The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Matt Allison]

54 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

I cannot fathom how either were allowed to be close to any degree of threat or danger, or how the fact that either supposedly were has not resulted in a massive review of security and attendant resignations.

There were numerous firings and resignations, including the Sergeant at Arms of both the House and Senate.

Your notion that those in the positions of protection are guaranteed to be good people is misguided in other ways as well:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/assistant-house-sergeant-arms-arrested-child-pornography-investigation-n1281660

[Jeff Carter]

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

There were numerous firings and resignations, including the Sergeant at Arms of both the House and Senate.

The firings and resignations were about the breach of the building, not specific to the security issues of #2 and #3 within the federal gov’t structure. I’m not a security expert, but had occasion to work beside a federal Canadian opposition party leader both before and after an election call which could have resulted in his becoming the PM. The difference in security between the two occasions was very noticeable and markedly more “serious”. Can’t help but extrapolate from that what should be expected, under the specific circumstances, for #2 and #3 of the world’s sole superpower. I haven’t seen much informed discussion of Pence or Pelosi’s experiences in context of the security and their position in the nation’s chain of command, despite their proximity to the rabble being the primary and most immediate security issue. I do see that Pelosi did in fact receive the security expected, as she told USA Today in April “I was never personally afraid because I had so much security for myself”.  That seems to underline that Pence’s experience was either not at the expected level, or certain widely disseminated accounts have been a bit loose with the actual facts. The security breach which did occur was limited to a building, while the integrity of the US political system was never under any direct threat or danger.

Trump did make an attempt to utilize the Supreme Court to switch the election result, like what occurred in 2000, but it was unsuccessful and after that there was no realistic means to realize that goal. So, just my observation, the hand-wringing over the alleged coup attempt is an orchestration leading towards new legislation further restricting the expression of grievances and the right to petition the government.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

The firings and resignations were about the breach of the building, not specific to the security issues of #2 and #3 within the federal gov’t structure. I’m not a security expert, but had occasion to work beside a federal Canadian opposition party leader both before and after an election call which could have resulted in his becoming the PM. The difference in security between the two occasions was very noticeable and markedly more “serious”. Can’t help but extrapolate from that what should be expected, under the specific circumstances, for #2 and #3 of the world’s sole superpower. I haven’t seen much informed discussion of Pence or Pelosi’s experiences in context of the security and their position in the nation’s chain of command, despite their proximity to the rabble being the primary and most immediate security issue. I do see that Pelosi did in fact receive the security expected, as she told USA Today in April “I was never personally afraid because I had so much security for myself”.  That seems to underline that Pence’s experience was either not at the expected level, or certain widely disseminated accounts have been a bit loose with the actual facts. The security breach which did occur was limited to a building, while the integrity of the US political system was never under any direct threat or danger.

Trump did make an attempt to utilize the Supreme Court to switch the election result, like what occurred in 2000, but it was unsuccessful and after that there was no realistic means to realize that goal. So, just my observation, the hand-wringing over the alleged coup attempt is an orchestration leading towards new legislation further restricting the expression of grievances and the right to petition the government.

Jeff Carter--

You are barking up the right tree, and yes, your observation that M$M now runs narratives, not news, is dead on. 

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

If one reads the actual complaints, affidavits and other information here, you will see the bulk of arrestees thought they were "let in" into the Capitol. Many texted in real time that sentiment. Only one, a Christopher Alberts, carried a firearm (and he was mysteriously released on his own recognizance on Jan. 7, and has been free since)....Many occupants of the Capitol were women, or had Hispanic surnames. And, or course, the only person shot and killed at the scrum was Ashley Babbitt, an unarmed woman. 

So where were the police? No one seems to know, or care. 

The WaPo reports the Capitol Police Commander of the Civil Disturbance Unit was at home making meatloaf on the afternoon of Jan. 6.  

Meanwhile, Mr. Buffalo Horns, the penniless unaffiliated Phoenix gadfly who turned himself into the FBI in Arizona shortly after Jan 6, was clamped in irons and put into solitary confinement ever since. He may go to prison for 55 months. 

Why? The narrative.

https://jellyfish.news/meet-ray-epps-the-fed-protected-provocateur-who-appears-to-have-led-the-very-first-1-6-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol/

The above story raises a lot of interesting questions regarding federal provocateurs or infiltrators on Jan. 6. 

I am very skeptical of the M$M narrative on Jan. 6, or the corporatist-Donk-party-national-security-state-political-theater (the Jan 6. committee and M$M coverage) since.

See the Russiagate fables for clues, and also...really, Liz Cheney and George Bush jr. are the new Donk heroes? 

If you trusted M$M coverage after 11/22/63...what did you know? 

And no, the establishment 'Phants are no better than the Donks. 

There is a great freedom is shucking off any party affiliations, or any side in the culture wars, and just trying to figure out what is what. 

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

 

Trump did make an attempt to utilize the Supreme Court to switch the election result, like what occurred in 2000, but it was unsuccessful and after that there was no realistic means to realize that goal. So, just my observation, the hand-wringing over the alleged coup attempt is an orchestration leading towards new legislation further restricting the expression of grievances and the right to petition the government.

Geez, Jeff... You can't be serious.

Apparently you've never heard about the (John) Eastman Memo, or the Trump team's Willard Hotel Command Center activities relating to the January 6th MAGA march on the Capitol.

Or the fact that Congressman Mo Brooks wore body armor on January 6th, before urging the crowd to, "March down to the Capitol and kick some ass!"

Or Steve Bannon's prior public statement that "All hell is going to break loose tomorrow," (January 6th) in order to "kill the Biden Presidency in its crib."

Or the White House/Secret Service directive to remove Mike Pence from the Capitol building to Andrews AFB before the election could be certified.

Or the fact that Trump refused to intervene to protect the Congress for three hours while watching the violent insurrection on television at the White House-- while his interim Secretary of Defense, Chris Miller, repeatedly declined to send National Guard troops to the Capitol.

It was all some sort of Deep State ruse to legislate a restriction of grievances and petitions?! 🤥  Sure...

All things considered, your (above) opinion on the January 6th coup attempt makes about as much sense as your persistent denial of Putin's GRU op to intervene in the 2016 U.S. election in order to put Trump in the White House.

But, at least, you're not alone.  Benjamin Cole seems to be equally unaware of these facts, despite the repeated attempts to point them out to him in our discussions here.

 

 

 

[Matt Allison]

4 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

 while the integrity of the US political system was never under any direct threat or danger.

Well, that's where you're wrong. Those of us that actually live in the U.S. can relate stories every day of the precipice our democracy is on.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Matt Allison

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Psychology is more of a religion than a science, and any "tests" they claim to have should be treated with extreme skepticism. Mental healthcare workers are all guilty of shoving their own personal, political, and philosophical opinions down people's throat in a very unnecessary way, and calling it objective fact. ALSO JFK researchers should be skeptical of those "mental health reports" of Oswald and other figures in the assassination - they probably lie in their reports as often as the Police.

Hey Micah. 

There are also those that claim science is a religion in the present day. It’s all open to abuse and corruption. Psychology amply explains the social conditioning that takes place, the coercion, human susceptibility to propaganda, interrogation techniques etc. If we don’t have psychology, then it’s just a mystery. It can’t be just a mystery as the methods work and are repeated time and time again with tremendous effectiveness. 
 

Chris

[Jeff Carter]

2 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Well, that's where you're wrong. Those of us that actually live in the U.S. can relate stories every day of the precipice our democracy is on.

The tripartite separation of powers in the U.S. federal system requires a 2/3 majority to assume or presume nominal control. In January 2021 Trump was in last weeks of a lame-duck Executive, with no Congressional or Court support for his claims of irregular election practices. There was therefore no constitutional avenue to a second Trump term, and an insurrection led by characters such as Mr Buffalo Horns had realistically no chance to reverse that fact. Claims of a supposed coup attempt  have yet to describe a process by which this coup would be at all feasible.

[Matt Allison]

Here's a good read to enlighten you on the reality of the situation:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/nov/14/trump-president-2024-election-coup-republicans

[Denny Zartman]

7 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

Claims of a supposed coup attempt  have yet to describe a process by which this coup would be at all feasible.

Wasn't the goal to remove Pence from the Capitol for security reasons and therefore prevent him from certifying the election?

[Chris Davidson]

10 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

The tripartite separation of powers in the U.S. federal system requires a 2/3 majority to assume or presume nominal control. In January 2021 Trump was in last weeks of a lame-duck Executive, with no Congressional or Court support for his claims of irregular election practices. There was therefore no constitutional avenue to a second Trump term, and an insurrection led by characters such as Mr Buffalo Horns had realistically no chance to reverse that fact. Claims of a supposed coup attempt  have yet to describe a process by which this coup would be at all feasible.

I believe they had a different path in mind, to meet their objective/s.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Chris Davidson

[Micah Mileto]

11 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Hey Micah. 

There are also those that claim science is a religion in the present day. It’s all open to abuse and corruption. Psychology amply explains the social conditioning that takes place, the coercion, human susceptibility to propaganda, interrogation techniques etc. If we don’t have psychology, then it’s just a mystery. It can’t be just a mystery as the methods work and are repeated time and time again with tremendous effectiveness. 
 

Chris

Here are two examples of how basic logic can debunk modern psychology:

 

1. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The human brain is the most complicated object in the universe that we know of.. Therefore, anybody claiming to have a firm grasp on the human mind needs to provide extraordinary evidence. Psychology is almost entirely self-reported data going through several fallible filters. Not only is self-reported data inherently not that objectively valuable, but it is also difficult to obtain high-quality self-reported data. In most cases, self-reported data should not be counted as "extraordinary evidence".

 

2. What psychiatrists call a "diagnosis" just describes a correlation of behaviors, not necessarily the cause of the behavior. So, what is a "behavior" when it comes to psychology? If a professional actor was acting in a scene, that would not count as a "behavior" which could lead to a diagnosis. But aren't we all "acting" to an extent in our day-to-day lives? There is no doubt that people express themselves on a spectrum ranging from their true feelings to acting a role. So, there is no reason to think that it is accurate to believe in the modern concept of "psychological diagnosis". Sounds more like something a cult would do. In fact, modern psychology just seems like a scam to make people ashamed of themselves, like how religion often makes people shamed.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Micah Mileto

[Chris Davidson]

https://www.sho.com/video/64088/the-family-business-trump-and-taxes---sneak-peek

The official documents are the proof. It doesn't matter who reports them.

I recommend watching the 1/2 hour documentary. It was most insightful.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Here are two examples of how basic logic can debunk modern psychology:

 

1. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The human brain is the most complicated object in the universe that we know of.. Therefore, anybody claiming to have a firm grasp on the human mind needs to provide extraordinary evidence. Psychology is almost entirely self-reported data going through several fallible filters. Not only is self-reported data inherently not that objectively valuable, but it is also difficult to obtain high-quality self-reported data. In most cases, self-reported data should not be counted as "extraordinary evidence".

 

2. What psychiatrists call a "diagnosis" just describes a correlation of behaviors, not necessarily the cause of the behavior. So, what is a "behavior" when it comes to psychology? If a professional actor was acting in a scene, that would not count as a "behavior" which could lead to a diagnosis. But aren't we all "acting" to an extent in our day-to-day lives? There is no doubt that people express themselves on a spectrum ranging from their true feelings to acting a role. So, there is no reason to think that it is accurate to believe in the modern concept of "psychological diagnosis". Sounds more like something a cult would do. In fact, modern psychology just seems like a scam to make people ashamed of themselves, like how religion often makes people shamed.

I don't think anyone is claiming the human mind is even nearly fully explored. Like science, it's people's best guess so far. So, there is no debunking there, Micah, just a pointing out that it's incomplete. 

@W. Niederhut is probably going to disagree here, as it's his trade. I have two good friends in the profession also, one IMHO is much better than the other but, that's the same in any field. You have a cynical view of it but, you could apply your logic to many professions. To me, your depiction is the social worker in Joker (2019) that Arthur (Phoenix) goes to see. Basically a person taking the money, doing nothing constructive, they don't care. 

I don't share your view on making people ashamed of themselves. I don't think that's the purpose at all, to me its helping people work through complex issues that are holding them back or making them suffer, and rebuilding them to give them the best life possible. That's a patient/Dr relationship. Psychology is also those people at Guantanamo Bay, breaking people down using Bideman's chart of coercion, or your government propagandists giving people free beer, burgers and hookers to take a covid shot. It's a broad field with different applications. 

In my own experience as a non-clinician, I managed to work through a friend's father issues this summer, over a period of months, she hated men, was combative and hostile. After a time she began to pacify and make peace with her past, with her father's wrongdoing, and generally had a different outlook on men. She returned home, some 500 miles away and her mother immediately noticed she was like a different person. I was only using psychology that I learnt in books. I think a good psychologist is worth their weight in gold IMHO.

Cheers

Chris

[Kirk Gallaway]

 

3 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

Wasn't the goal to remove Pence from the Capitol for security reasons and therefore prevent him from certifying the election?

Concerning that Denny, Another thing I found interesting in that interview is that Trump, in his all consuming desire for attention can't help but reveal is that he knew where Pence was, and was ok, which means it's pretty obvious he knew Pence was going to be removed from the Capitol. If Karl had just asked , what was the plan for Pence that day, and wouldn't that have effectively stopped certification?  It would be interesting to hear Trump's answer.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Kirk Gallaway

[Micah Mileto]

34 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

I don't think anyone is claiming the human mind is even nearly fully explored. Like science, it's people's best guess so far. So, there is no debunking there, Micah, just a pointing out that it's incomplete. 

@W. Niederhut is probably going to disagree here, as it's his trade. I have two good friends in the profession also, one IMHO is much better than the other but, that's the same in any field. You have a cynical view of it but, you could apply your logic to many professions. To me, your depiction is the social worker in Joker (2019) that Arthur (Phoenix) goes to see. Basically a person taking the money, doing nothing constructive, they don't care. 

I don't share your view on making people ashamed of themselves. I don't think that's the purpose at all, to me its helping people work through complex issues that are holding them back or making them suffer, and rebuilding them to give them the best life possible. That's a patient/Dr relationship. Psychology is also those people at Guantanamo Bay, breaking people down using Bideman's chart of coercion, or your government propagandists giving people free beer, burgers and hookers to take a covid shot. It's a broad field with different applications. 

In my own experience as a non-clinician, I managed to work through a friend's father issues this summer, over a period of months, she hated men, was combative and hostile. After a time she began to pacify and make peace with her past, with her father's wrongdoing, and generally had a different outlook on men. She returned home, some 500 miles away and her mother immediately noticed she was like a different person. I was only using psychology that I learnt in books. I think a good psychologist is worth their weight in gold IMHO.

Cheers

Chris

That may be the sales pitch they give in college courses, but they do not practice what they preach. They show their true self when they waste money on pointless "experiments" which prove nothing, like when College students earn extra credit by interviewing eachother and their "data" gets published in a journal like it's Albert Einstein. They show their true self when they throw people in prison for no solid reason or force them to take medication or control them in other ways, like when people are forced to talk to a therapist despite not wanting to, which is harassment and torture. They show their true self when they try to trick people into accepting a political or philosophical opinion as fact. There is no separation of science and politics. The human rights abuses of psychology is such a horrible holocaust going on right now, and there is a N@zi concentration camp in every large hospital in the world. I now understand Jack Ruby's strange outbursts when he would say things like that.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Micah Mileto