Politics: where a week is a long time

Getting rather irritated with the sheer stupidity of politicians.

Someone in the EU, in the latest twist in the AstraZeneca row, decided to cast it in the worst light possible by deciding to, without talking to either the British or Irish governments, set fire to Northern Ireland.

As attempts at blame deflection go, this is overkill.

Edit – Guardian headline has changed from ‘diplomatic row’ to ‘spat’, EU now saying it was an error – clearly there’s been some very rapid communications.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by Ben.

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Todd

It’s already been rolled back.

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Dave

Russell Brand on the Great Reset

https://youtu.be/mD-ioJM8v64

Anonymous wrote:

Russell Brand on the Great Reset

https://youtu.be/mD-ioJM8v64

 

Huh… second time I hear about this “great reset” this week… I’ll watch the vid later though, no time rn.

Dave wrote:

No-one is coming out of the whole UK-EU vaccines argument well. But it’s rare for the EU leaders to look this rattled and defensive.

They’ve been facing a lot of backlash for not ordering enough of the Biontec vaccine, and have been calming people down by repeating that there’ll be enough vaccine, we’ll be getting the AstraZeneca vaccine, all will be well bla bla bla – and then this news came, at the worst possible time. Not to mention that Britain doing better in this situation must be eating at them in the wake of Brexit.

Honestly, in this kind of situation, you’d wish for politicians with some backbone who are able to tell people to calm the fuck down. Yeah, AstraZeneca is possibly in breach of contract, and we’ll deal with that. Yeah, we’d hoped to get more vaccine quicker, but we had some bad luck with some of the companies we were hoping would develop one quickly. But we’re doing our best here, and you will all be vaccinated this year, and going hysteric about whether it takes a month longer or less is helping no-one.

4 users thanked author for this post.

paul f, lorcan_nagle, Dave, Ben

Christian wrote:

Honestly, in this kind of situation, you’d wish for politicians with some backbone who are able to tell people to calm the fuck down. Yeah, AstraZeneca is possibly in breach of contract, and we’ll deal with that. Yeah, we’d hoped to get more vaccine quicker, but we had some bad luck with some of the companies we were hoping would develop one quickly. But we’re doing our best here, and you will all be vaccinated this year, and going hysteric about whether it takes a month longer or less is helping no-one.

The most bizarre bit is Macron saying that the AZ/Oxford vaccine doesn’t work while bemoaning they don’t have enough stock.

The truth is the UK went in aggressively on vaccines, they placed very big orders per head of population first, and their gamble paid off. It’s one that probably had to as they’ve ballsed up every other aspect.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, Dave

Ben wrote:

You’ve got to be careful on UBI, as some of its advocates do so with the intent of using it to shred the existing social safety net.

UBI can mean a lot of things to many people I agree. I remember my struggles with Jim explaining that it wasn’t like welfare, a dole payment that doesn’t require you to be looking for work but rather a basic income for everyone. I don’t think it was fully grasped, not because he isn’t an intelligent guy but I think that system is so ingrained in how we think.

The thing is that welfare as a solution has issues. Currently people in receipt tend to lose all benefits if they find work which is counterproductive in may ways. I know post industrial areas where essentially a change of government means those payments going up or down but nobody addressing the issue of a lack of decent work.

There’s a balancing act there over retaining the social safety net but also seeing that a UBI system frees people up to innovate to bring in extra income which can then be taxed and put back into the system. The left needs to stop looking back to the 1970s and start thinking of ideas that address today’s problems. If the factory isn’t coming back to town A then what can we do to ensure they have meaningful work and hope? So far for parties like Labour it’s been to give incentives to someone overseas to open one, which may arrive or maybe not or come and then go again when they get a better offer from Poland.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Andrew, Todd, Ben

I think a decent UBI could work. But there should be additional welfare for “emergencies”, like if someone falls into debt for some reason, or has other expenses they can’t afford. Like expensive dental bills after an accident, expenses like that which are unforeseen.

The other big thing to keep in check is housing prices. I think if those two things could get done, poverty would plummet, or be eradicated. Housing prrices make a UBI difficult because prices are so high in some places. If there was more uniformity a UBI could be implemented more easily.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd

Ben wrote:

As to politicians like Greene denying mass shootings happened isn’t a mere difference of opinion. That should be held against her and all who back her.

Agreed you can hold it against her but not remove her for parliament for it. That goes directly against the basic idea of democracy. Imagine if a majority party could remove other parties for having views they find abhorrent.

If she supported the storming of the Capitol that’s another matter, that should be a crime. I would be OK with removing her from parliament for that. Not for conspiracy theories.

Anonymous wrote:

Jon wrote:

Huh… second time I hear about this “great reset” this week… I’ll watch the vid later though, no time rn.

Primary because the meeting they just had, it’ll ramp up in the news:

These are the top impact stories from The Davos Agenda | World Economic Forum (weforum.org)

DAVOS 2021: What should be done about unsurmountable global debt load (yahoo.com)

At Davos, Xi Jinping Shows His Nerves Over U.S.-China Decoupling (foreignpolicy.com)

Oh yeah, that would explain it… =P

Anyways, watched that Russell Brand video… damn, I always forget how obscenely smart and well spoken he is. I’ll need to devour more of his videos.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Andrew

Anonymous wrote:

Isn’t he a genocidal maniac?

Aren’t they all?

3 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, DavidM

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Isn’t he a genocidal maniac?

Aren’t they all?

Well most countries have problems. Still, I don’t think the Netherlands is currently engaged in genocide.

Xi Jinping should be on the same list as Assad, Khamenei and Kim Jong Un. It’s scary that he’s speaking in Davos.

DavidM wrote:

I’m always suspicious when we are told “community leaders” are saying anything. In my experience, “communities” don’t appoint leaders.

Or that they all have the same opinion for that matter.

2 users thanked author for this post.

DavidM

Anonymous wrote:

Xi Jinping should be on the same list as Assad, Khamenei and Kim Jong Un. It’s scary that he’s speaking in Davos.

You’re not wrong. I hope what’s happening isn’t quite genocide, but forced labour concentration camps should be more than enough reason to force sanctions. But everybody is afraid of China, of course, and just goes along with whatever the fuck they want. Because in the end, we need them more than they need us, and they’ll tell anybody to fuck off if they get their noses in their business.

Still, apparently they’re worried that that whole dynamic may be changing. So I suppose there’s good news in there.

They’re not really killing Uyghurs in great numbers I think, but you can call it cultural genocide. Which does fall under the official definition of genocide.

China sees this as a good thing. If you disregard that Uyghurs are detained for bullshit reasons and habitually tortured, the CCP would say they are assimilating Uyghurs culturally, making them good citizens. What is the problem with that? Isn’t it good to have a whole nation obedient and behind Xi Dada? I think it is a question which is universal. Can we live with people who disagree with us?

Ben wrote:

So we’re playing Devil’s Advocate Extreme now?  Because, even allowing for that, that post reads pretty awful Arjan.

It’s the rationale China gives. The Uyghur genocide is cultural assimilation, wiping out their tradition to make the populace in line with what the CCP wants. Of course it is horrific, but it is how the CCP sees it. In their minds, they’re the good guys, and this is all justified.

If I gave the impression I was defending the CCP for this, I am sorry, it is completely monstrous and I completely disagree with them.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Ben

I don’t know if they are retaining the cultural revolution mentality in this. Essentially, they need control over that area as China wants to be the dominant nation in Central Asia and Eurasia and the Central Asia-China pipeline runs right into Xinjiang. On top of that, massive petrochemical reserves exist in the autonomous region and China wants more control over those resources. On the ground, there is no reason to disturb the coexistence of Han Chinese and Turkic Uyghurs as they generally were getting along fine under PRC governance. The reports of Islamic extremism and separatist movements are, as usual, overblown generally as an excuse for crack downs.

China’s Communist party, like Russia’s government, faces a great deal of existential threats that are mostly either of their own making or internal. A big one for China is the threat of its deserts. Most of Xinjiang is desert and we’ll live to see all of it become a desert. A quarter of all Chinese territory is desert and over half is in the process of becoming a desert. So, most of those people living there probably will be moving East quite soon or leaving China altogether (or dying out, really). However, the deserts will only grow faster due to climate change which will make any initiative to control central Asia even more difficult.

Also, this is the main reason China must avoid sanctions and cannot afford to become a pariah state. It has to remain connected to the world and especially to the United States or it will not be able to solve its own internal problems. America may look like it’s in bad shape relative to the past, but our problems are things like extreme partisanship, financial mismanagement and massive deficits. We’re not looking at half the country becoming barely habitable in a couple of decades or less.

It’s always about control.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So it’s not about cultural differences, then they’re doing it why? To get more control over Xinjiang?

To “assert” control in advance of growing difficulties. What we, at least in the US and probably most of Europe, don’t usually consider is actually thinking ahead. We’re often dealing with problems that we should have dealt with 20 years ago or that are imminent at best. We are the kings of can-kicking in the US.

However, like I pointed out above, a lot of that is because most of our problems have essentially imaginary causes around ideology or money. When half your country is literally turning into a desert before your eyes, you can’t kick that can down the road. The Uyghurs and Han Chinese living in Xinjiang were fairly integrated and peaceful, but Xinjiang is going to become the bridge between China and Central Asia in a new economic powerhouse they are committed to creating. That means more opportunities in the region that is going to shift the balance of Uyghurs and Han Chinese greatly. Also, with more prosperity generated, the Communist Party already knows that poses a threat to their power. They are already “disappearing” Chinese businessmen and taking over the companies of billionaires who aren’t all the way on board with the Communist monopoly on political power in Eastern China (and even foreign countries). Minor separatist movements in the Muslim population are very likely to become major movements once the region is more connected with the rest of the Muslim world on China’s Eastern borders. On top of that, again, the place is already a desert and they are going to need serious control over populations to deal with shortages and mass migrations as large areas just become unlivable.

They aren’t necessarily doing this in response to any problems, but in advance of problems that they can easily foresee because of the plans they have for the region.

I guess if you’re a tyrant, the solution to every problem is putting a bunch of people in camps.

The disappearing of businessmen is crazy. It seems part of China’s “anti-corruption” campaign but I think it’s more likely a way to get rid of rivals.

It seems to be a part of communist countries that they are always looking to defeat ideological opponents even if they are imagined, and it often involves bloodshed or camps. It is part of their raison d’etre. There are evil corrupt counter-revolutionary forces out there, and that’s why you need the boot on your neck.

Anonymous wrote:

The disappearing of businessmen is crazy. It seems part of China’s “anti-corruption” campaign but I think it’s more likely a way to get rid of rivals.

At the same time, it’s tough to be on either side of that. Especially, when we’re clamoring for billionaires over here to be held accountable both to regulation and share of taxation and just plain obeying the law.

Anonymous wrote:

It seems to be a part of communist countries that they are always looking to defeat ideological opponents even if they are imagined, and it often involves bloodshed or camps. It is part of their raison d’etre. There are evil corrupt counter-revolutionary forces out there, and that’s why you need the boot on your neck.

I do believe that the Communist leaders of China are truly communist – specifically Maoist (or Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) as opposed to Stalinist which is the basis for North Korea – and that Xi’s ideology is a direct evolution from previous communist leaders and thinkers, but politically that comes down to two priorities. No matter how much of the free market is introduced in the Chinese economy, the monopoly on political power cannot change in any respect. This does require them to find the “kulaks” (which is Stalinist, at heart – look it up) to use as examples to keep the capitalist elements of the culture in line as well as provide the average people proof that the government will not be swayed by wealthy interests.

It’s actually great international P.R. because they can say to the world “look at the United States. Who gets bailed out first whenever there is a crisis? The rich and powerful who actually caused the crisis, that’s who! Over here, we punish the guilty no matter the size of their wealth and put The People first. It is ‘The People’s’ Republic over here.”

Second, and without a hint of hypocrisy, for them The People means Han Chinese. National security, economic and foreign relations strategies are focused on the benefits or threats to Han dominance in China and Han interests around the world. Yes, the Tibetans, Uyghurs and about 50 or so other ethnic groups are Chinese, but not quite as Chinese in practice. Though, honestly, they have benefited from the prosperity in China as well so the desire to separate even in regions where the minority is actually the majority is not as prevalent as one might expect.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

True – but look at the cases in the capitalist world where you can’t see why many billionaires aren’t in prison for life. I mean, look into the way De Beers manipulated the diamond market. Why were “blood diamonds” so profitable for warlords and terrorists in Africa? It was due to the manipulation and monopoly of the diamond market. Even the response to conflict diamonds works in their favor by, essentially, leaving the “legitimate” diamond dealers in control of the supply. Diamonds are literally the most common gemstone in the world. It’s made out of carbon and carbon is everywhere. However, to protect their business, thousands have to die, get maimed or become refugees.

This is just one situation where there are businesses obviously directly or indirectly but knowingly involved in human rights violations and just plain human suffering on an international scale, but instead of punishment, they are rewarded for it.

China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia and other nations are certainly involved in great oppression, illegal activity and mass murder, but there is no way our governments can criticize them on moral grounds without exposing the obvious hypocrisy in their own positions. The only action that can be taken has to be diplomatic and material since everyone is pretty much wading in the same mud and filth.

Meanwhile, the best activist position from citizens is joining with groups criticizing and opposing the establishment that has normalized this behavior.

Exactly – we have a system where our politicians reward billionaires to stay in power – and invest in their companies based on policy decisions they control thus profiting personally from the system, while China has a system where they punish billionaires to stay in power and support business interests only as long as it profits them personally. On top of that, we in the United States have capital punishment and a higher prison population rate than any other country – including China. And we’ve tortured people or outsourced the torture as well. It’s really hypocritical if any US president say that China must join the rest of the world. They actually have.

We can only make a credible case if we clean up our own situation – however, we have the advantage of isolation and wealth that seemingly is unassailable — also backed by an incredible and incredibly expensive military. It’s like that old Emo Phillips joke from the 80’s when the U.S. owed billions of dollars to Japan.

JAPAN: Hey, USA, what about that billion dollars you owe us?

USA: Oh, sorry, I don’t have it right now. I used it to buy all these nuclear weapons.

JAPAN: That’s okay. You can pay us back whenever you’re ready.

If you compare the lives of the Chinese people at the lowest position in their country and the American at the lowest position in ours, it’s gonna be hard to see the difference. The average Chinese worker probably has a harder life than the average US worker, but on the other hand, the average US worker is always facing unemployment and financial ruin from debt while working harder every year but seeing no rise in income.

So… where will the slavery go next?

Anonymous wrote:

So… where will the slavery go next?

It’ll still be there in Federal prisons, it just won’t be profitable for two private institutions now.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd

Anonymous wrote:

So… where will the slavery go next?

Going by a story I saw yesterday, it’s already infiltrated court-mandated rehab programmes.

They thought they were going to rehab. They ended up in chicken plants

(admittedly, that story is three years old, but I can’t see it having been stopped by the Trump administration).

5 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, lorcan_nagle

Martin Smith wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So… where will the slavery go next?

Going by a story I saw yesterday, it’s already infiltrated court-mandated rehab programmes.

They thought they were going to rehab. They ended up in chicken plants

(admittedly, that story is three years old, but I can’t see it having been stopped by the Trump administration).

I saw that on twitter yesterday and it made me quite pissed off.

It got me thinking about how I would handle that and many other completely made up scenarios. Now I have this weird urge to be put in a position to choose between slavery and death just so I can politely and enthusiastically choose death.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, lorcan_nagle

Dems deliver GOP ultimatum over Marjorie Taylor Greene

Top House Democrats are moving to force Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene off multiple committees this week — with or without Kevin McCarthy’s help.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer has delivered an ultimatum to McCarthy: Either Republicans move on their own to strip Greene (R-Ga.) of her committee assignments within 72 hours, or Democrats will bring the issue to the House floor.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by JRCarter.
• This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by JRCarter.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Chris D, Ben, lorcan_nagle

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

So much for loyalty to the cause!

Behind all their bluster and guns, they’re a bunch of gutless cowards.

Capitol Rioters May Be Ready to Start Snitching on Each Other

As thousands of MAGA supporters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, some insurrectionists urged their fellow rioters to “hold the line” against law enforcement defending the beacon of democracy.

“Listen, guys, they only got so much mace. And we got all these patriots. We’re not running out. They’re going to run out,” Mathew Capsel, who was captured on video assaulting several National Guard members during the insurrection, said in a TikTok video. “Hold the line. Don’t run.”

Marine veteran Hector Vargas Santos posted a similar message on Facebook: “WE THE PEOPLE TOOK OVER THE U.S. CAPITOL. #HOLDTHELINE.”

Now, it appears several rioters are abandoning the group’s original rallying cry to never give up—potentially opting for plea agreements with prosecutors to save their own skin.

More than 150 individuals across 39 states have been federally charged for participating in the Capitol siege. While a majority of these Trump supporters only face misdemeanor charges, recent court documents suggest that some are planning to plead guilty or take plea deals in exchange for their cooperation in ongoing investigations.

According to federal court records, at least three rioters have agreed to be charged by information—a process generally used by those planning to plead guilty—instead of waiting for a grand jury indictment. Like an indictment, an information is still a charging document outlining an individual’s alleged crimes.

“Informations are a clear sign that these defendants intend to plead guilty,” former federal prosecutor Neama Rahman told The Daily Beast. “Defense attorneys do not advise clients to waive their right to an indictment (or in rare cases, a preliminary hearing) unless there are active plea negotiations and an offer on the table.”

“Even if there is the potential for cooperation against others, defendants will usually plead guilty, then cooperate with the Government before they are sentenced, whether that be a proffer, testifying before the Grand Jury, or testifying at trial,” he added.

The group of rioters now being charged by information includes Rasha Abual-Ragheb, who had been on the FBI’s radar even before she allegedly stormed the Capitol. The information was filed Jan. 28, 11 days after the Justice Department filed its initial criminal complaint against the New Jersey woman.

Abual-Ragheb was arrested on Jan. 16 and charged with entering or remaining in a restricted building, disorderly or disruptive conduct in a restricted building, violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building. According to the criminal complaint filed following Abual-Ragheb’s arrest, she had been interviewed by the FBI in November after her name appeared in Facebook and Telegram chats for the New Jersey chapter of the anti-government militia group, the Three Percenters.

In one Facebook message to the group, Abual-Ragheb “advised the revolution will start not by standing by but by standing up,” and that a “civil war is coming and they need to show support, and rise up and fight for our Constitution.”

During an interview with the FBI, Abual-Ragheb said that she was a Trump supporter who had attended many of his rallies and was “blocked from making posts on Facebook and Twitter for pro-Trump postings.” Abual-Ragheb was identified to the FBI by two confidential sources.

Bryan Betancur, a self-proclaimed white supremacist who allegedly went to the riots while still wearing an ankle monitor for another crime, was charged by information on Jan. 27, according to court records. Betancur, who was out on probation for burglary, was seen posing with a Confederate battle flag at the Capitol. On Wednesday, prosecutors filed a new five-count information for Betancur, charging him with entering and remaining in a restricted building, disorderly and disruptive conduct, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing at a Capitol building.

According to a criminal complaint filed after his arrest, the Maryland resident “has made statements to law enforcement officers that he is a member of several white supremacy organizations. Betancur has voiced homicidal ideations, made comments about conducting a school shooting, and has researched mass shootings.”

“Betancur voiced support for James Fields, the individual convicted for killing an individual with his car during protests in Charlottesville, Virginia. Betancur has stated he wanted to run people over with a vehicle and kill people in a church,” the complaint adds.

After first being charged by criminal complaint, an information was filed Jan. 28 against Matthew Carl Mazzocco, who was arrested on Jan. 17 at his San Antonio home after he uploaded TikTok videos from the riots. According to the complaint, the 37-year-old mortgage loan officer could be heard telling others “not to take or destroy anything” as he roamed the halls of the Capitol building. Then, he noted “they were probably going to get in trouble for what they were doing.”

“The capital [sic] is ours!” he captioned another video. On Thursday, prosecutors filed a four-count information for Mazzocco, charging him with entering and remaining in a restricted building, disorderly and disruptive conduct, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building.

It has yet to be confirmed why these rioters opted to waive their right to a grand jury, or if they have already agreed to cooperate with authorities. Rahman believes their possible assistance could be vital for prosecutors trying to secure criminal charges against those who organized the Jan. 6 siege.

“Cooperation is always likely in federal cases, especially here, where the U.S. Attorney’s Office has both significant leverage and wants to identify the ringleaders in this sedition conspiracy, as well as other potential domestic terrorist threats,” Rahman said. “It’s uncommon to have this large of a gathering of political extremists from all across the country, so the Government will have a treasure trove of information and witnesses to work with.”

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

Todd wrote:

Capitol Rioters May Be Ready to Start Snitching on Each Other

Yeah no shit. NONE of the them banked on actually going to jail for this. That’s not the kind of the revolution they thought they were having.

I wonder how much social media played into these people actually not realising they were committing crimes. If you’re being cheered on constantly by your tiktok and insta and whatnot followers, does your frame of reference get so lost that you just can’t see the reality of your actions anymore?

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, lorcan_nagle

Todd wrote:

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

So much for loyalty to the cause!

Behind all their bluster and guns, they’re a bunch of gutless cowards.

This is very common in reactionary movements. It’s a by-product of the kind of personality that’s attracted to them, you’re more likely to find people who are primarily motivated by self-interest – either they want to be in charge or they feel threatened by changes to the status quo and are primarily motivated by a desire to preserve what they have. As a result, the idea of solidarity with your comrades is far more likely to go out the window when you’re in trouble. You can see the other element of this very clearly if you look at exposés of the various white supremacist movements that have fallen apart in recent years in the US because of power plays and people in leadership positions having affairs with the spouses of other prominent members.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd

lorcan_nagle wrote:

The irony being, of course that these are often the people who accuse leftists of creating echo chambers

The best moment in that Trump phone call was when they tried to tell him something along the lines of that what he had been seeing on social media wasn’t necessarily the truth, and he was all, “Oh, this isn’t social media, this is Trump media!” and thought that would make what he was saying more valid.

Most leftists are at least aware that there is something like echo chambers.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, lorcan_nagle

These protestors just keep looking dumber all the time.

They stormed the Capitol to overturn the results of an election they didn’t vote in

They were there to “Stop the Steal” and to keep the President they revered in office, yet records show that some of the rioters who stormed the US Capitol did not vote in the very election they were protesting.

One was Donovan Crowl, an ex-Marine who charged toward a Capitol entrance in paramilitary garb on January 6 as the Pro-Trump crowd chanted “who’s our President?”

Federal authorities later identified Crowl, 50, as a member of a self-styled militia organization in his home state of Ohio and affiliated with the extremist group the Oath Keepers. His mother told CNN that he previously told her “they were going to overtake the government if they…tried to take Trump’s presidency from him.” She said he had become increasingly angry during the Obama administration and that she was aware of his support for former President Donald Trump.

Despite these apparent pro-Trump views, a county election official in Ohio told CNN that he registered in 2013 but “never voted nor responded to any of our confirmation notices to keep him registered,” so he was removed from the voter rolls at the end of 2020 and the state said he was not registered in Ohio. A county clerk in Illinois, where Crowl was once registered, also confirmed he was not an active voter anywhere in the state.

Crowl was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of destruction of government property and conspiracy for allegedly coordinating with others to plan their attack. He remains in custody after a judge said, “The suggestion to release him to a residence with nine firearms is a non-starter.” In an interview cited by the government, Crowl told the New Yorker that he had peaceful intentions and claimed he had protected the police. Crowl’s attorney did not provide a comment about his client’s voting record.

Many involved in the insurrection professed to be motivated by patriotism, falsely declaring that Trump was the rightful winner of the election. Yet at least eight of the people who are now facing criminal charges for their involvement in the events at the Capitol did not vote in the November 2020 presidential election, according to an analysis of voting records from the states where protestors were arrested and those states where public records show they have lived. They came from states around the country and ranged in age from 21 to 65.

To determine who voted in November, CNN obtained voting records for more than 80 of the initial arrestees. Most voted in the presidential election, and while many were registered Republicans, a handful were registered as Democrats in those jurisdictions that provided party information — though who someone votes for is not publicly disclosed. Public access to voter history records varies by state, and CNN was unable to view the records of some of those charged.

Among those who didn’t vote were a 65-year-old Georgia man who, according to government documents, was found in his van with a fully-loaded pistol and ammunition, and a Louisiana man who publicly bragged about spending nearly two hours inside the Capitol after attending Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally. Another was a 21-year-old woman from Missouri who prosecutors say shared a video on Snapchat that showed her parading around with a piece of a wooden sign from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office. And a Florida man previously convicted of attempted murder who was accused by the government of refusing to leave the Capitol likely did not have the option to cast a ballot because of his unpaid court fines.

Jessica Stern, a Boston University professor who has spent around 30 years researching extremists, said that while she hasn’t spoken with the individuals involved in the events at the Capitol, from her interviews with other violent extremists, she believes a number of factors could have been at play. They could have believed the system was rigged, as the “Stop the Steal” movement claims, in which case there would be no point in voting. They could be more attracted to the theater, violence or attention they would get from a demonstration like the one at the Capitol than to actually achieving their purported goal — in this case, different election results.

Stern speculated that it was a combination of these reasons, adding that feelings of anger and humiliation often draw people to extremist groups and violence. She said that for someone to actually cast a vote, “you would have to believe in the ethic of voting more than you thought it was a waste of time…and see it as a moral imperative. You have to believe the system works for everyone, that it’s for the good of the country.”

Jack Griffith, a 25-year-old from Tennessee, trumpeted his arrival in Washington DC with a Facebook post saying, “THE CAVALRY IS COMING!!!!,” using the hashtag “#MAGA,” according to court documents. Shortly after leaving the Capitol on January 6, he posted a message of disappointment. “I hate to be that guy, but The New World Order beat us,” he wrote. “Trump was our greatest champion, and it still wasn’t enough. He tried his very best. He did so much, but he’s only one man…I even helped stormed(sic) the capitol today, but it only made things worse…Why, God? Why? WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN US? Unless…Trump still has a plan?”

These online missives describing his participation in the Capitol siege were later used by the Department of Justice to build a criminal case against him. Griffith faces a number of charges, including violent entry or disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds.

Election data from Tennessee and Alabama, where public records show Griffith had lived, showed that he had voted in the 2016 and 2018 elections but not the 2020 presidential election. The public defender who initially represented him declined to comment. Another attorney listed as representing him now did not respond to requests for comment.

Court records detail how University of Kentucky senior Gracyn Courtright posted a series of images on Instagram showing herself marching with a large American flag and another with her arms raised in triumph outside the Capitol, with the caption, “can’t wait to tell my grandkids I was here.” Later, she posted a photo of herself in a belly baring shirt with the caption, “Infamy is just as good as fame. Either way I end up more known. XOXO.”

Courtright, who was charged with crimes including knowingly entering a restricted building, was also identified on surveillance footage lugging a congressional “Members Only” sign around the Capitol, according to court records. “idk what treason is,” she wrote in a conversation shared with the FBI by a tipster, who had confronted the college student in a series of Instagram messages. Courtright is not registered in Kentucky, where she attends school, according to election officials. She is registered in her home state of West Virginia, but records show she did not vote in the 2020 election. Her attorney told CNN that Courtright did not dispute the fact that she did not vote in the election but declined further comment.

In a string of social media posts he shared straight from the Capitol, Edward Jacob Lang of New York portrayed himself as ready for a revolution. “1776 has commenced,” he wrote in one that was cited by the government, showing him standing on the steps of the Capitol. “I was the leader of Liberty today. Arrest me. You are on the wrong side of history,” read another. After leaving the Capitol, he continued to encourage followers to join the “patriot movement” with him. “GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH,” he posted.

Federal prosecutors said that video footage from January 6 shows Lang attempting to attack police officers with a baseball bat, donning a gas mask and riot shield. He now faces a variety of federal charges, including assaulting, resisting or impeding certain officers or employees, civil disorder and violent entry. A recent ProPublica story also revealed how Lang had used the online messaging app Telegram in an attempt to radicalize “normies” and convince them to join local militia groups — encouraging people in the days after the Capitol riot to stock up on guns and prepare for war.

Though state records show that Lang is registered to vote and had participated in a couple of past elections, county and state officials confirmed to CNN that he did not vote in the November election. Lang’s attorney said in a statement that Lang claimed from jail that he submitted an absentee ballot, saying, “Mr. Lang has always represented himself as a Libertarian…He is not a devout Trump supporter, but believes that those taking office will not uphold citizens’ First and Second Amendment rights.”

New York law requires absentee ballots to be postmarked by election day and received within the following week in order to be counted. When asked about Lang’s claim that he sent in an absentee ballot, the Sullivan County Board of Elections directed CNN to file an open records request in order to receive any information. The request had not been responded to before the time of publishing.

Lang’s attorney also said the 25-year-old was a “naive, impressionable young man” who had been provoked by Trump’s rhetoric. He cited Senator Mitch McConnell’s statement that “the mob was fed lies” and said he hoped that Lang and others would not be considered guilty “due solely to their associations, beliefs and presence.”

A man who identified himself with the name of Lang’s father refused to talk with a reporter, saying, “We hate CNN. We’re pro Trump, goodbye.” In a statement to a local newspaper, Lang’s father attributed his son’s actions at the Capitol to “a substance abuse problem.”

Arie Perliger, a professor at University of Massachusetts Lowell who specializes in right-wing domestic terror, said that he was not surprised to hear some of the rioters had not voted, particularly militia members like Crowl, since militia membership is often rooted in a distrust of government. Still, he said he was concerned that it could reflect a growing erosion of faith in the American democratic process, which is a “risk we need to think about.”

“When we see that significant ideological groups are stopping participating in the Democratic process, that may mean they are looking for other ways to participate, and those other ways could be more violent,” said Perliger, who oversees a database of right-wing extremist acts of violence in the United States. “We should be concerned if we see a growing number of ideological groups are reducing their involvement in electoral politics.”

3 users thanked author for this post.

JRCarter, lorcan_nagle

Prediction: On March 5, Donald Trump will not be president, the QAnon bunch will pull a new date and a new reason out of their collective assholes, and none of them will stop believing.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by Tobias Radesäter.
• This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by Tobias Radesäter.

6 users thanked author for this post.

Chris D, garjones, lorcan_nagle, Todd

Tobias Radesäter wrote:

Prediction: On March 5, Donald Trump will not be president, the QAnon bunch will pull a new date and a new reason out of their collective assholes, and none of them will stop believing.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by Tobias Radesäter.
• This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by Tobias Radesäter.

You forgot to mention the part where we drink their tears of anguish, frustration, and despair.

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

In other political news than Brexit and Trump, in the UK are the media or people considering the approach to the Monarchy vs. Republic once Charles takes the throne?

I mean, if Charles even takes the trone. He might decide to have it skip a generation.

Christian wrote:

I mean, if Charles even takes the trone. He might decide to have it skip a generation.

Or give it to serial child rapist Prince Andrew. That would make some nice headlines.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd

garjones wrote:

He is 8th in line now, just behind this baby, who I think we’d agree has more suitable qualifications for the role.

That looks like a de-aged Dr Evil.

Fitting.

If so, I’d like to add “alleged lizard”.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd

Anonymous wrote:

. Personally, I do believe that the monarchy is much more than a tourist attraction and has greater influence than it appears – how could a family so wealthy not have influence? – on regular people’s lives and public policy, but their century old public image as innocuous eccentrics disguises much of that.

I wouldn’t disagree but there’s a long list of people with as much money and influence who are actively and relatively openly causing harm. The inequities of the of the property and tax rights are shared by several dozen people with the infamous ‘non-dom’ rights who can essentially do what they want and avoid any taxes or responsibility. They also tend to own the newspapers and media outlets and fuelled things like Brexit. Large swathes of London are owned by Russian oligarchs.

I may be wrong and don’t really care what happens to them but there’s no real republican movement to bolster, rather a lot of people that think the whole idea is silly and have bigger fish to fry. We may well see the UK split up and a change in heads of state for places like Australia and Canada but an end to the monarchy in England I think is as likely in my lifetime as the US second amendment being repealed.

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

Seems to me (based on the prepared statement that Sellers read) that NewsMax is concerned about being added to the Dominion lawsuit rather than about any effort at reporting legitimate facts. They aren’t taking the moral higher ground or suddenly espousing journalistic integrity; they’re just listening to their legal advisors.

3 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Todd, garjones

Not surprised the GOP is trying tit for tat:

Republicans target Rep. Ilhan Omar after Dems try to oust Marjorie Taylor Green

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

I found this through the virtue of the latest Late Show monologue. Very useful gif in these troubling times.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

JRCarter wrote:

Not surprised the GOP is trying tit for tat:

A bunch of blatant hypocrites — on the same day they refuse to take away Marjorie Taylor Green’s committee positions despite her encouragement of attacks on members of Congress, they attempt to oust Liz Cheney for voting to impeach Trump

GOP disconnect

4 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, JRCarter, Todd

The great reset – Some will be more reset than others.

2 users thanked author for this post.

DavidM, Todd

njerry wrote:

A bunch of blatant hypocrites — on the same day they refuse to take away Marjorie Taylor Green’s committee positions despite her encouragement of attacks on members of Congress, they attempt to oust Liz Cheney for voting to impeach Trump

Jesus. I have to say that I am surprised by all of this, honestly. Those motherfuckers really don’t know when to keep their heads down.

4 users thanked author for this post.

JRCarter, Todd, lorcan_nagle

GOP keeps moaning about unity and healing, but whenever they have a softball lobbed at them to show they are sincere they cry about how unfair the Dems are being. Their argument about convicting Trump or even simply reprimanding crazy Q lady boils down to “but that would set a precedent of holding politicians accountable!!”

I don’t see a way out of this death spiral.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

I think Biden is attempting to (dare I say it?) MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. Only for real this time.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Andrew, Todd

Chris D wrote:

GOP keeps moaning about unity and healing, but whenever they have a softball lobbed at them to show they are sincere they cry about how unfair the Dems are being. Their argument about convicting Trump or even simply reprimanding crazy Q lady boils down to “but that would set a precedent of holding politicians accountable!!”

I don’t see a way out of this death spiral.

They’re stuck.

They’re afraid of losing the Trumpers because there’s a lot of elections they’ll lose without them. Long term though, they know they’re fucked if they’re seen as the party of Trump, the biggest loser they’ve ever had in office. Trump returning as a candidate is just as bad a nightmare for them as him creating his own “Patriot Party”. Either way, they’re fucked.
I do think there are a lot of Republicans who are ready to take on the Trump section of the party, who want to fight for the long-term chances of the GOP and for the party’s sanity (such as it was). But the alternative of just saying, “Hey it’s a big tent, we’re fine with whatever as long as you’re ready to take control of women’s bodies!” seems like the easier way to most at the moment, I suppose. Just close your eyes and hope the whole madness goes away, as it surely must.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Chris D, Todd