Capitol Hill and the next 2 weeks (Trump #118)

[Roussette]

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4128051-Coup-on-Capitol-Hill-Trump-117

Fast moving threads....

C) don't berate people for stupidity because it will make them less likely to engage in debate/ask question.

The problem is when people make matter of fact statements without minimal knowledge. Or put forward outlandish conspiracy theories based on their lack of knowledge, without even acknowledging it.

Asking questions is not the problem. Debating is fine.

I think he is reading off cue cards/autocue in that speech. That’s why he is looking straight ahead so intently. His gestures are muted possibly because it’s not spontaneous (or what he wants to say). It looks heavily rehearsed and edited. It is odd.

It most probably took 18 hours to get his meds stabilised before he could record that, then several more hours of takes and retakes before they had something usable.
He still managed to slip in a big whopper about immediately deploying the national guard, so I assume he was allowed some input.

They will very likely have done some editing afterwards as well. I was trained in joe to do this with radio programmes. That would explain the lack of pauses during the speech.

@Lweji

C) don't berate people for stupidity because it will make them less likely to engage in debate/ask question.

The problem is when people make matter of fact statements without minimal knowledge. Or put forward outlandish conspiracy theories based on their lack of knowledge, without even acknowledging it.

Asking questions is not the problem. Debating is fine.

In this particular case though (last thread I think). The person had been told why they wrong and come back and said, oh I see , I didn't know that. So yes it may not have been a question but they went away with more knowledge.

And even if someone makes a statement based on little knowledge and never acknowledges it was wrong, there are other people reading these threads who may come away with more knowledge.

I do find it difficult to express where I think the balance should lie because there are people out there who deliberately spread lies and fake news (as we have seen) but on a thread with plenty of knowledgeable people I don't have a problem with statements that are incorrect. They get corrected pretty fast and people go away more informed.

Also there is information that it was organised and many were paid to be there

twitter.com/d3m0a/status/1347069689990500352?s=21

They always say that! Maybe because people were paid to attend trump rallies!

@Lweji

C) don't berate people for stupidity because it will make them less likely to engage in debate/ask question.

The problem is when people make matter of fact statements without minimal knowledge. Or put forward outlandish conspiracy theories based on their lack of knowledge, without even acknowledging it.

Asking questions is not the problem. Debating is fine.

and yet - and MN is a perfect example of this - what of the situation which happens with enough regularity you could set your calendar by it:

OP: Some problem with misdirected mail
Knobs A,B and C: "IT'S ILLEGAL TO OPEN IT"
Professional lawyer: No it's not, here's the link to the law

(a week passes)

A different OP: Some problem with misdirected mail
The same knobs A,B and C: "IT'S ILLEGAL TO OPEN IT"

You can lead a horse to water ....

I don't like Brian Cox' hair, so I really can't believe what he says about science is something I actually heard at work once.

Also remember that 50% of the population is below average intelligence. Whatever you might think about that.

I don't like Brian Cox' hair, so I really can't believe what he says about science is something I actually heard at work once.

Ok, some things just can't be argued with

But I don't know what the law is on opening mail (never needed to know, am not a lawyer) so I'm glad someone has asked and a lawyer has linked to the law in case I ever need to know. Even if that one post hasn't informed everyone of the law (Which given the size of mumsnet it's likely not everyone saw the post).

If Trump "pardons himself", as a power explicitly granted under the Constitution (although annoyingly not explicitly barred from use by self) it is open to scrutiny by the guardians of the constitution (much like the guardians of the galaxy, but waaaaaaaaaaay less spandex) SCOTUS.

However they can only review it, if it is used in a US court of law.

I agree with the NYT article, that there is a real danger that simply by inaction, the US courts could give the appearance that it is actually valid.

Bald note for US readers: If Trumps waving his self pardon around does result in courts deciding not to try him, you have effectively created a route whereby someone can put themselves above the law. And much as you might like to play with language, that is what a King does. A monarch. 244 years after you rather pompously decided you didn't like Kings, you will have finally got one back again. I just hope you are honest about it, and have a coronation, and knock up a crown.

Obviously the whole point of a Monarch is to keep the Monarchy going, so you're going to get the first born Trump as heir.

Oh, and even hated King George was not above the law of Britain. We did away with that in 1649. So not only have you regressed, it's not 1775 you are welcoming in, but more 1509. Think Henry VIII

I posted a joke of Kim Jong Un upthread. Maybe it's not so funny now ?

@DGRossetti

If Trump "pardons himself", as a power explicitly granted under the Constitution (although annoyingly not explicitly barred from use by self) it is open to scrutiny by the guardians of the constitution (much like the guardians of the galaxy, but waaaaaaaaaaay less spandex) SCOTUS.

However they can only review it, if it is used in a US court of law.

I agree with the NYT article, that there is a real danger that simply by inaction, the US courts could give the appearance that it is actually valid.

Bald note for US readers: If Trumps waving his self pardon around does result in courts deciding not to try him, you have effectively created a route whereby someone can put themselves above the law. And much as you might like to play with language, that is what a King does. A monarch. 244 years after you rather pompously decided you didn't like Kings, you will have finally got one back again. I just hope you are honest about it, and have a coronation, and knock up a crown.

Obviously the whole point of a Monarch is to keep the Monarchy going, so you're going to get the first born Trump as heir.

Oh, and even hated King George was not above the law of Britain. We did away with that in 1649. So not only have you regressed, it's not 1775 you are welcoming in, but more 1509. Think Henry VIII

I posted a joke of Kim Jong Un upthread. Maybe it's not so funny now ?

The rate at which Trump gets through advisors and the number of people who rose under him from relative obscurity only to be abandoned really does have some similarity to Henry VIII. Except Trump can't behead them when they don't get the results he wants.

Please don't suggest it to him...

Except Trump can't behead them when they don't get the results he wants.

I would bet a cent to a dollar that he thinks he can.

@DGRossetti

Except Trump can't behead them when they don't get the results he wants.

I would bet a cent to a dollar that he thinks he can.

God, yes, I think the comparison with the Red Queen and Trump was made a long time ago. Well, I've had the image of Trump flouncing about shouting: "Off with their heads" at the back of my mind for a good while, anyway.

[quote littlebillie]Also there is information that it was organised and many were paid to be there

twitter.com/d3m0a/status/1347069689990500352?s=21[/quote]
This stinks of the usual conspiracy nonsense. "They" paid me to be there...but not able/willing to say who "they are" - are we to assume the same "they" who invented Covid? Those pesky Russians? Biden?

Reads a lot like an attempt at self preservation to me. Shitting themselves in case the FBI come knocking.

Antifa paid them, of course. Obvious, innit?

Oh, and even hated King George was not above the law of Britain. We did away with that in 1649. So not only have you regressed, it's not 1775 you are welcoming in, but more 1509. Think Henry VIII

^This definitely. I see a distinct similarity with Henry VIII's last days, when none of his courtiers or councillors dared to tell him that he was dying. Because apparently that was 'wishing the King's death', which was treason.

There is a similarity in their attitude towards women as well.

@Mittens030869

Oh, and even hated King George was not above the law of Britain. We did away with that in 1649. So not only have you regressed, it's not 1775 you are welcoming in, but more 1509. Think Henry VIII

^This definitely. I see a distinct similarity with Henry VIII's last days, when none of his courtiers or councillors dared to tell him that he was dying. Because apparently that was 'wishing the King's death', which was treason.

There is a similarity in their attitude towards women as well.

It's entirely possible that Henry VIII suffered severe mental illness after a serious accident in 1536.

If we substitute the GOP for the church, then the analogies only get closer. Trump is renting asunder the GOP in much the same way Henry did the church.

I guess the answer lies in your own hands. Are you going to continue to be a Republic. Or were the Founding Fathers absolute idiots of the highest order with their dislike of monarchs and tyrants, and it's only natural that Donald Trump restores the monarchy to the US - and is it's first King. In which case someone needs to tell him that if he's going to ape the British style, he'll only be King Donald the first when there's a King Donald after he's died.

Would he be (or need to be) accepted as a King state by state ? Or being federal and all is it a done deal ?

It may be Friday

@Jaichangecentfoisdenom

Antifa paid them, of course. Obvious, innit?

It wouldn't have been Trump, as he doesn't like to pay anyone.

But there's a lot of money from those funding requests since the election.

Ted Cruz has a fucking cheek!

Before it became widespread knowledge that Fox etc were saying this, I encountered a couple of Republican ‘friends‘ on social media saying Antifa were at the Capitol dressed as Trumpists. Inciting the event. I was so baffled. Didn’t realise it was one of their talking points they’d pushed out to the masses ASAP.

could have been so much worse

John Scott-Railton
@jsrailton
WOW: Was there a plan to take hostages? This man is carrying police-style zip-tie handcuffs. And mace(?)

mobile.twitter.com/jsrailton/status/1347011413101998080

I've just watched the video on a high quality monitor instead of my phone, and there is no question at all-- the background is fake, his head is stuck on top of a different body. IMO.

I'm no expert, but the outline where the body contrasts with the background is very clear.

And as pp said, if you watch the area where his neck skin joins his suit there are regular imperfections

What it all means I have no idea, but I like the idea of numerous people holding up things which terrify him, forcing him to say this. Just from a personal-to-trump point of view, not from a coercing a world leader to say what you need them to in public point of view. That's also terrifying

I really can't believe that anyone can believe that Antifa was involved with people dressing up as Trump supporters. A lot of them were interviewing and were clearly deluded Trump fans.

"These fools out here literally playing games with democracy"