5 ms·

> God forbid a flash mob storms the Capital again and writes a slur on the wall without killing anybody They took a calculated and premeditated swipe at the se

> God forbid a flash mob storms the Capital again and writes a slur on the wall without killing anybody They took a calculated and premeditated swipe at the seat of power. Even a liberal democracy built on loftier principles than Machiavelli's cannot afford to let this slide. The mob's purpose in the the plan devised by Eastman and enacted by Trump [1] was to serve as a distraction / excuse for Mike Pence to launch a contingent election with fake electors who would certify Trump as the victor, thereby terminating our democracy and ending the American experiment. Pence refused to do this and that's why the peaceful mob started chanting "Hang Mike Pence, Hang Mike Pence." I have to admit, before that point in time I saw Pence as the diametric opposite of every political belief I ever held -- because I did not realize that a basic belief in American democracy was up for question. I thought it went without saying that we all shared that value. We did not. But Pence did, and he set an example of "Love Thy Neighbor" that I will not soon forget. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot

99_00 3y ago
>The mob's purpose in the the plan devised by Eastman and enacted by Trump [1] was to serve as a distraction / excuse for Mike Pence to launch a contingent election with fake electors who would certify Trump as the victor, thereby terminating our democracy and ending the American experiment. Your source doesn't back up that statement.
- heroprotagonist 3y ago
  The 'source' in this is the "House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack". It's hard to get more authoritative.. What isn't backed up by the source? The purpose of the mob? Accepting the government investigation reports, the fake elector plot was real. They didn't _need_ a mob to attack to push Pence into enacting it. It would have just told their story better afterwards. Optically, if you're going to steal an election by changing which electors count, after putting your own electors in as replacements, then having a mob attack the capital demanding that you respond to some made-up conspiracy is a _lot_ better optics than just enacting the plan without any kind of justification.
  - 99_00 3y ago
    >What isn't backed up by the source? The purpose of the mob? Yes. >Optically, if you're going to steal an election by changing which electors count, after putting your own electors in as replacements, then having a mob attack the capital demanding that you respond to some made-up conspiracy is a _lot_ better optics than just enacting the plan without any kind of justification. You're justifying your speculation by saying it is plausible. That doesn't change that it's speculation. It's fine for you to speculate. I was confused because you were mixing speculation with fact in the same sentence and providing a source.
    - heroprotagonist 3y ago
      Speculation? Not really. It is beyond reasonable conjecture as a motivation for the mob orchestration at this point. And the much more important findings around the fake elector plot are very concrete. Arguing the burden of proof on motivation for the mob orchestration is a distraction. The mob was showy and got a lot of attention, sure. But everything happening in the background has been proven beyond any doubt by now. And it was _much_ more important. This proof is not dependent on the mob attack having occurred. The facts would be the same if the mob attack had never happened. Ignore the mob attack entirely, regardless of motivation or spontaneity, and it doesn't change anything. Look, I guess it's going to be another one of those years. Our brains put these bias filters in place for their own protection. But they're horribly exploited. They're going to keep getting exploited, and we'll keep seeing attempts to build on gains from past exploitation. It's really hard, but try to work past it.
  - mistermann 3y ago
    > The 'source' in this is the "House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack". It's hard to get more authoritative.. "Authoritative" is an interesting term...does it imply (and guarantee) accuracy of claims? > Accepting the government investigation reports, the fake elector plot was real. To what degree was it "real"? And does "real" mean "objectively true"? > demanding that you respond to some made-up conspiracy Row, row, row your boat...
selimthegrim 3y ago
Apparently Dan Quayle told Pence to shut up and listen to the parliamentarian and that the VP only checks the certificates of ascertainment.
mistermann 3y ago
> The mob's purpose in the the plan devised by Eastman and enacted by Trump [1] was to serve as a distraction / excuse for Mike Pence to launch a contingent election with fake electors who would certify Trump as the victor, thereby terminating our democracy and ending the American experiment. Pence refused to do this and that's why the peaceful mob started chanting "Hang Mike Pence, Hang Mike Pence." How was this purpose transported from the minds of the planners into the minds of each individual member of the mob? Was there some sort of training program that hasn't been covered in the news yet (assuming I haven't missed anything)?
- jdewerd 3y ago
  What details do you think they needed to know, lol? Pence was going to take all of the official actions. The rioters just had to storm the capitol and delay the response long enough for team Trump to consolidate power, and maybe serve as a prop if Pence was asked to rationalize his decision. Trump's speech to rile up the mob and send them to the capitol building at the correct time was quite sufficient. That's how stay-in-power coups work. That's how they've always worked. The mobs never needed telepathic training before, why would they now?
  - mistermann 3y ago
    > What details do you think they needed to know Those that are materially relevant to the discovery of comprehensive truth. > lol? What is the intended message of this? Do you believe this is a laughing matter? > Pence was going to take all of the official actions. You have no way of knowing with guaranteed correctness what Pence was going to do. If you disagree, please explain a methodology of how you could. > The rioters just had to storm the capitol and delay the response long enough for team Trump to consolidate power, and maybe serve as a prop if Pence was asked to rationalize his decision. Leaving aside a variety of things, such as: a) The US Military's opinion on the matter. b) The truth of the matter. > Trump's speech to rile up the mob and send them to the capitol building at the correct time was quite sufficient. Sufficient to accomplish what it did, which is unknowable. Due to the unknowability of reality, our culture has adopted a convention: telling stories, and believing them to be true with little to no concern whether they actually are. This cultural norm is driven into our heads constantly, bypassing all filters, because it is a cultural norm. > That's how stay-in-power coups work. That's how they've always worked. The mobs never needed telepathic training before, why would they now? Well, you could explain how the gameplan ended up within the mind of each participant. Or, you could explain why you refuse to do that. Or, you could tell us some more popular, fun to believe memes, and continue to act as if I have not asked you point blank about the truth value of them. Humans fear epistemology, and I can see it clear as day through your evasive cultural conventions, "lol".

99_00 3y ago

heroprotagonist 3y ago
The 'source' in this is the "House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack". It's hard to get more authoritative.. What isn't backed up by the source? The purpose of the mob? Accepting the government investigation reports, the fake elector plot was real. They didn't _need_ a mob to attack to push Pence into enacting it. It would have just told their story better afterwards. Optically, if you're going to steal an election by changing which electors count, after putting your own electors in as replacements, then having a mob attack the capital demanding that you respond to some made-up conspiracy is a _lot_ better optics than just enacting the plan without any kind of justification.
- 99_00 3y ago
  >What isn't backed up by the source? The purpose of the mob? Yes. >Optically, if you're going to steal an election by changing which electors count, after putting your own electors in as replacements, then having a mob attack the capital demanding that you respond to some made-up conspiracy is a _lot_ better optics than just enacting the plan without any kind of justification. You're justifying your speculation by saying it is plausible. That doesn't change that it's speculation. It's fine for you to speculate. I was confused because you were mixing speculation with fact in the same sentence and providing a source.
  - heroprotagonist 3y ago
    Speculation? Not really. It is beyond reasonable conjecture as a motivation for the mob orchestration at this point. And the much more important findings around the fake elector plot are very concrete. Arguing the burden of proof on motivation for the mob orchestration is a distraction. The mob was showy and got a lot of attention, sure. But everything happening in the background has been proven beyond any doubt by now. And it was _much_ more important. This proof is not dependent on the mob attack having occurred. The facts would be the same if the mob attack had never happened. Ignore the mob attack entirely, regardless of motivation or spontaneity, and it doesn't change anything. Look, I guess it's going to be another one of those years. Our brains put these bias filters in place for their own protection. But they're horribly exploited. They're going to keep getting exploited, and we'll keep seeing attempts to build on gains from past exploitation. It's really hard, but try to work past it.
- mistermann 3y ago
  > The 'source' in this is the "House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack". It's hard to get more authoritative.. "Authoritative" is an interesting term...does it imply (and guarantee) accuracy of claims? > Accepting the government investigation reports, the fake elector plot was real. To what degree was it "real"? And does "real" mean "objectively true"? > demanding that you respond to some made-up conspiracy Row, row, row your boat...

selimthegrim 3y ago

Apparently Dan Quayle told Pence to shut up and listen to the parliamentarian and that the VP only checks the certificates of ascertainment.

mistermann 3y ago

> The mob's purpose in the the plan devised by Eastman and enacted by Trump [1] was to serve as a distraction / excuse for Mike Pence to launch a contingent election with fake electors who would certify Trump as the victor, thereby terminating our democracy and ending the American experiment. Pence refused to do this and that's why the peaceful mob started chanting "Hang Mike Pence, Hang Mike Pence." How was this purpose transported from the minds of the planners into the minds of each individual member of the mob? Was there some sort of training program that hasn't been covered in the news yet (assuming I haven't missed anything)?

jdewerd 3y ago
What details do you think they needed to know, lol? Pence was going to take all of the official actions. The rioters just had to storm the capitol and delay the response long enough for team Trump to consolidate power, and maybe serve as a prop if Pence was asked to rationalize his decision. Trump's speech to rile up the mob and send them to the capitol building at the correct time was quite sufficient. That's how stay-in-power coups work. That's how they've always worked. The mobs never needed telepathic training before, why would they now?
- mistermann 3y ago
  > What details do you think they needed to know Those that are materially relevant to the discovery of comprehensive truth. > lol? What is the intended message of this? Do you believe this is a laughing matter? > Pence was going to take all of the official actions. You have no way of knowing with guaranteed correctness what Pence was going to do. If you disagree, please explain a methodology of how you could. > The rioters just had to storm the capitol and delay the response long enough for team Trump to consolidate power, and maybe serve as a prop if Pence was asked to rationalize his decision. Leaving aside a variety of things, such as: a) The US Military's opinion on the matter. b) The truth of the matter. > Trump's speech to rile up the mob and send them to the capitol building at the correct time was quite sufficient. Sufficient to accomplish what it did, which is unknowable. Due to the unknowability of reality, our culture has adopted a convention: telling stories, and believing them to be true with little to no concern whether they actually are. This cultural norm is driven into our heads constantly, bypassing all filters, because it is a cultural norm. > That's how stay-in-power coups work. That's how they've always worked. The mobs never needed telepathic training before, why would they now? Well, you could explain how the gameplan ended up within the mind of each participant. Or, you could explain why you refuse to do that. Or, you could tell us some more popular, fun to believe memes, and continue to act as if I have not asked you point blank about the truth value of them. Humans fear epistemology, and I can see it clear as day through your evasive cultural conventions, "lol".