Page 2 of 4

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2021 9:39 pm
by Bret Ripley
ajax18 wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 8:00 pm
Bret Ripley wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 7:35 pm
Fabulous question! I'm not really 'up' on what weapons are de rigueur for coups this season, but let's see what's on the list -- well, this one guy was carrying a podium that would probably hurt if he dropped it on your foot. Then there was the guy with a crossbow -- he also had several guns, Molotov cocktails, and smoke bombs, but a crossbow deserves special mention not only because crossbows are cool but also because they sublimely encapsulate the cultural milieux from which the gentleman's politics emerge. That sort of attention to subtle detail deserves recognition.

Pistols and tasers were reportedly carried by some, but that's nothing you won't see being toted around at your local Walmart. (Tip: pay close attention to those folks -- nothing says 'I know how to spot a bargain' like a Sig Sauer P365.)

(We will note but quickly pass over the pipe bombs; they carry too much of a radical '60s leftist vibe to merit serious consideration as a proper patriot's 'coup weapon.')

Honorable mention goes to the wrist-restraints and gallows, but aesthetically they don't really bring anything to the table that has not already been more elegantly stated by the crossbow.
A coup would have been 40,000 marines with heavy artillery taking over the capital and arresting everyone in Congress.
So, the folks with the gallows and explosives (etc.) didn't bring marines with heavy artillery and evidently had no intention of arresting anyone, and so may have been content with only murdering government officials without forethought about who may replace those unfortunate enough to end up on gibbets or in giblets; it's a novel approach, I will give you that.

(Some artless soul could point out that some of these folks fully expected the military to join them in their not-a-coup, but fortunately for them the very whackadoodleness of that sentiment readily lends itself to plausible deniability.)

Here's a tip you can have for free: having 40,000 marines with heavy artillery arresting folks and not having 40,000 marines with heavy artillery arresting folks is irrelevant to whether the intent is 'coup' or 'not-coup,' but it can be the difference between whether history remembers it as a 'coup' or an 'attempted coup.' Seriously, no charge.

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2021 11:13 pm
by Doctor CamNC4Me
Copypasta:
Listen, you fantastically retarded idiot. I'm going to try and explain this so you can understand it.

You cannot control an entire country and its people with tanks, jets, battleships and drones or any of these things that you so stupidly believe Trump's citizen ownership of firearms.

A fighter jet, tank, drone, battleship or whatever cannot stand on street corners. And enforce "no assembly" edicts. A fighter jet cannot kick down your door at 3AM and search your house for contraband.

None of these things can maintain the needed police state to completely subjugate and enslave the people of a nation. Those weapons are for decimating, flattening and glassing large areas and many people at once and fighting other state militaries. The government does not want to kill all of its people and blow up its own infrastructure. These are the very things they need to be tyrannical assholes in the first place. If they decided to turn everything outside of Washington D.C. into glowing green glass they would be the absolute rulers of a big, worthless, radioactive pile of crap.

Police are needed to maintain a police state, boots on the ground. And no matter how many police you have on the ground they will always be vastly outnumbered by civilians which is why in a police state it is vital that your police have automatic weapons while the people have nothing but their limp dicks.

BUT when every random pedestrian could have a Glock in their waistband and every random homeowner an AR-15 all of that goes out the damned window because now the police are out numbered and face the reality of bullets coming back at them.
If you want living examples of this look at every insurgency the the U.S. military has tried to destroy. They're all still kicking with nothing but AK-47s, pick up trucks and improvised explosives because these big scary military monsters you keep alluding to are all but damned useless for dealing with them.

Dumb. “F”.

-Anonymous, February 19th 2017
Granted the author probably isn’t thinking about a Stasi-like ‘police state’, but the point is the last thing you need for an insurrection is an artillery shell. Xanax is waxing weepy eyed at the notion of a hot civil war, but doesn’t realize he’d be the one catching the 155.

- Doc

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2021 11:49 pm
by ajax18
I want to first thank my team of dedicated lawyers and others for their tireless work upholding justice and defending truth.

My deepest thanks as well to all of the United States Senators and Members of Congress who stood proudly for the Constitution we all revere and for the sacred legal principles at the heart of our country.

Our cherished Constitutional Republic was founded on the impartial rule of law, the indispensable safeguard for our liberties, our rights and our freedoms.

It is a sad commentary on our times that one political party in America is given a free pass to denigrate the rule of law, defame law enforcement, cheer mobs, excuse rioters, and transform justice into a tool of political vengeance, and persecute, blacklist, cancel and suppress all people and viewpoints with whom or which they disagree. I always have, and always will, be a champion for the unwavering rule of law, the heroes of law enforcement, and the right of Americans to peacefully and honorably debate the issues of the day without malice and without hate.

This has been yet another phase of the greatest witch hunt in the history of our Country. No president has ever gone through anything like it, and it continues because our opponents cannot forget the almost 75 million people, the highest number ever for a sitting president, who voted for us just a few short months ago.

I also want to convey my gratitude to the millions of decent, hardworking, law-abiding, God-and-Country loving citizens who have bravely supported these important principles in these very difficult and challenging times.

Our historic, patriotic and beautiful movement to Make America Great Again has only just begun. In the months ahead I have much to share with you, and I look forward to continuing our incredible journey together to achieve American greatness for all of our people. There has never been anything like it!

We have so much work ahead of us, and soon we will emerge with a vision for a bright, radiant, and limitless American future.

Together there is nothing we cannot accomplish.

We remain one People, one family, and one glorious nation under God, and it’s our responsibility to preserve this magnificent inheritance for our children and for generations of Americans to come.

May God bless all of you, and may God forever bless the United States of America.

DONALD J. Trump

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:09 am
by ajax18
It's all just a way to make Trump's political opinions illegal. Democrats would have done a better job actually connecting Trump to the riot as MeDotOrg tried to do in his original post in the senate trial if a conviction was their objective. Their real objective is to disenfrachise the 72 million people who voted for Trump and claim they're all guilty of storming the capital. It's a way to criminalize political opinion, to cancel and silence those they disagree with, get them fired from their jobs etc. It's a way to silence and outlaw facts and speech that doesn't support their world view and preconceived beliefs.

As Rand Paul mentioned, the BLM protesters who attacked him and his wife during the BLM protests walked away with not even a ticket. Political unrest, protest, destruction of property, attacking, berating, and goading police officers is all protected as long as it for a leftist or racial justice cause. The one left wing protester who illegally entered the capital building was released on personal recognizance.

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:44 am
by Doctor CamNC4Me
Holy, cow. Xanax almost got his wish!

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-ba ... or-potomac
A member of the right-wing paramilitary group the Oath Keepers in the days leading up to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot proposed a plan to transport “heavy weapons” in a boat across the Potomac River, prosecutors said in a Thursday court filing.
- Doc

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:51 am
by ajax18
Chap wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 9:20 pm
Gunnar wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 8:46 pm

What!?! You're claiming that you can't call a riot to unlawfully overturn an election or government a coup, unless it involves tens of thousands of troops armed everything including heavy artillery, and arresting everyone in congress? Surely, even you cannot believe that nonsense, do you?
What on earth would the point of the heavy artillery have been in ajax's imaginary mission? There would have been no enemy armor or fortifications to destroy, and you can't arrest people by dropping great big shells on top of them. And what would all those 40,000 infantrymen have been doing, given that the only opposition was a few policemen with side-arms and batons?

Yup, just a great big wet dream of proxy violence from Ajax the Barbarian Optometrist ... no surprise.
Fair enough, from what I hear the police let them in initially. The congress does belong to the taxpayer.

And if you want to prosecute people for planning the riot before Jan 6, you can't blame Trump's Jan 6 speech for incitement of the same riot.

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2021 7:22 am
by Some Schmo
ajax18 wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:51 am
And if you want to prosecute people for planning the riot before Jan 6, you can't blame Trump's Jan 6 speech for incitement of the same riot.
Again... idiot or liar. Take your pick.

I'm going with damned idiot on this one.

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2021 10:35 pm
by Gadianton
Ajax wrote:A coup would have been 40,000 marines with heavy artillery taking over the capital and arresting everyone in Congress.
Suppose that those who stormed the capitol would have been quicker on the draw, and surrounded Pence and the rest of Congress. Suppose that they performed citizens arrests on the whole lot of them, and presented Pence with the noose. Suppose Pence cooperated and said the election was overturned, and everyone in congress agreed to it. Suppose that this resulted in Trump continuing as president.

What more authority do 40,000 marines have to "arrest" any civilians, or overturn an election, than a civilian mob?

Ask yourself this, Ajax:

Had they been successful, would Trump have accepted the results, or would he have rebuked them as ANTIFA operatives, and brought in troops to have them arrested?

Had they been successful, would YOU have accepted the results?

If the answer is yes, and it IS yes, then it was in fact a failed coup, Trump was significantly responsible, and given his position of authority and to gain, primarily responsible, and you also are responsible for supporting a coup, though far less so than Trump.

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2021 7:20 pm
by Bret Ripley
ajax18 wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:51 am
Fair enough, from what I hear the police let them [the mob] in initially.
I don't doubt you for a moment; folks will spin all sorts of yarns. If you let them.

Here's an interesting article that may also serve as a GIGO prophylactic -- what happened as told from the perspective of 19 of the police officers who found themselves at ground zero:

https://www.propublica.org/article/i-do ... surrection

Please do yourself a favor and read it, then try to say "the police let them in initially" out loud with a straight face. Then maybe have yourself a little sit-down think about those sources of yours, and ask yourself why they would repeat such an easily-smoked porky. And also why it is so easy for them to get away it, but experience tells me that this requires a much more difficult bit of pondering as well as some susceptibility to humility.

Re: The Conversation

Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2021 9:07 pm
by Themis
ajax18 wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:09 am
It's all just a way to make Trump's political opinions illegal. Democrats would have done a better job actually connecting Trump to the riot as MeDotOrg tried to do in his original post in the senate trial if a conviction was their objective.
If I were to look at just one thing to determine Trump's guilt or innocence is whether members of his own party voted to impeach. Before Trump it had never happened. Ajax, did any members of the republican party vote to impeach Trump?