The US Capitol has been Breached [Action and Developing stories]

[DigglerontheHoof 21195]

It bottles my mind people still argue w/ badteammate.  

[Pig Bellmont 8717]

1 minute ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

It bottles my mind people still argue w/ badteammate.  

Seriously 

[cactusflinthead 27598]

 

[Brisketexan 105123]

2 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

We had bodies in SE Texas as well

I never said any of them would be in trees.  I said that MAGA would engage in organized, deadly violence.  They have.  I expect that they will continue to do so, even as lone wolves.  And they have already demonstrating a willingness to go after sitting politicians.  There's no reason to expect that they won't continue.

[sidis 9828]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

This is nothing more than your opinion. I'd say there's plenty of reason to consider the threat credible, considering multiple Democratic members of Congress have already told us they were scared that GOP reps would lead rioters to them to murder them last week. "Oh sure it's reasonable to worry about Lauren Boebert leading a murder mob to kill Ayanna Pressley in the middle of a riot she helped incite but it's not reasonable to worry about her being a threat to Pressley and others in any other scenarios" is not a good take. In fact it's a very stupid take.

And prohibiting firearms from being brought onto the floor isn't restricting a congressman's access, it's restricting the firearm. All they have to do is leave it in their office. It's also not unconstitutional. The purpose of the clause you cite was to prevent the President from having congressmen arrested to keep them from voting a way the President didn't like. Congress can still set rules to provide for the safety of its members and require the members to comply.

i know that b_t is just doing his contrarian for the sake of contrarian thing here (which can occasionally be useful), but let's also not lose sight of the fact that the night of the certification, after the rioting had been cleared, there was a physical altercation between congressmen on the house floor initiated by a republican member against a democratic member that had to be broken up by the sergeant in arms had to remove the members.

it is obviously a bit of leap to get from there to people shooting each other in the house but this is a direct response and intended to send a message.  we have nutbag qanon subscribing morons in congress now so ya know...

 

[Red Five 40857]

3 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

First of all, 1) bwahahahaha

2) If he still had twitter he'd immediately contradict this somehow. 

[Brisketexan 105123]

4 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

That's actually the best thing that he's done in months.  I'm serious.  It is unequivocal, doesn't try to justify their actions, doesn't shift blame to "the leftists who stole the election."

I mean, the horse has already left the barn, and this won't stop most of the ones who are already planning on violence, but maybe it stops a few.  

 

EDIT -- and yes, if he had Twitter, he would contradict this within the hour.

Edited January 13, 2021 by Brisketexan

[Dahobbs 17534]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

That's actually the best thing that he's done in months.  I'm serious.  It is unequivocal, doesn't try to justify their actions, doesn't shift blame to "the leftists who stole the election."

I mean, the horse has already left the barn, and this won't stop most of the ones who are already planning on violence, but maybe it stops a few.  

Which is how we know that he had nothing to do with it and that it was forced upon him. 

[Pato del Muerto 52492]

40 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Good god, you know what I mean.

I want you to think this through...
So right now Democrats express fear and get to restrict the rights of a Republican. It's not based on a real threat from the Republican. It's not based on a real action from a Republican. No real credibility to the threat.  It's just a fear primarily backed up by a chorus of increasingly-loud outrage.

Do you seriously not see a problem with this precedent of being able to restrict a Congressman's access to Congress based on nothing but fear-mongering?

100%

Dogs have been co-evolving with us for millenia. You don't have to love dogs, but if you don't find them engaging at all then something is wired wrong in the brain. Alien stuff.

I didn’t realize that the metal detectors were only for republicans and that democrats were just walking around them. 

[cactusflinthead 27598]

1 minute ago, Red Five said:

First of all, 1) bwahahahaha

2) If he still had twitter he'd immediately contradict this somehow. 

 

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

That's actually the best thing that he's done in months.  I'm serious.  It is unequivocal, doesn't try to justify their actions, doesn't shift blame to "the leftists who stole the election."

I mean, the horse has already left the barn, and this won't stop most of the ones who are already planning on violence, but maybe it stops a few.  

 

EDIT -- and yes, if he had Twitter, he would contradict this within the hour.

Correct!

Which means he didn't write it.

[Brisketexan 105123]

Just now, cactusflinthead said:

 

Correct!

Which means he didn't write it.

Of course he didn't.  I don't much care.  It's a communication from the OFFICE of the president.  Which is still a thing, even nominally.  And if it helps ratchet down the threat of violent insurrection, I'm for it.

[sidis 9828]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Which is how we know that he had nothing to do with it and that it was forced upon him. 

likely part of some sort of compromise between him and pence in exchange for pence publicly rebuking the call for the invocation of the 25th amendment.

[lemonlime 5503]

8 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

Wait.  I thought he no longer had any way to communicate with the American people.

[Biff Tannen 45680]

7 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Which is how we know that he had nothing to do with it and that it was forced upon him. 

Sadly, his cult probably knows this too and therefore will ignore it.  Not from the god king?  Not listening!

[Dr. Teeth 5844]

If Trump would have written that it would have said “Because of the impeachment, we are hearing more acts of violence...”. The person who edited knows that is the their new message and that it is implied. 

[cactusflinthead 27598]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Of course he didn't.  I don't much care.  It's a communication from the OFFICE of the president.  Which is still a thing, even nominally.  And if it helps ratchet down the threat of violent insurrection, I'm for it.

Up until Trump it would be a standard daily thing we ignored most days. I used to get a press conference for announcements like this.

But, we all know how that goes.

So, his gutlessness today made him a better president today!

[bad_teammate 13195]

24 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Not allowing guns on the floor is pretty goddamn reasonable.

It's been allowed from the founding until the day before yesterday. 250 years of US Congressman allowed to carry a gun on the floor of Congress. I think a lot of the "OH MY GOD!" reaction is that many didn't even know that was how it has worked for over two centuries.

 

11 minutes ago, sidis said:

it is obviously a bit of leap to get from there to people shooting each other in the house but this is a direct response and intended to send a message.  we have nutbag qanon subscribing morons in congress now so ya know...

I know. This is my point. It's not there to actually increase safety, it's a "message" from Democrats to Republicans. It's security theater and a power play. It's not real.

How many Dems walked off the floor of Congress because they were legitimately scared of the armed Republicans? It's stupid and pointless. And it makes these idiots more powerful.

18 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

This is nothing more than your opinion. I'd say there's plenty of reason to consider the threat credible, considering multiple Democratic members of Congress have already told us they were scared that GOP reps would lead rioters to them to murder them last week. 

 

Republicans don't play by informal rules and they don't respect consequences without teeth. This is not new. Yet here the Democrats went setting up another decorum test and I'm supposed to be SO OUTRAGED by the most predictable possible outcome.

Either we are legitimately concerned that these Republicans are going to shoot Democrats or not.

[bad_teammate 13195]

"Enjoy your guns, MAGA Bimbo and Hot Wheels, we've got real shit to worry about."

[Degenerate Gardner 4085]

26 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

Per usual, the most salient both-siderism comes from Trump’s mouth.

[Guest Lobo]

I remember Mark Updegrove (former head of LBJ Presidential Library) playing us some fascinating phone calls that had only then been declassified (this was probably 10 years ago) between LBJ and various DoD officials about Vietnam.  He was telling us we would be getting the 2-version of the calls transcript as a "souvenir" for spending the morning with him.  Since LBJ, all presidential archives follow this format.  There's the 1-version (which is what we read/see most of the time), which edits out all the verbal fillers, expletives, and pause sounds (Uh, Um, Like, Hmm, So, et. al.).  When you read a presidential archived transcript, that's usually what you get.  But scholars, journalists, and those really interested in a deep dive can get the completely un-edited transcript that prints out everything verbatim, mistakes, f-bombs, fillers, and all. 

And I think about the Trump archive and how many speeches, how many paragraphs, how many sentences are going to contain the phrase, "A lot of people are saying..."  He said the most frequently quoted phrase in speeches/addresses that was not policy/event specific was "May god bless you and may god bless the United States."  Makes sense,right?  With Trump, it'll be "A lot of people are saying..."  

There is a really cool program developed at our very own UT School of Information (iSchool) that can scrub just several  dozen to a few hundred hours of a President's calls and remarks and interview questions and debates (anything they weren't reading directly from a speech).  And from that you can estimate with high certainty what the active vocabulary is for that person and that the passive vocabulary is for that person.  Average adult of average intelligence is 20,000 active words, 40,000 passive.  Not surprisingly, since LBJ---George H.W. Bush had the largest and most complex vocabulary.  everybody else was kinda lumped together.  Preliminary data using their algorithyms is that Trump functions with about 10,000 active and 25,000 passive.  Making him the least eloquent and most poorly-spoken President since recordings of presidential remarks began about 125 years ago.  It would be comparable to an average to above average-educated high school student.  

Edited January 13, 2021 by Lobo

[Continental Op 3934]

1 hour ago, slorch said:

This.

It's finally a test of leadership that they fucking signed up to do.  So fucking scary, now that we're past the fluff pieces on National Tamale Day declarations and working those backroom deals and kickbacks on gov't contracts in your home state.

Time to actually fucking do something of merit.

Hey you stop talking bad about National Tamale Day you son of a bitch. 

[Dahobbs 17534]

21 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's been allowed from the founding until the day before yesterday. 250 years of US Congressman allowed to carry a gun on the floor of Congress. I think a lot of the "OH MY GOD!" reaction is that many didn't even know that was how it has worked for over two centuries.

Who gives a shit whether it has been previously allowed? The question is whether it is a reasonable and constitutional restriction; I believe that answer is yes. I'm somewhat sympathetic with some of your points, but when you start with a blatantly misrepresented and exaggerated position (restricting their rights because they are republican!) you lose credibility. 

Edited January 13, 2021 by Dahobbs

[Macanudo 12977]

13 minutes ago, Lobo said:

It would be comparable to an average to above average-educated high school student.  

So, he sounds just like his supporters.

[Dr. Teeth 5844]

SIAP

 

https://twitter.com/MikeDrucker/status/1349431707003473927?s=20

 

[SilasCoade 2622]

#muderedbywords

[atomheartbevo 89659]

edit: out of context

 

Edited January 13, 2021 by atomheartbevo

[Brisketexan 105123]

16 minutes ago, Continental Op said:

Hey you stop talking bad about National Tamale Day you son of a bitch. 

Exhibit # eleventy billion in insidious white supremacy.  Why?  Because there is no such thing as a motherfucking tamale.  If you only have one, you have a tamal.  If you have more than one, you have tamales.

Goddamit, it's enough to make a man mad enough to invade the Capitol and start destroying shit in Pelosi's office, I tell ya.

[Guest Lobo]

1 minute ago, Macanudo said:

So, he sounds just like his supporters.

Precisely.  One of the scientific connections being studied about how he connected to deeply and quickly with his base.  We intuitively know language was a big part of it, but why and how?  We've seen several other candidates who were less than brilliant and very plain spoken get elected, or at least nominated by a major party.  But what was it about Trump's language and rhythms that resonated so widely?  It wasn't just the buzzwords, there's more to it than that.  I'm fascinated for them to conclude their research but it won't be for awhile.  Or course turning over that communication data-rich report to a bunch of Texans may be like distributing copies of Mein Kampf to Austrian hoteliers.  

[Dr. Teeth 5844]

Just now, atomheartbevo said:

 

That's correct. Black and poor people should be uprising against Republicans more.

[Red Five 40857]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Teeth said:

SIAP

 

https://twitter.com/MikeDrucker/status/1349431707003473927?s=20

 

I don't understand the relevance. Most people probably own the ingredients to make a bomb. Most people own a gun. Bringing them into the Capitol with you after you've broken in is a little different matter. 

[elfenix 34238]

for setting an armed mob on congress while it was counting the votes of the election that he lost, barry. 

[Underdog 28623]

5 minutes ago, Dr. Teeth said:

SIAP

 

https://twitter.com/MikeDrucker/status/1349431707003473927?s=20

 

I seriously doubt he has to be tied down, no doubt he watches quite regularly and with enthusiasm. 

[Continental Op 3934]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

 

Dogs have been co-evolving with us for millenia. 

If this is true then why can't I lick my balls?  Science has failed us. 

[Brisketexan 105123]

6 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I don't understand the relevance. Most people probably own the ingredients to make a bomb. Most people own a gun. Bringing them into the Capitol with you after you've broken in is a little different matter. 

I own rope, zipties, knives, and duct tape.  Pretty much everyone does.

So I really don't know why the cops hassled me when they found all of those things in the trunk of my car as I umm, "parked" in front of Sela Ward's house.

[Pescado_Rojo 19416]

5 minutes ago, Underdog said:

I seriously doubt he has to be tied down, no doubt he watches quite regularly and with enthusiasm. 

probably focused on the penis. (NTTAWWT)

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19101]

Go Lizzie. She is from the 7th. H-Town!

[Grandioso 2592]

We now take you to the replies to Ben Shaprio's tweets...

[bad_teammate 13195]

17 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Who gives a shit whether it has been previously allowed?

It's usually a really good indicator of whether or not something is a problem if it's been allowed for 250 years and never been an issue. We are in the 117th Congress and not only have their been no murders, but no one has even motioned towards pulling a gun on someone.

Quote

The question is whether it is a reasonable and constitutional restriction; I believe that answer is yes. I'm somewhat sympathetic with some of your points, but when you start with a blatantly misrepresented and exaggerated position (restricting their rights because they are republican!) you lose credibility. 

That's the entire point of this move.

No one rationally believes that the new GOP reps are going to shoot anyone. This was done to send a message.

This move is not about protecting anyone from anything, it's about extending a middle finger to Republicans. Which in and of itself is fine, but when it's done this stupidly it pisses me off because it further reveals the strategic uselessness of the Democrats.

[David Dennison 18856]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's usually a really good indicator of whether or not something is a problem if it's been allowed for 250 years and never been an issue. We are in the 117th Congress and not only have their been no murders, but no one has even motioned towards pulling a gun on someone.

That's the entire point of this move.

No one rationally believes that the new GOP reps are going to shoot anyone. This was done to send a message.

This move is not about protecting anyone from anything, it's about extending a middle finger to Republicans. Which in and of itself is fine, but when it's done this stupidly it pisses me off because it further reveals the strategic uselessness of the Democrats.

If it bothers the right, it's worth doing.

[atomheartbevo 89659]

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/house-trump-impeachment-vote-01-13-21/h_8d534835578857b8278a2f48af7fffc9

Quote

Chad Wolf, who resigned as Homeland Security acting secretary two days ago, said Wednesday that President Trump bears some responsibility for the events at the US Capitol last week.

"He's the President. What he says matters," Wolf told CNN. "People listen to him — particularly supporters of his, I would say, really listen to him — so there is responsibility there."

 

[burntorangebongos 10710]

You are wrong, guns have always been banned from the from the house floor. Members are allowed to have them in their office. This new move is because tits and a gun, the new member mentioned wanting to bring it where ever she pleased. I dont trust that dumb Q Anon bitch so I don't blame them from keeping guns out. 

[Pato del Muerto 52492]

@bad_teammate you keep saying guns have always been allowed in chambers until now. But others have said that they have not been, and that Congress members licensed for concealed carry that choose to carry into the Capitol building and in their offices are supposed to not bring them to the house and senate chambers. Can we at least figure out which position is correct before we continue with this debate?

[bad_teammate 13195]

4 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

You are wrong, guns have always been banned from the from the house floor. 

In 1967 legislation was passed to ban guns in Congress; Congressmen were specifically exempted.

2 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

But others have said that they have not been, and that Congress members licensed for concealed carry that choose to carry into the Capitol building and in their offices are supposed to not bring them to the house and senate chambers. Can we at least figure out which position is correct before we continue with this debate?

A huge problem here is how opaque the regulations seem to be. (Or who even has the authority to interfere.)

But there's no history of a problem and no history of this level of intrusion on Congresspeople entering the chambers.

I would fully support an open process to discuss and debate securing of the chamber.

[David Dennison 18856]

16 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

@bad_teammate you keep saying guns have always been allowed in chambers until now. But others have said that they have not been, and that Congress members licensed for concealed carry that choose to carry into the Capitol building and in their offices are supposed to not bring them to the house and senate chambers. Can we at least figure out which position is correct before we continue with this debate?

 Firearms are restricted to a member's office.

Quote

Acting House Sergeant-at-Arms Timothy Blodgett said in a memo to all members of Congress and their staffs that the metal detectors were being installed to ensure compliance with police regulations banning guns and incendiary devices from the chamber.

 

Members are reminded that pursuant to the firearms regulations that Members received on opening day, "firearms are restricted to a Member's Office," the memo stated. "Thank you in advance for your (cooperation) with the United States Capitol Police and Sergeant at Arms staff during the screening process."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics/house-democrats-safety-worries/index.html

Edited January 13, 2021 by David Dennison

[Beau Vine 54219]

20 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

@bad_teammate you keep saying guns have always been allowed in chambers until now. But others have said that they have not been, and that Congress members licensed for concealed carry that choose to carry into the Capitol building and in their offices are supposed to not bring them to the house and senate chambers. Can we at least figure out which position is correct before we continue with this debate?

How about if you just quit engaging him?

[burntorangebongos 10710]

You didn't even read what you attached. They are exempt and can carry on grounds and in their offices. Never was it allowed in the chambers. 

[immamac 42846]

1 hour ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

Too late now you fucking weak piece of shit. 

[bad_teammate 13195]

2 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

How about if you just quit engaging him?

This is fine, too, and I always endorse it.

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

 Firearms are restricted to a member's office.

Has this been tested as a valid restriction of a Congressperson's Constitutional rights? I tend to think it isn't as they just breeze past with zero consequences.

---------------
Again I point to 1-6-1...

(Members of Congress) ...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
---------------

And... is this really the time to waste time on it just to send the message?

[bad_teammate 13195]

2 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

You didn't even read what you attached. They are exempt and can carry on grounds and in their offices. Never was it allowed in the chambers. 

I 100% missed that small paragraph under the picture. 

[Pato del Muerto 52492]

1 minute ago, immamac said:

Too late now you fucking weak piece of shit. 

He didn’t draft it and he doesn’t believe it. Unless someone has a link to a piece of paper with that on it plus his signature.  And if you show me that I’ll probably demand video of him signing it.