ChrisWeigant.com

From The Party Of Law And Order To The Party Of No Accountability

[ Posted Tuesday, January 12th, 2021 – 16:39 UTC ]

Younger readers may be surprised to hear it, but the Republican Party used to stand foursquare for law and order. Indeed, it was a big part of their whole political brand. Republicans used to actually sanctimoniously lecture the rest of us on the righteousness of taking personal responsibility for our actions, and how there simply had to be severe consequences for bad actions. Society absolutely depended on it, they told us.

That was then. This is now.

Now, the Trumpian Republican Party is standing solidly against law and order. The president of the United States attacked the Constitution itself, by whipping up a dangerous mob to forcibly prevent the United States Congress from concluding a free and fair election (that Trump lost). That is anti-law and anti-order, defined. And now, all those who aided and abetted this attempt to overthrow the will of the voters are taking zero personal responsibility for both their actions and their inaction, and they are trying to convince the rest of us that there needn't be any consequences for any of it, "because it would divide the country." Not a peep about how a blatant attempt to overthrow a free and fair election "divided" the country, mind you.

It is hard to even overstate the moral depths the entire Republican Party, as a whole and individually, has now sunk into. Republicans are saying there is no need to impeach Donald Trump -- which is nothing short of giving the president a free pass for the worst crime against democracy ever committed by any American president, ever. Indeed, it would be hard to even imagine anything worse than what Trump did -- whip up a mob, tell them where to go, and sit back and gleefully watch the riot he had caused. Trump directed this mob to break the law, to physically threaten Congress, and to fight even the Republicans in Congress who were faithfully following the Constitution. It was an attack on the legislative branch of government orchestrated by the executive branch. The only worse thing I can even think of would have been if Trump had tried to order the U.S. Army to invade the Capitol.

That would indeed have been a worse affront to the American system of government, but it is doubtful it would have succeeded. The officers at the Pentagon would have refused the order, and the soldiers themselves would likely have also refused such a patently illegal order. The pro-Trump mob, however, had no such compunctions.

What Donald Trump did was horrifically bad. There must be consequences. Impeachment is only the beginning of the consequences both Trump and all his Republican enablers must face, if the country is going to move forward. This was a crime. A high crime, in fact. One of the most serious imaginable. Today -- after remaining silent for almost a full week -- the F.B.I. and the Department of Justice finally gave a briefing. They patted themselves on the back quite a bit, they engaged in a whole bunch of ass-covering, and they pointed to all the people they've been arresting and starting to prosecute for the crimes committed in the Capitol. Notably, neither the head of the F.B.I. nor the acting attorney general were present, which showed how little regard the Trump administration has for what happened. That, and the fact that it took them six whole days before they even addressed it.

Donald Trump is almost certainly going to try to pardon himself before he is forced out of office. This has never happened before because we have never had a president with such contempt for the rule of law before. We have never had a president so narcissistic that he simply does not care what anybody else thinks of his actions.

The Republican Party has enabled Trump for four years, now. They have refused to ever speak an ill word of Trump, no matter what he has said or done. No matter how outrageous and flamboyantly illegal his behavior has gotten, they have refused to even comment on it. "Sorry, I didn't read his tweet," or: "I don't think it's productive for me to criticize every tweet from the president" are just fancy ways of saying: "Donald Trump can do or say anything under the sun, and I will not criticize him for any of it because I am a coward."

So Trump has gotten away with all of it, up until now. And most of these same cowardly Republicans are now telling us that he must be allowed to get away with his naked attempt to overthrow an American presidential election, too. This would leave the path open to Trump running again in 2024, but this somehow doesn't seem to worry the rest of the Republicans.

In fact, the only real price Trump has paid has come from social media companies, who have banned him from their platforms, for inciting violence and for attacking the Constitution and the government. Trump broke their rules, so they booted him. And even this was too much for today's Republican Party. They are now arguing that Trump should have been allowed to remain on Twitter and the rest of them, free to spout his poison and incite even more violence. For politicians who sanctimoniously carry around little printed copies of the U.S. Constitution, it is simply amazing how few of them seem to ever have read the document.

The argument that Trump's First Amendment right to free speech has been censored is utter hogwash. Let's go to the text to see why:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Most of the time, people pay the most attention to the concluding clauses in this sentence, which contain five pillars of democracy: freedom of religion, speech, the press, assembly, and redress. But this time, please pay attention to all of it. The freedom in question is properly defined thus: "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech." Got that? Congress shall make no law -- meaning the federal government is forever banned from censorship. But it doesn't say one word about private companies. Twitter is not a government, nor is it a branch or agency or bureau of any government. It just isn't. Twitter is therefore free to make any rule they wish on their own proprietary platform. Arguing otherwise is valid, but please don't cloak any such arguments with the First Amendment, because the First Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Even this price -- a private company denying the president access to its platform -- is somehow too steep a penalty, according to the Republican Party of today. Trump must be free to attack any and all laws -- up to and including the Constitution itself -- and threaten violence and disorder against any who oppose his illegality -- up to and including Congress itself. Trump must be free to do all of this without facing any consequences at all. He must be allowed to take no personal responsibility for his actions whatsoever, and the rest of the Republicans must also remain unaccountable for any of it. There must be no consequences (never mind severe ones like impeachment) for Donald Trump, or for any of the members of Congress who colluded in the attempt to overthrow a free and fair presidential election with no basis in fact whatsoever. Such behavior must remain unpunished in any way.

I will end exactly as I began, in a probably-fruitless attempt to shame a few more Republicans (to be fair, there are a very few who are not going along with all this idiocy) into doing the right thing and standing up for what they used to believe in so fervently:

Younger readers may be surprised to hear it, but the Republican Party used to stand foursquare for law and order. Indeed, it was a big part of their whole political brand. Republicans used to actually sanctimoniously lecture the rest of us on the righteousness of taking personal responsibility for our actions, and how there simply had to be severe consequences for bad actions. Society absolutely depended on it, they told us.

History is watching, and recording the names.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

60 Comments on “From The Party Of Law And Order To The Party Of No Accountability”

  1. [1] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Insurrection Day is going to be a date remembered like 9/11. If the orange one is not impeached and convicted, the terrorists have won. Send him to Gitmo before he flees to Russia.

  2. [2] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Younger readers may be surprised to hear it, but the Republican Party used to stand foursquare for law and order.

    They used to say that muslims were generally responsible for the actions of jihadis, that somebody in the community had to know what was going on. They said that muslims needed to call them out and they needed to snitch on them, despite the fact that muslims were the main victims of holy war.

    Will white chr

  3. [3] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Will white christian conservatives be held to the same standard regarding Vanilla ISIS?

  4. [4] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Will law enforcement officials begin to take their terrorism seriously? They seem to have ignored the warnings regarding that Nashville suicide bomber and then they allowed Insurrection Day happen despite the Level Orange warning signs.

    Orange is the new Red.

  5. [5] 
    John M from Ct. wrote:

    I love the passion here. This is what I want to read, day and night, hoping enough of the world, or country, agrees. This is not normal. This is not just politics. This is not about fair play, and both sides have valid points, and - oh, Jesus make it stop.

  6. [6] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: What Donald Trump did was horrifically bad.

    Historically horrendous.

    There must be consequences.

    And there will be. Tune in tomorrow, for we are truly living history.

    A POTUS only gets impeached twice once, you know. :)

  7. [7] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Kick -

    OK, that last bit was pretty funny!

    :-)

    -CW

  8. [8] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    John M from Ct -

    Yeah, I've been pretty pissed off for a whole week.

    Four year, really, but it's impossible to ignore, at this point.

    I've already settled on a title for tomorrow's column: "Fourteen Days In January." That's the crisis level we're really at, I think...

    -CW

  9. [9] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Happy Impeachment Day 2.0!

  10. [10] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @cw (fpc)

    They attacked the legislative branch of the United States government by force, and tried to carry out a putsch.

    somehow i think the use of that german word was not an accident.

    god willing, history is not repeating itself, but this little jaunt through the halls of congress last wednesday certainly does rhyme with the beer hall putsch of 1923.

    https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/opinion/us-capitol-violence-is-the-attack-similar-to-germanys-beer-hall-putsch-in-1923-6314661.html

    JL

  11. [11] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Oh boy! The Deathocrats are going to hold Trump and the Republikillers accountable.

    Because it was Republikillers that offered us Obama in 2008 and 2012 and Hillary in 2016 which is what made it possible for Trump to be elected. Then after the shit hit the fan they offered us Biden in 2020.

    It was Republikiller leaning media that pretended the Deathocrats were not a false alternative to the Republikillers which also helped Trump get elected.

    Your sanctimonious lecture on holding the Republikillers accountable rings hollow when you have spent the last few years and continue to refuse to hold the Deathocrats accountable for selling out to the big money interests and making Trump possible.

    Of course you have spent the last week as well as the last four years being pissed off at Trump and the Republikillers. It allows you ignore what the Deathocrats are doing so you don't have to hold the Deathocrats or yourself accountable for the results of what the Deathocrats have done (or haven't done).

    If you really believed in holding people accountable you would be encouraging citizens to hold ALL the big money politicians accountable in the voting booth in 2022 by participating in One Demand.

    Wake up. Wise up. Rise up.
    GET REAL.
    GET CREDIBLE.

  12. [12] 
    TheStig wrote:

    It’s all over save the pouting. Trump is leaving in disgrace. Why is their no YouTube video of Hail to the Chief played on a sad trombone? There MUST be at least one Tromboner craving a million hits and 24 hrs of fame. Get busy.

  13. [13] 
    TheStig wrote:

    If Trump has any sense he is Googling “tax havens” and “weak extradition treaties” before he takes his final ride on AF-1. Nine out ten despots put this planning off until the last minute.

    It’s a pity Michael isn’t alive to see this.

  14. [14] 
    John M wrote:

    [13] TheStig wrote:

    "It’s a pity Michael isn’t alive to see this."

    Did something happen that I missed???

  15. [15] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    the Republican Party used to stand foursquare for law and order

    I hope that Biden has reconsidered keeping Chris Wray after this week. He should hire the internet instead. While the FBI and DOJ drag their feet, the internet is identifying the Vanilla ISIS jihadis and that includes the one who killed officer Sicknick. Send #extinguisherman to Gitmo.

  16. [16] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Chris implies (2nd para) that Trump needs to suffer serious consequences for ". . whipping up a dangerous mob . .", raising the question in my mind, if I or CW or any average person uttered the identical words spoken by Trump, even if another mob riot ensued, would we be subject to comparable 'serious consequences'??

    Likely not, therefore by inflicting those consequences on Asshole Man, we are essentially implying that he has, by virtue of his status as president, some measure of responsibility far in excess of what normal folks have.

    OK if that is the case, then we need to ask ourselves, 'Where and how did he acquire this extraordinary measure of power/responsibility', right?

    And the inevitable answer writes itself and screams out 'We the American electorate, in an unprecedented display of ignorance/stupidity, were so dumb as to confer that measure of power and authority on a person that nobody with the least amount of common sense should have failed to recognize as a world-class asshole', right??

    So, who is really to blame for the capital riots? I'd say, those people who nominated Hillary in 2016!

    Now, that represents some serious 'round-about' logic, but it's logic that is damn tough to refute.

  17. [17] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    It's striking that Republicans can't quit Short Fingers even at this late date, but I guess that's just how death cults are.

    What has Fat Donny actually accomplished?

    * Lost control of the House
    * Lost control of the Senate
    * Lost the White House
    * 380,000 deaths and counting
    * Instigated a terrorist incident at the Capitol

    It's likely that none of that would have happened if Willard or JEB was president. They would still have gotten their tax cuts and judges, but the coronavirus would have been taken seriously.

    All because the deplorables wanted an internet troll in the White House to pwn the libs!

  18. [18] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Stucki,

    Now, that represents some serious 'round-about' logic, but it's logic that is damn tough to refute.

    No, not really. The GOP could have nominated Rubio or Fiorina and the Hillary factor would have been unchanged.

    So, who is really to blame for the capital riots?

    Those people who nominated Fat Donny in 2016!

  19. [19] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    JFC-
    If CRS's logic that the Deathocrats offering Hillary in 2016 is one reason we ended up with Trump is not really tough to refute, then why did you avoid refuting it and just try to deflect back on the Republikillers?

    What have the Deathocrats actually accomplished?

    They lost seats in the House.

    Switched control from the big money Republikillers in the Senate and White House to the big money Deathocrats in the Senate and the White House.

    Big money still controls the House, Senate and White House.

    380,000 deaths and counting.

    That's why it's the DEATHOCRATS AND REPUBLIKILLERS.

    So who is to really to blame for the capital riots?

    The people that keep supporting BOTH the Deathocrats and Republikillers, the media hacks that pretend the show is real and the citizens that buy into it because they don't want to believe they have been duped by the big money Deathocrat/Republikiller cult.

  20. [20] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Death Harris,

    why did you avoid refuting it

    Apparently and unsurprisingly, you delight in displaying your illogic and illiteracy. Nobody is responsible for the orange one's election but those who voted for him. Hillary was a poor choice for the Dems to nominate, but that did not force the GOP to nominate the demented troll that they nominated. As I pointed out, they had other options. Work on your reading comprehension and try not to be so boring and repetitive.

  21. [21] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @jfc [20],

    good luck with that. i suggest pie.

    JL

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    James Comey for FBI Director!

  23. [23] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    . . . or somebody who is not a Republican!

  24. [24] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Hmm. There is a Republican congressman at the podium at this very moment arguing that the Insurrection Day terrorist attack would not have happened if not for the Black Lives Matter protests this summer.

    It seems Stucki and Death Harris got the memo. The preferred talking point is "Look over there."

  25. [25] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Death Harris,

    Corporations are threatening to cut off the Big Money to insurrection-supporting congress critters. The Republicans are clearly terrified about voting today. If they vote for impeachment, the death cult will mark them for assassination. If they vote against, the cash flow dries up. Door #2 is your opportunity to recruit your candidates! They'll all be traitors, but they'll be Small Money traitors.

  26. [26] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Is he still a Republican? That doesn't really bother me. He would be an inspired choice for any number of reasons, including that he's been a Republican.

  27. [27] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I startrd taking notice of Comey when he was acting AG in the Bush administration. He is one of America's finest.

  28. [28] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    He's the right man at the right time.

  29. [29] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I wonder how many MAGA adherants there are in the FBI ...

  30. [30] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    11

    Because it was Republikillers that offered us Obama in 2008 and 2012 and Hillary in 2016 which is what made it possible for Trump to be elected.

    You are a mental case and obviously seriously confused. The GOP didn't "offer us Obama" or "Hillary" or anyone else. We the People choose our candidates regardless of Party. Majority generally rules in the vast majority of elections. Might as well blame those morons not voting for not producing your fantasy candidate. Might as well blame those idiots encouraging other idiots to vote for themselves for producing no viable candidates in any jurisdiction in America. This is all your fault, Death Harris.

    I would use this paragraph to inform you to "eff off" if I didn't have ample evidence that you'd already spent your entire life doing exactly that very thing. We know this for a fact because you informed us in your bio.

    So to recap: Pie. Pie. Pie. Pie. Pie. Pie. Pie.

    Bake up. Rise up. Fries up.
    Get real whipped cream. :)

  31. [31] 
    Kick wrote:

    C. R. Stucki
    16

    Chris implies (2nd para) that Trump needs to suffer serious consequences for ". . whipping up a dangerous mob . .", raising the question in my mind, if I or CW or any average person uttered the identical words spoken by Trump, even if another mob riot ensued, would we be subject to comparable 'serious consequences'??

    Don't allow yourself to miss the forest for the trees; I think you are too smart for that. This impeachment isn't about "whipping up a dangerous mob" on one day with one speech. It is about multiple months of actions taken by Donald Trump to interfere in America's elections. It's not like he hasn't been impeached for it already; he withheld funds from Ukraine in attempting a quid pro quo wherein a foreign nation would disparage the political opponent he did not want to face: Joe Biden. This current impeachment is more of the same. Lying to the American people that he won the election began on election night. You don't claim you'll go to the Supreme Court if you know you won an election.

    Paul Gosar, Mo Brooks, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz, Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump. This was premeditated.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/13/ali-alexander-capitol-biggs-gosar/

    Now, that represents some serious 'round-about' logic, but it's logic that is damn tough to refute.

    Incorrect. :)

  32. [32] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    [This comment removed by moderator for foul language and personal attacks. You are skating on very thin ice, and this will be your last warning.]

  33. [33] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    [This comment removed by moderator for foul language and personal attacks. You are skating on very thin ice, and this will be your last warning.]

  34. [34] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick-
    There is nothing wrong with me mentally and I am not at all confused.

    You just don't like having you inability to understand simple basic reality exposed.

    Or you are just here to troll.

  35. [35] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    34

    There is nothing wrong with me mentally and I am not at all confused.

    You blamed Republicans for Obama and Hillary. That is ample evidence of your confusion.

    You just don't like having you inability to understand simple basic reality exposed.

    You don't have a scintilla of a clue regarding what I like or don't like except the fact that I admittedly don't like trolls. I can tolerate intelligent trolls; you're not one of them.

    Or you are just here to troll.

    Your projection is again duly noted. Yes you are a troll, and I can prove it:

    [54] Chris Weigant wrote:

    Don Harris [49] -

    Yes. You are a troll. Deal with it.

    As for your language, you are pushing me very very close to banning the first person ever from my site. You have been warned, and this is your final warning.

    If ignoring you doesn't work, then banning you just might. Address the issues in the articles or the comments to those articles, and quit with your own monomania, because nobody's listening. Instead, you are just trolling.

    And we're ALL way beyond getting tired of it.

    Is that clear enough?

    -CW

    [Thursday, April 2nd, 2020 at 16:05 UTC]

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2020/04/01/april-is-the-cruelest-month/#comment-156925

    Your self-description in the form of your bio proves you're ignorant:

    I have none of the credentials normally listed in a bio. No degrees, no years of running a successful business and no experience in political campaigns or activism. I am simply an average person that has been working and living at survival mode. But I have the only credentials that I believe really matters. I am a citizen and I have an idea that may improve our political system.

    ~ Don Harris

    And that makes you an ignorant troll.

    I have the evidence... while you have little else than your repetitive invented fantasies wherein you are frequently confused.

    Anything else you need explained? Just ask. :)

  36. [36] 
    Kick wrote:

    Death Harris
    32

    The real truth is that it is not boring or repetitive that bothers you- it is that it exposes your bullshit and you as the fraud that you are.

    I would wager extremely Big Money that "boring" and "repetitive" does, in fact, bother JFC as well as multiple others. I know this because I can read and comprehend the written word. The reason you have trouble understanding this was fabulously outlined in your bio by you.

    You should believe people when they inform you that "boring" and "repetitive" bothers them. Not rocket science!

    Anything else you need explained? Just ask. :)

  37. [37] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Death Harris,

    You are an ignorant, repetitive, obsessive-compulsive troll and incompetent, ineffective grifter who is unable to comprehend plain English.

    The Democratic party is not responsible for who the Republican party nominates. Fat Donny incited the terrorist attack on the Capitol and he, his party and his fans (you) own that.

  38. [38] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick-
    You are delusional. You are completely wrong about what I said.

    Just because you and CW called me a troll does not mean it is a fact. CW was wrong.

    My actions do not fit being a troll. Yours do.

    You have nothing of any substance.

    The bullshit spewed here by the Deathocrat supporters is boring, repetitive, a lie and moronic.

    The only thing I need explained from you is why you think you are not a boring repetitive lying moron as your posts provide ample evidence that you are.

  39. [39] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    [This comment removed by moderator for foul language and personal attacks. You are skating on very thin ice, and this will be your last warning.]

  40. [40] 
    Kick wrote:

    Death Harris
    38

    I am not concerned with your opinion of me. :)

  41. [41] 
    Kick wrote:

    Death Harris
    39

    see comment 38.

    Your laziness is again duly noted. :)

  42. [42] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Don Harris -

    Be very careful. Deleting people's accounts permanently is all the rage, right now. You never know when I'll get caught up in the new fad... Fair warning.

    -CW

  43. [43] 
    Kick wrote:

    18 United States Code Section 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

    If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

  44. [44] 
    Kick wrote:

    18 United States Code Section 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

    Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383

  45. [45] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    CW-
    Once again you are wrong.

    The attacks were first instigated by Kick and JFC, I was merely responding to their attacks.

    A fair warning has to actually be fair.

    There have been numerous uses of the same words that you find foul by other commenters without a peep from anyone.

    "The thing that critics of activists don't get is that they tried playing the "polite language" policy game and all it did was make them easier to ignore.
    It wasn't until they made folks uncomfortable that there was traction to do ANYTHING even if it wasn't their full demand.

    The whole of of protesting is to make ppl uncomfortable.

    Activists take that discomfort w/the status quo & advocate for concrete policy changes. Popular support often starts small and grows.

    To folks who complain protest demands make others uncomfortable... that's the point.

    The Democratic Party does not do more unless it pushed. So we need to push them.

    And they don't like it.

    I think I annoy them...but...but that's our job"

    -AOC

    And that is why you and others here want to find anything to claim I am not behaving even though others here do the same or worse than me- because my pointing out the reality of the hypocrisy that dominates this site makes you uncomfortable.

    I am just doing my job the way it is supposed to be done.

    You should follow my example.

  46. [46] 
    dsws wrote:

    James Comey for FBI Director!

    The guy who screamed "buttery males", a few days before the 2016 election? No thanks.

  47. [47] 
    dsws wrote:

    So, who is really to blame for the capital riots? I'd say, those people who nominated Hillary in 2016!

    Don't worry, there's plenty of blame to go 'round. The primary voters and caucus-goers who decided to nominate Hillary Clinton certainly earned a big heaping helping of it.

    A fair warning has to actually be fair.

    Nope. It's CW's site. He can give fair warning that's truly fair, "fair" warning that's heinously biased, unfair warning that makes no bones about being unfair, or no warning at all. It's completely up to him. He's shown great forbearance toward the back-and-forth that has been drowning the comments section here. Any warning at all was more than fair at this point, imo.

  48. [48] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Yes. CW doesn't have to be fair. But I can point out when CW is not being fair even if he claims he is being fair. That is the purpose of the comments section to give our opinions on CW and other's opinions.

    But only a warning that is fair can be realistically and honestly be called fair.

  49. [49] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Take down the attacks by JFC and Kick or put my comments back up.

  50. [50] 
    dsws wrote:

    CW:
    Younger readers may be surprised to hear it, but the Republican Party used to stand foursquare for law and order.

    There's an unbridgeable chasm between political lawn ordure and the actual rule of law. The calls to execute the Central Park Five, even after their innocence was unequivocally known to all, were squarely on the side of lawn ordure. The Republican Party used to have some concern for actual rule of law, but they were always more on the side of lawn ordure.

    Also CW:
    Got that? Congress shall make no law -- meaning the federal government is forever banned from censorship. But it doesn't say one word about private companies.

    Missing premise, here. The premise is true, so it doesn't invalidate the argument, but it is missing from the reasoning as stated.

    The first amendment doesn't say one word about the states either, yet it governs their conduct as well, under the case law that interprets the fourteenth amendment as extending it to apply to them. Case law is law, and the fourteenth is law. The missing premise is that there is no counterpart of the fourteenth lurking in the case law and statute surrounding the commerce clause.

    Twitter is not a government, nor is it a branch or agency or bureau of any government.

    Define government. It's not called a government, but that-which-we-call-a-rose, y'know. It's not accountable to the people, but neither was the administration of Louis XIV.

    When the most significant response to insurrection comes from certain powerful institutions, they're at least well on their way to being a key part of the de-facto government. Our system still has significant democratic elements, but we also have a degree of corporatocracy. Having that power in unaccountable corporate hands, to the extent that we do, has aptly been described as scary.

  51. [51] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    45

    Once again you are wrong.

    Once again, your (lack of) intelligence is showing.

    The attacks were first instigated by Kick and JFC, I was merely responding to their attacks.

    I am responding with my opinion of your attack. Your (lack of) intelligence is again showing. If you post your opinion, you'll get responses. If the responses sound repetitive, consider the fact that your attacks are repetitive. Whining that someone attacked you first is both hysterical and incorrect.

    A fair warning has to actually be fair.

    It surprises no one that you don't understand what CW meant by "fair warning." *laughs*

    There have been numerous uses of the same words that you find foul by other commenters without a peep from anyone.

    Whataboutism is a weak argument.

    Also, you don't get to call yourself an activist if you fail repeatedly at doing it. You cannot curse your way into making people agree with dumb things or force them into giving your spew credence. Bugger off.

    The whole of of protesting is to make ppl uncomfortable.

    When your spew just sounds whiny and repetitive and very ignorant in the process, please go pound sound with some other trolls who care. You can all make yourselves "uncomfortable."

    Activists take that discomfort w/the status quo & advocate for concrete policy changes. Popular support often starts small and grows.

    Or it could be that you just sound like a repetitive moron who has been asked to stop trolling here but won't do it because he fancies himself an "activist" aiming to make others "uncomfortable."

    To folks who complain protest demands make others uncomfortable... that's the point.

    Congratulations. You have defined yourself fabulously, and you wonder why the majority here have referred to you as a troll. *laughs*

    And that is why you and others here want to find anything to claim I am not behaving even though others here do the same or worse than me- because my pointing out the reality of the hypocrisy that dominates this site makes you uncomfortable.

    You sound like a whiny 5-year-old child seeking frantically for attention.

    I am just doing my job the way it is supposed to be done.

    Keep posting your BS. I will respond if I want to. If you don't like the responses you receive, may I suggest you stop posting your BS.

    You should follow my example.

    You post, and I'll respond. If you can't handle my posts and insist on referring to them as "attacks," then you're a lightweight and not an activist. Calling me names gets you nowhere. Whining about whataboutism is a waste of your time.

    My job here is to make you sound like a toddler and make you infinitely uncomfortable. Mission accomplished. :)

  52. [52] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    49

    Take down the attacks by JFC and Kick or put my comments back up.

    My opinion of your repetitive BS is not an "attack." If you can't handle my opinion of your BS, that's your problem and no one else's.

    Cry more.

    Mission accomplished. :)

  53. [53] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    [49] Death Harris,

    I said something to someone else and you trolled me by mischaracterizing what I said to fit your boring, repetitive agenda and I pointed that out in addition to mentioning your obvious reading comprehension issue and pretzel logic. Then I offered you some helpful advice with your failing "only I can fix it" project from which you ludicrously hope to skim off $100K for yourself.

    Finally, I did not use foul language. You're confused (as Kick pointed out). That was you.

  54. [54] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    There was foul language and I missed it? Aw shucks! Don't red-card don yet CW, who else will be jealous of my success when i get a guest column dedicated to pie?

  55. [55] 
    Kick wrote:

    dsws
    50

    Define government.

    Define lazy.

    It's not called a government, but that-which-we-call-a-rose, y'know. It's not accountable to the people, but neither was the administration of Louis XIV.

    That which we call a rose isn't a government either. I'm sure you think you had a point in there, but Twitter still isn't a government and claiming that your First Amendment rights have been violated because you got "deleted" off Twitter was the subject... gardening and the pitfalls of le Roi Soleil and the French aristocracy wasn't.

    When the most significant response to insurrection comes from certain powerful institutions, they're at least well on their way to being a key part of the de-facto government.

    Utterly nonsensical. Refusing to provide a platform to those who commit insurrection does not somehow magically transform your institution into a "government," de facto or otherwise.

    Below is a list of companies halting donations to GOP members of the "Coup Caucus":

    3M
    Amazon
    American Airlines
    American Express
    Airbnb
    AT&T
    Best Buy
    BlackRock
    Blue Cross Blue Shield
    Boston Scientific
    BP
    Charles Schwab
    Citigroup
    Cisco
    Coca-Cola
    ConocoPhillips
    Comcast
    Commerce Bank
    Dell
    Deloitte
    Dow
    Ernst & Young
    Facebook
    Ford
    General Electric
    Goldman Sachs
    Google
    Hilton
    JPMorgan Chase
    Kroger
    Leidos
    Marathon Petroleum
    Marriot International
    Mastercard
    Microsoft
    Morgan Stanley
    PricewaterhouseCoopers
    Smithfield Foods
    Target
    UPS
    Verizon
    Visa
    Walmart

    Compliments of The Lincoln Project. I am sure it has grown larger still.

    Our system still has significant democratic elements, but we also have a degree of corporatocracy. Having that power in unaccountable corporate hands, to the extent that we do, has aptly been described as scary.

    Boo!

    How unfair of me. I should have given you "fair warning" that I'm part of the de-facto government. /sarcasm off

    *laughs*

  56. [56] 
    Kick wrote:

    nypoet22
    54

    There was foul language and I missed it?

    Fowl language... I believe someone got called a chicken. Speaking of chicken, you can make a mean pot pie out of a dead bird... after you pluck it.

    Aw shucks!

    That's pluck it... and you watch your fowl language, pal.

    Don't red-card don yet CW, who else will be jealous of my success when i get a guest column dedicated to pie?

    My one demand is for your guest column dedicated to pie... on 3/14! Or is that multiple demands? Aw pluck it. :)

  57. [57] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-56

    Fowl language. Are you channeling Groucho? ....your cadences are perfect.

  58. [58] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @don,

    your opinion on the validity of CW's warning is irrelevant to its enforcement. you're allowed to think whatever you want about whether or not your "red card" is in fact a card or if it happens to be the color red, but everything you ever posted here would still be deleted. best of luck, and do be careful. after all, it's my way or the pie way. preferably both.

    JL

  59. [59] 
    Kick wrote:

    TheStig
    57

    Fowl language. Are you channeling Groucho? ....your cadences are perfect.

    Heh. Not on purpose. You know I'm not a Democrat, and I sure as hell ain't no Marxist!

    Apologies... I couldn't stop myself. :)

  60. [60] 
    Kick wrote:

    nypoet22
    58

    best of luck, and do be careful. after all, it's my way or the pie way. preferably both.

    Heh. :)

Leave a Reply

[If you have questions as to how to register or log in, to be able to post comments here, or if you'd like advanced commenting and formatting tips, please visit our "Commenting Tips" page, for further details.]

You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you are a new user, please register so you can post comments here.

[The first time you post a comment (after creating your user name and logging in), it will be held for approval. Please be patient (as it may take awhile). After your first comment has been approved, you will be able to post further comments instantly and automatically.]