific goal.

This. You aren't here, Bloop. Too many people here are claiming that Trump supporters are never violent and that what happened yesterday was completely acceptable and even good. Too many people need to be spoonfed the truth. Maybe if the media had done it sooner, yesterday's seditious insurrection wouldn't have happened.

As an American and editor, I am glad that they're finally using strong enough language to convey the horror of what has happened.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6642 on: January 07, 2021, 07:56:51 PM »
You missed my point (even though I explicitly said it) which is not that I take issue with the characterisations, but that the characterisations do not belong in straight news reporting.

As a matter of intellectual honesty, I like my journalism dry and fact based. I have no need to know a journalist's personal opinions on anything, whether I disagree or agree with those opinions.

Yes, the word "violent" does belong in straight news reporting. It isn't a personal opinion.

I'm fine with the word 'violent' being used in news reporting, but 'mob' already contains the concept. That's the principle of parsimony.

I don't agree with OtherJen that the direness of the situation requires dumb people to be spoon-fed. Leaving aside the pragmatic consideration that those people wouldn't be reading The Guardian in the first place, I don't think spoon-feeding terms like "finally" (oh, about time!) and "egregious" (one step up from Trump's own Terrible, Terrible) is going to change anyone's political opinions at all.

And even if I were to accept that "the dumb populace needs to understand!", that's better saved for an opinion piece. Or a speech by a populist demagogue.

MudPuppy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 871
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6643 on: January 07, 2021, 08:03:50 PM »
These are descriptors. Appropriately used descriptors.

Abe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1831
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6644 on: January 07, 2021, 08:21:44 PM »
Bloopís personal peeves with journalism-specific grammar aside, who do you thinks going to finally replace Trump as crackpot head of the violent egregious mob insurrection Party? Cruz seems like a good bet. Heís eager to use the nut jobs to jump into power and is probably better at controlling them to political ends than Trump. I predict he will announce his candidacy for president on January 22nd, win the 2024 election and again in 2028. Thatíll be the outrage for today.

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1765
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6645 on: January 07, 2021, 08:34:50 PM »
If this guy isn't a terrorist, who is? What are those zip ties for...  gardening?
How about the Molotov cocktails, the pipe bombs, the guns?

« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 08:38:53 PM by Poundwise »

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6269
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6646 on: January 07, 2021, 09:06:39 PM »
You missed my point (even though I explicitly said it) which is not that I take issue with the characterisations, but that the characterisations do not belong in straight news reporting.

As a matter of intellectual honesty, I like my journalism dry and fact based. I have no need to know a journalist's personal opinions on anything, whether I disagree or agree with those opinions.

Yes, the word "violent" does belong in straight news reporting. It isn't a personal opinion.

I'm fine with the word 'violent' being used in news reporting, but 'mob' already contains the concept. That's the principle of parsimony.

I don't agree with OtherJen that the direness of the situation requires dumb people to be spoon-fed. Leaving aside the pragmatic consideration that those people wouldn't be reading The Guardian in the first place, I don't think spoon-feeding terms like "finally" (oh, about time!) and "egregious" (one step up from Trump's own Terrible, Terrible) is going to change anyone's political opinions at all.

And even if I were to accept that "the dumb populace needs to understand!", that's better saved for an opinion piece. Or a speech by a populist demagogue.

Quote
mob
[mšb]
NOUN
a large crowd of people, especially one that is disorderly and intent on causing trouble or violence.
"a mob of protesters"

It's a perfectly acceptable word to clarify the behavior of the mob.  The fact that you're more outwardly bothered by this than you are what actually happened is concerning.

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3490
  • Location: South Korea
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6647 on: January 07, 2021, 09:07:46 PM »
Bloopís personal peeves with journalism-specific grammar aside, who do you thinks going to finally replace Trump as crackpot head of the violent egregious mob insurrection Party? Cruz seems like a good bet. Heís eager to use the nut jobs to jump into power and is probably better at controlling them to political ends than Trump. I predict he will announce his candidacy for president on January 22nd, win the 2024 election and again in 2028. Thatíll be the outrage for today.

Sometimes people forget that he's one of the original Tea Party. Feeding off the fringe is his claim to fame. If Trump decides he wants to continue to play the role of standard bearer for this crowd it's going to be an entertaining power struggle. Go back and look at their 2016 arguments for what happened when Trump stole that from him.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2003
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6648 on: January 07, 2021, 09:08:46 PM »
You missed my point (even though I explicitly said it) which is not that I take issue with the characterisations, but that the characterisations do not belong in straight news reporting.

As a matter of intellectual honesty, I like my journalism dry and fact based. I have no need to know a journalist's personal opinions on anything, whether I disagree or agree with those opinions.

Yes, the word "violent" does belong in straight news reporting. It isn't a personal opinion.

I'm fine with the word 'violent' being used in news reporting, but 'mob' already contains the concept. That's the principle of parsimony.

By your own definition, the mob is either violent or it had the potential for it. It is an important factual matter to know whether violence actually occurred or if the potential was left unrealized. Therefore, this was a valuable addition in order to dispel the ambiguity you describe in the definition of "mob."

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #6649 on: January 07, 2021, 09:46:10 PM »
Sure, perhaps 'violent' was a helpful and objective term to clarify that the mob did indeed partake in violence and wasn't just inclined to violence. I will accept that.

JLee, the fact that I pick up on journalistic integrity doesn't mean I'm not bothered by what's happening. Though as you can probably tell by my Les Mis comment, I regard it as all slightly surreal, and reflective of a country that's gone to shit.

If I were American I would seriously want blue states to secede - or I'd make plans to leave the country. The Republicans are going to ruin it for the rest of you, otherwise.