It has only taken four years for the media to wake up

Now, at last, in the last few weeks of the Trump presidency, do our newspapers start ringing the alarm bells.

It’s a bit late, gang. All these years you’ve been printing pro-Trump columnists, and only now you notice what kind of monster you’ve created?

Facebook has finally banned Trump, Twitter is still thinking about whether maybe a fascist might be a legit part of their brand.

And Fox News…oh jesus, fuck Fox News.


  1. hemidactylus says

    Schumer has called for Trump to be deposed. I hope it happens. Toss him out yelling “You’re fired!”. Then lock him up. Amazing he projects on his opponents (eg- Hillary) what he deep down knows should happen to him. Good riddance. He deserves the historic notoriety that will ring through the ages: impeached failed one-termer who was expelled then prosecuted as citizen. Rub his nose in it!!!!

  2. birgerjohansson says

    Naah. They will arrest some MAGA hats and send them to prison. Drumpf will be criticized but somehow not prosecuted for the more serious felonies. If he has to pay a fine, and get a couple of weeks of house arrest, the authorities will be content.
    The New York prosecutors…. that is a quite different ballgame.
    The biggest threat to Fox News right now is the commercial competition from One America Network and that other nutcase alt right network.
    A few years from now this will be forgotten alongside the sexual harassment by R. Ailes and that other sleazebag.

  3. robro says

    Another departure from the Trump White House, and the first cabinet member: Elaine Chao (McConnell’s wife) is resigning as Secretary of Transportation because of Trump’s role in events yesterday. Too little, too late…jeez as if 350,000 dead Americans wasn’t enough already. But, it’s something.

    This does raise the question of whether “acting” cabinet members can participate in invoking the 25th. Perhaps the best course of action is for Trump to resign.

    Also just saw that Schumer is saying he’ll replace the Senate Sergeant at Arms because of the failure of Capitol security yesterday. I have also read this morning that there were few arrests because Capitol security didn’t have personnel there to process the arrests…sounds like an excuse. Michael C. Stenger has been in the role since April 2018 when he was put in the position by McConnell. Not much about Stenger other than he is Marine veteran and 35-year veteran of the US Secret Service.

  4. robro says

    birgerjohansson @ #2 — “…forgotten alongside the sexual harassment by R. Ailes and that other sleazebag.” I think that’s “sleazebags” because there have been some others. I even read that Kimberly Guilfoyle left Fox under a cloud of sexually harassing an aid. It’s part of the Fox culture, probably right from the top.

  5. Tethys says

    Being personally attacked by neofascist maga mobs on the instruction of the narcissist is going to have ramifications. Figuring out the best way to proceed is going to take more than a few hours, but the unprecedented looting and invasion of the Capitol has deeply offended many of the most powerful senior office holders on both sides of the aisle.

    I would like to think that FBook has shut their site to him out of intelligent thought, but the fear of being sued for liability by various congress people is probably a bigger factor.

  6. Reginald Selkirk says

    @8: Threaten, my bleep. She should go ahead with that avenue rather than waiting for others to act.
    This time around they could include the call to Georgia, and incitement of the mob. I’m sure there is a long list of other impeachable offenses, but the evidence is readily available for these and the conclusion is undeniable*

    * Yes, there are Republican who will deny it anyway.

  7. davidc1 says

    The Capitol police need to be sacked and replaced by some people that would do their job properly .
    Mall cops for example .

  8. captainjack says

    birgerjohansson @ #2

    The New York prosecutors…. that is a quite different ballgame.

    My sister’s lived in and near NYC for 35 years. She’s loathed Trump from way back. It’s a common feeling around there that’s going to pressure the AGs to prosecute the Trumps everyway they can.

  9. robro says

    Reginald Selkirk @ #9 — Re “threaten”: For what it’s worth, that’s the NYT title and not Pelosi’s words. I can speculate that Pelosi is being strategic. The chances of getting even a fast-track impeachment through the House in 13 days is low. Then, getting a super-majority in the Senate is unlikely, even under these extraordinary circumstances. There is also some political liability for the Democrats for doing another impeachment. Of course, there’s a political liability for not doing it…smarter people than me will have to weigh those tradeoffs. However, if they can get Trump’s WH to invoke the 25th and get him out of the way, then they accomplish the goal and put the onus on Republicans. On the other hand, if Trump just resigns then everybody is off the hook. I can imagine the argument going on with him is that pardoning himself is questionable (it keeps cropping up), but if he resigns then Pence can pardon him.

  10. numerobis says

    robro: I somehow doubt that Trump has good enough understanding of the universe to be able to run the resign-and-be-pardoned plan.

    Also… I’m not sure Pence would go along with it. He seems to be rather pissed at Trump.

  11. says

    Impeachment is a rather lengthy process. Given the time frame (less than 15 days before the Angry Cheeto’s term expires anyway), impeachment is not going to do shit to prevent the Cheeto from pulling more shitty surprises from his ass while he still can. Invoking the 25th Amendment, now, that is (or can be) fast. In theory, all it takes is the Cabinet officers getting together and voting the Cheeto off the island. Could be done in, like, 15 minutes.

  12. robro says

    numerobis @ #13 — I agree. Trump’s ego alone might prevent him from trying that path. And yes, he and Pence seem to have fallen out. He set the mob on Pence and other “weak” Republicans as well as Democrats.

    cubist @ #14 — The problem with 25th is that it gives him a opportunity to respond to his removal. So, there could be delays before he’s actually removed.

  13. captainjack says

    robro @ #15
    I saw something by George Conway that there’s a 4 day period that could be enforced under the 25th Amendment before Trump could regain control from Pence. After that, it would be a legal wrangle. Best case, the deprivation would cause Trump’s complete mental collapse. Worst case, the time off would rejuvenate him. I think it’s a crapshoot.

  14. whheydt says

    Under the 25th Amendment, if Trump objects, so long as Congress is in session (and these days, when is it not?), they have 21 days to deal with the President’s appeal. Might take a while to decide how to hear the appeal….

  15. robro says

    We got this nice message from Nancy Pelosi this evening:

    Dear San Franciscan,

    I believe that the President’s rhetoric incited an armed insurrection against America yesterday. The gleeful desecration of the U.S. Capitol, which is the temple of our American democracy, and the violence targeting Congress are horrors that will forever stain our nation’s history. In my opinion, this was instigated by the President of the United States’ words and actions.

    In calling for this seditious act, the President has committed an unspeakable assault on our nation and our people. I join the Senate Democratic Leader in calling for the Vice President to remove this president by immediately invoking the 25th amendment. If the Vice President and the Cabinet do not act, the Congress may be prepared to move forward with impeachment.

    Justice will be done to those who carried out these acts, which were acts of sedition and cowardice. Those whose purpose was to deter our responsibility failed. They did not divert the Congress from our solemn constitutional purpose to validate the overwhelming election of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as President and Vice President of the United States.

    Despite the desecration of our Capitol, we upheld the bedrock principle that the people are sovereign and that they hold the power to choose their leaders through the ballot, rejecting this attempted coup encouraged by the President’s rhetoric.

    The House worked through the evening and into the morning to validate the electoral count proclaiming Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as the duly elected President and Vice President of the United States.

  16. epawtows says

    As I’ve seen speculated before: if Amendment 25 is invoked, all we need to do is convince the WH staff to support it. It takes away the president’s power until he writes a letter to Congress asking for it back. Does anyone honestly believe Trump is capable of writing a letter without assistance? He can barely sign his name to one.

  17. John Morales says

    Wow, robro.

    (“unspeakable assault”, “desecration of our Capitol” are particularly purple)

  18. PaulBC says


    “desecration of our Capitol”

    It’s the seat of representative government in the US, and kind of a big deal. I really do find it reprehensible enough to go purply with a word like “reprehensible” when complete assholes take selfies showing contempt for “the government of the people” and by extension my vote and my representation in that government. I’m not a great admirer of former president Gerald Ford (I don’t hate him either), but what am I supposed to make of this display? These self-styled “patriots” sure seem to hate America and everything we stand for.

    So yeah, desecration. It’s the right word, and of course politicians are rarely shy about sounding high and mighty.

    “unspeakable assault”

    Well, I have plenty to say about it, so maybe not “unspeakable.” Seriously, though, do you expect anyone, let alone the Speaker of the House, to sound blasé about an invasion of Congress?

  19. robro says

    John Morales @ #20 — Pelosi’s words. In fact you can read it on her official website:

    Another rat fucker checks out: Betsy DeVos has resigned. She said something about yesterday was an “inflection point.” What a troll. Good riddance.

    A national security adviser, Robert O’Brien, and deputy chief of staff, Chris Liddell, are reputed to be considering bailing the sinking ship.

  20. John Morales says


    So yeah, desecration. It’s the right word

    Ah. So it is no longer sacred.

    (That’s to what desecration refers, right?)

    Well, I have plenty to say about it, so maybe not “unspeakable.”

    Heh. Unless you never speak of it again.

    Seriously, though, do you expect anyone, let alone the Speaker of the House, to sound blasé about an invasion of Congress?

    No, but I’m an old cynic. I don’t expect it, but it would be perfectly possible.

    (might even have more weight to it were it clinical and factual, but what do I know?)

    You know, I’ve seen video of the event.

    “This is our house, the people’s house, so we are entitled to it”, to paraphrase them.

    robro, I didn’t miss you were quoting that elderly woman.

  21. Tethys says

    In the same way a religious marriage or baptism is conducted within a church, because it is a sacrosanct space; the business of congress making the law within the halls of congress is also considered sacrosanct.

    Please don’t refer to Ms Pelosi as “that elderly woman”. She is doing a very difficult job under shitty circumstances and her age isn’t remotely relevant.

  22. John Morales says

    Tethys, yes, yes. Politics is every bit as religious as marriage, and the Capitol is unto politics as a church is unto marriage.

    Sacred. Holy.

    Thing is, if something is desecrated, it can be reconsecrated. No biggie.

    (Or better still, leave it as desecrated… it can never be desecrated again if it is not reconsecrated. It will merely be a secular space, but presumably will still fulfil its function)

    Please don’t refer to Ms Pelosi as “that elderly woman”.

    Ah, sorry. Didn’t realise her age is, um… “unspeakable”, in her own words.
    Such a sprightly 80-year old!

    … her age isn’t remotely relevant

    Well then, why would it bother you when I mention it? it’s an irrelevance.

  23. Rob Grigjanis says

    John @25:

    Well then, why would it bother you when I mention it? it’s an irrelevance.

    It’s sometimes amusing when you pretend not to understand how language works. But usually just tiresome.

  24. Ridana says

    So yeah, desecration. It’s the right word

    Ah. So it is no longer sacred.
    (That’s to what desecration refers, right?)

    No, it refers to the act of treating something deemed sacred or sacrosanct (in the sense of not to be trespassed upon) with irreverence or contempt. But of course you know that.

  25. PaulBC says


    “This is our house, the people’s house, so we are entitled to it”, to paraphrase them.

    It’s my house too and I don’t like them shitting on the floor.

  26. John Morales says

    Ridana, heh.

    So you hold the Capitol is “something deemed sacred or sacrosanct”.
    To be revered.

    And its denizens are sacred appointees, blessed by the populace and on a holy mission, in that same sense.

    (Me, I’m not much for religious terminology, never mind reverence)

  27. PaulBC says

    John Morales@29 I’m trying to figure out if (a) this is a cultural difference, (b) you’re just incapable of comprehending other people’s feelings, or (c) your on your usual nitpicking kick. (Not to rule out other possibilities.)

    The most interesting possibility would be (a). You’re in Australia, I think. Maybe attitudes towards government are different there. But I suspect a lot is that it’s just you being you.

    It is a fact that many Americans across the political spectrum feel a reverence towards certain national symbols. The flag is a big one, obviously, but the National Mall* spanning the distance from the Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial tends to stir up patriotic feelings (i.e. the existence of these feelings is fact; you may if you want, dispute their appropriateness). It includes the Washington Monument and the Smithsonian museums. It’s been the backdrop of many demonstrations and has hosted fireworks displays on July 4. The Capitol itself is of course where Congress convenes, and it literally is the one place in Washington DC where each citizen’s vote counts on a national level (our vote for president only sort of counts because the electoral college could still do crazy things).

    While I’m generally not that big on symbols, I can understand that people see an equivalence between breaking into the Capitol building and showing the same sort of disrespect towards a church of temple. But it’s not limited to church or country. Suppose I broke into the Louvre and didn’t even damage anything but just took pictures of myself acting like a jackass. Could I find someone (French or just an admirer of the museum) who was offended by this? I think so. Could my acts rise to the level of “desecration.” Why not? It is ultimately subjective reaction, and it is one that I personally share in this breach of the Capitol building.

    BTW, I sort of assume you know this, but I still don’t mind explaining. To call something a “desecration” is possibly the most effective way to explain your feelings about it, though you may not be literally drawing a distinction between the sacred and the mundane. Personally it makes me mad as hell seeing someone lounging in Pelosi’s office uninvited and claiming he “scratched his balls” there. Or putting a MAGA cap on a sculpture of a past president and taking a smirking photo with it.

    When I see this, I really do think “Why do they hate America?” I mean, I know it already for more important reasons. If you hate Black people (whose American ancestries go back much further than many white people) or hate cultural diversity, you hate America by definition, because these are longstanding parts of our national heritage. So, yeah, I know these idiots hate America, but I didn’t know that they would go out of their way to be so obvious about it. They don’t burn flags, it’s true, but they’ve gotten in the habit of covering them with all kinds of graffiti. Now they are going around literally mocking the existence of our democratic institutions. What the fuck is wrong with these people?

    *Not to be confused with the Mall of America, which is an enormous indoor shopping mall in Minnesota.

  28. Tethys says

    One does not need to hold religious beliefs to consider the White House, congress, and the Supreme Court as sacrosanct symbols of our democracy.

    Of course nobody is required to be respectful, but referring to Ms Pelosi as “that elderly woman” is both sexist and ageist. She is within a few years age of Biden, Bernie and McConnell, and nobody bats an eye at their ages.

  29. John Morales says


    […] nobody bats an eye at their ages.

    Ahem: So, this is what it’s like to live in a gerontocracy
    “The whole Senate is sclerotic with these ancient, decrepit geezer. It’s how we ended up with a 78 year old Democratic president, and a senate full of old people shaking their canes at each other.”


    or (c) your [sic] on your usual nitpicking kick.

    Fine, you think it’s perfectly ordinary language and lacks any religious connotation.

    Anyway, I once bothered to try to explain so someone here how sexism pervades our language, and I’m not about to repeat that effort about how goddism likewise does.

    Either one sees it, or one does not. No biggie.

    (And yes, I think you USAnians are particularly jingoistic — you’ve even made the continental name your demonym!)

  30. addicted4444 says

    Trumpkins have killed more policemen in 1 day than were killed in months of BLM protests.

  31. hemidactylus says

    Sorry I can’t read or hear about something being sacrosanct or hallowed without a bit of eye rolling. The red hat rabble breached a safety cordon, vandalized, and acted in a very threatening manner. They committed crimes. The frickin’ Capitol is just a building. Yeah it has a special status as a space for governmental proceedings, but it’s not the frickin’ tabernacle built to house god.

    Weren’t there silly rules in the Torah about who could enter the Temple (no defectives) or near the Holy of Holies? Weren’t the Levites rather self absorbed? This sacrosanct nonsense sounds like that. Is that why we have a frickin gov’t chaplain to solemnize the proceedings and technically breach Jefferson’s wall? That’s offensive to me.

    If an incontinent congress critter makes doody and leaks on the holy carpet, get some Resolve and a vacuum cleaner and continue on. No big deal.

    As the governed we collectively confer some sort of status function on the building as an institution (channeling Searle) in a similar manner a fence represents a property boundary. Vandalization, trespass, and threat per legal documents are all we need to think about. If irreplaceable works of art were defaced that is a wrong too. But enough of the quasi-religious bullshit.

    If someone burns a flag people take offense because it’s pseudo-sacred representation. It’s just a piece of cloth. As a matter of respect and cultural norm, I myself would try to abide by the flag code. I would also speak the pledge sans “under God” phrasing. Why don’t we bring back the Bellamy salute? Seems fitting in a convergent way.

  32. hemidactylus says

    Now after suffering four years of Trump’s greasy spray tan infused carcass and his trashy family they should tent and fumigate the White House and then wipe every square inch with bleach. It’s not a sacred building but one must remove the pestilence and stench.

  33. Ridana says

    29) @ John Morales:
    I like how you omitted the parenthetical “((in the sense of not to be trespassed upon)” when you quoted me. For someone who is such a stickler for language, it’s surprising that you apparently deny any secular meanings of the words in question. For example, “sacred,” is not limited to religion or theism, nor is it necessarily inclusive of those, as it can also mean “secured against violation, infringement, etc., as by reverence or sense of right,” or “properly immune from violence, interference, etc., as a person or office.” I think both of those apply. One can say they hold a thing “sacred” as a measure of its value or meaning, without seeing it as divine.

    34) @hemidactylus: if a flag were “just a piece of cloth” no one would burn it. It’s just a piece of cloth in the same way as a $100 bill is just a piece of paper. And if a guy whips out his dick and looks you in the eye while taking a piss on your leg, hey, he was just relieving himself right? No other meaning in that, I suppose. Only religious people would get upset over that, but you’re waterproof, just wipe yourself off and move along.

  34. stroppy says

    Don’t know where I saw this, maybe it was here.

    “We spend $750 billion annually on “defense” and the center of American government fell in two hours to the duck dynasty and the guy in the chewbacca bikini.”

    If language fails, we can say it’s a special place both in practical terms and in how we house and present our evolving narrative, and it deserves respect–for now anyway. Maybe not tomorrow if things keep devolving the way they are.

    What else? Oh yeah, damn Trump and his ass-wipe hoard of despicable zombies.

    Oops. Did I say “damn?” Sound too religious? I don’t give a damn. Secular enough for me, damn it! Damn good word, I say.

  35. PaulBC says


    Sorry I can’t read or hear about something being sacrosanct or hallowed without a bit of eye rolling.

    I can accept it as a statement of fact that you feel inclined to roll your eyes but you should also accept it as a fact that you are in the minority, even adjusting for political views.

    Many people do feel a sense of the sacred or inviolable (I wonder, is “inviolable” on the Morales goddism-free approved list?). They get offended when their symbols are mocked. Full stop. It’s not that complicated. But if you want to go with a weak self-interest argument, if you attack my symbols, you are attacking me. Therefore, it is a reason for me to take notice at the very least. I learned in the schoolyard not to let bullies rile me, but it doesn’t mean that ridicule is irrelevant. It’s a warning sign and the response needs to be calculated.

    What offends me, and what the asshole in the Speaker’s office may not comprehend, is that an office belonging to the government of the people was breached and treated with disrespect. I might feel a little differently if it had been Mitch McConnell’s office and not Pelosi’s. Honest, I’m only human. But I like to think that at least after a pause I would get the point that you can’t have a functioning democracy without setting some boundaries. The people who stormed the Capitol proved themselves to be unfit for living in a society.

  36. hemidactylus says

    @38- PaulBC

    I think we can have boundaries and values (respect, honor, dignity, &c) without magical incantations or ancestor worship (see originalists and their founder porn). I have issues with Haidt’s political stances or framing of the mollycoddle thesis, but there is a tincture of something to his moral tastebud matrix at play here in that beyond sheer gut reaction what is at play with the sacred or hallowed angle that by light of reason has an actual there there?

    And Ridana @36 yes there is an implicit collective agreement thing to both money and the flag, but money has exchange value and is most mundane where the flag gets conferred some troublesome intrinsic sacred value. You and I should have intrinsic value as people and if someone pees on my leg that is disrespect of such value, a boundary violation, maybe a health code violation, implies public indecency, and is perhaps in the eyes of the state some sort of chargeable offense. Burning a flag doesn’t rise quite to that level. I’m not burning any flags, but I am not flying any of these cloth thingies to signal anything to others either.

    Ford with a MAGA hat and Trump flag is a dishonor to his memory I suppose (yet funny on its face to some), but it was also done after violating far more actionable boundaries. Reagan with a Che beret would be kinda funny, but I still find both Che and the Gipper reprehensible in their own ways. I wouldn’t put a Che beret on Reagan who actually had some presidential moments unlike Trump (ever).

  37. PaulBC says


    I have issues with Haidt’s political stances or framing of the mollycoddle thesis, but there is a tincture of something to his moral tastebud matrix at play here in that beyond sheer gut reaction what is at play with the sacred or hallowed angle that by light of reason has an actual there there?

    I had to look up Haidt. I can fill in the gaps to see where you’re going with this, though I’ll read if you want to explain in more detail. I personally just don’t have a problem at all with people using a word like “desecrated” as shorthand. In fact, if I were still a believing Catholic, I would have a lot more trouble with it, because it is clear that Congress is of the mundane and not the sacred, same with the flag. These are earthly, not eternal. If there was anything eternal, it’s not these things. However, putting aside issues of religion, I can acknowledge that these symbols carry comparable subjective weight for very many people, certainly Speaker Pelosi among them. Whatever I think about that, I have to live with it.

    Again, you could say “breached” or “violated”. Is that acceptable? I do not believe the Capitol is infused with some national spirit and would literally require reconsecrating. But just taking language as descriptive rather than prescriptive, I felt that Pelosi’s sentence “The gleeful desecration of the U.S. Capitol, which is the temple of our American democracy, and the violence targeting Congress are horrors that will forever stain our nation’s history.” carries a clear meaning, and I agree with that meaning. I might have phrased it differently, though it’s also extremely unlikely that I would ever be elected to public office even if I had a life to live over again with that aim in mind. Pelosi does her thing her way. I do my thing my way.

  38. PaulBC says


    Ford with a MAGA hat and Trump flag is a dishonor to his memory I suppose (yet funny on its face to some),

    That it’s Ford isn’t really the point, and it actually makes the point especially clear to me, since Ford is arguably the least distinguished president in living memory. I have no ax to grind against him (no more than any other Republican) nor do I think about him warmly.

    But here is a minor monument, intended at some level to honor American presidency in the abstract. It may not be such a big thing, but it is bigger than this vile individual who thinks this is an opportunity for a cheap selfie. In fact, the more I stew over it, the angrier I get. This is a person who probably honors his Trump flag and MAGA hat. He’d be offended if I took them from him and pissed on them for example, or maybe even waved them around and said “Look at me! I’m a dumbass Trumpie!”

    His act (which “is funny on its face to some”) is funny the same way that crude schoolyard bullying is fun, and I see myself as the target of that bully, not because of anything about Gerald Ford but because I respect the ideal of a government that is accountable to the people, that stands higher than crude partisan symbolism. He has disgraced this statue with his disgusting accessories.

    Now, do it to a statue of Reagan… well first I acknowledge that my real initial reaction might be different. Also, I have no problem with any of this being carried out in fantasy, e.g. in a cartoon like the infamous Mohammed comic. But entering a building and defacing a statue is a transgression.

    Fast forward twenty years and suppose it’s one of Trump. Do I care? Well, I would prefer that official sanctions were taken to declare his presidency void after the fact, making such monuments unlikely. But if it stood as “an American president” I suppose I’d have to agree to the same protection as the Ford statue.

    And a monument to Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson? (Like the one in Baltimore that I knew all too well and was thankfully removed.) In that case, sure. Go ahead and deface it. But understand that this is a transgression. You are declaring hostile intent. In this case, the jackass who put the hat on the Ford statue was not declaring hostile intent against a past traitor and racism, but against the legitimate government by the consent of the people of the United States. I am one of those people and yes, I am mad as hell.

  39. pacal says

    I’ve been listening to the perfect song that sums up how I think Americans should feel about Trump right now.

  40. stroppy says


    Dropkick Murphys. Some fascists out there are badly in need a beat down. Now. The job is far from being done, not by a long shot.

  41. Tethys says

    I agree that the U.S. has a long standing tendency to reduce any long and difficult terms to shorthand, acronyms, and nicknames.

    Complaining about the fact that people who live in the USA refer to themselves as Americans is pointless.

    Yes, we do. And? One may as well complain that those Americans are unaware that they live in the “land of cherry trees”, that England is an island, or that Australians live in ” the east most land “.

    Of course Amerigo also has the meaning of “bastard”, as does the Colon part of Cristobo Colon. Funny how language works, isn’t it?

  42. says

    Don’t get me wrong, attaching social disgust to actions is standard human behavior. I’ve been working on explicit control of that part of the meat computer. But the existence of people who care more about flags than lives has me also in some performative poking at feelings of desecration.

    I would expect more of this because quite frankly the rest of the world will be testing what we hold dear. That does not mean every test of feeling will be appropriate and I’m not suggesting anything specific, it’s more that I think this country should get pecked at so we have to think about this stuff.

  43. PaulBC says

    Brony, Social Justice Cenobite@46 I am not sure if it would make me a better or worse person if I could honestly say I give a damn about the death of Ashli Babbitt. It makes me an honest person to say that I didn’t and that I still don’t.

    But yeah, she broken into a building, and got shot. She has people who love her. I’m relieved not to be one of them. It would have been better outcome if she had not been shot (and then a little voice pops into my head. “Really? Maybe she will serve as an object lesson.” and I am not sure if that’s true or not). But by my ethical balance between lives and property, I will stick with my initial preferred outcome, which has been mooted by reality.

    I will say this. She violated her military oath (even if she’s delusional enough not to see this) (and I guess she’s not active duty) (and no, when I put on my rational cap I don’t give a rat’s ass about oaths, but…). She declared war on the US, even if it was just part of a chickenshit rebellion and even if she was not bearing arms herself. I mean what the fuck do you do? If she had stood on a freeway and committed suicide that way, I’d still have to say it was her choice. I’d have a little more sympathy, since she wasn’t trying to usurp the government of my consent and replace it with whatever godawful thing she thought of as “real” America.

    So I don’t care. Maybe with an official diagnosis and I can consider the possibility that she was mentally ill. I am willing to reconsider. Even so… object lesson, right? The Chinese quashed a peaceful demonstration in Tiananmen Square and that’s been paying off for decades. Kent State probably put the kibosh on a lot of counterculture protest. Force works. Who the fuck knew?

  44. says

    @PaulBC 48
    That is a matter of people and people if I’m not mistaken or missing some diversity. I have openly stated that I can’t mourn some deaths because their decisions led them there in a teachable fashion, or I felt their life was more negative than positive so I don’t see a reason to mourn.
    Laying anything more than an apathetic attitude would require specifics from the situation. I don’t feel good about it so I do it sparingly, and not with family, just people who I think are over-personalizing.
    This is one where I feel like I can have more potential responses.

  45. whheydt says

    Re: robro @ #47….
    Given how long he’d be President…call him 46.0.1.

    Re: PaulBC @ #48…
    Babbit gets to be a insurrectionist martyr. Indeed, in some respects an actual martyr, as opposed to all the ones that merely feel butt hurt.

    In general…
    The cop that died was, apparently, hit with a fire extinguisher. That is…beaten to death. The Acting AG has announced opening a murder investigation into his death. (Does make one wonder how long it will take for Trump to fire him over that.)

    And…Randy Rainbow has the definitive word

  46. PaulBC says

    whheydt@50 Yes, but I think it’s presumptuous to assume martyrdom is always that big an advantage. That notion runs deep in our culture (notably but not exclusively through Christianity). However, there are plenty of people who are cowed by the realization that it’s not all just a game and they might get killed. I don’t have a predictive model for this. It is clear that the Chinese government prefers the Tiananmen Square martyrs to lay as martyrs. “John Brown’s body”? You could go either way on that, but it’s likely the Civil War would have come about anyway. The Hay Market martyrs? The Molly Maguires? The dead at Wounded Knee? Maybe not more powerful in death than in life.

    We’re not all Jesus or Gandalf. I’d respectfully suggest that most of us are not, though I’m sure plenty of Trumpies think they are. Start with the asshole with the buffalo horns.

    Hopefully, Ashli Babbitt is remembered as unfortunate and foolish. What exactly did any of those idiots accomplish on Wednesday? Even Mitch McConnell called it a “failed insurgency.”

    I’m convinced they could have turned it into a protracted standoff too. But it would have required more planning than they’re now capable of. Will they get better at it? I have no idea. There do need to be consequences though. We know who many of them are and they broke multiple laws. They were not exercising First Amendment rights.

  47. Tethys says

    I’m glad the looters are being tracked down and charged.

    On deaths, all of them are on Cheetos hands. Neither the police or the rioters deserve death because of seditious lies from the highest office in the country. That’s why it’s a terrible idea to allow charismatic fascists access to the reins of power in the first place. Too bad so many needed to experience the violence firsthand before they remembered that words mean things.

  48. davidc1 says

    Well if a redneck broke into my office ,trashed the place ,then wrote me an insulting note ,and finally sat in my chair ,and scratched his balls ,i would consider that a desecration .
    I see our Nancy P has contacted one of the military high ups ,she is a tad worried that the snatch snatcher still has access to the nuclear codes .
    If I worked at the WH i would place a big red button on his tiny desk ,with the words “NUCLEAR LAUNCH BUTTON ,DO NOT TOUCH ” beside it ,just to see if he would press it .
    PS ,there is a photo out there with a rioter taking a selfie with a cop ,someone has suggested that the cop has standing his ground ,and trying to defuse the situation.

  49. whheydt says

    There is a W. Va. legislator that was at the Capitol on Wednesday, egging on the rioters. He has now been arrested and charged.

  50. hemidactylus says

    I vaguely remember this in Wednesday’s cacophony of reports but:

    “Photo of Senate right now. ‘Where’s Pence, show yourself!’ protester shouts”

    That’s frickin’ scary in its indication that this mob had quickly pivoted to seeking after Pence too.

    I found this tweet in an WaPo article that’s scary as shit:

    More evil vitriol was pointed at Pence as indicated in that article which I shall not repeat here. And the scariest part is that these demon possessed are still out there lurking in wait???

    I haven’t checked my feed for “I Don’t Speak German”…wait…nothing new. They have suddenly become perhaps one of the most relevant podcasts in that focus is on far right extremist groups. They have plenty to ruminate now.

  51. whheydt says

    Re: hemidactylus @ #58…
    Dredging up what remains of my high school German (i.e. it may well be wrong) from something over 50 years ago..
    Ich spreche keine Deutsche.