860
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
860 points (96.3% liked)
politics
19246 readers
3308 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
A coup. That's what was attempted. Everyone may not call it that now, but that's what history will call what Trump attempted.
Trump has to be held accountable and punished severely as a deterrent for the future.
It took 244 years for our first nearly successful coup. The next attempt may be much much sooner.
I heard this a couple years ago: The single most important predictor of a successful coup, is a failed coup
And he knows it too.
Another unfortunate thing is that surely rivals and enemies of the US noticed how unprepared we were for an event like that, and while as various pundits and news organizations pointed out, our institutions did prevail and were strengthened, they sure weren't rock solid. And we're still having to deal with this orange-painted douchebag, who is not only not in prison, but almost as popular as before and running for president. But anyway, it's a concern that someone like Russia or China could sponsor and a stage a coup by manipulating the crew of violent mouth breathers into it. I mean, I'd be surprised if foreign influence wasn't involved in the last one.
We know that it was.
Or did you think that the Saudi royal family was just paying kushner 2 billion for an excellent blowjob?
I assumed that they bought state secrets from Orange Julius. I’m not sure they have a particular interest in destabilizing the US as much as say, that one guy who is basically 2 inches from war with NATO.
the Saudis will do what's best for the Saudis. Including destabilizing the US if it means they can continue being assholes on the world stage.
Why not? Destabilize the US, let them invade Iran under false pretense, like Russia did in Ukraine, rely on Saudis and maybe Israel as "strategic partners to stabilize the region", so they can control the middle east and establish their theocracies. Meanwhile the weakened US relies on more ressources and funding from the Saudis so they make big money and gain influence in the US economy.
The capitalist elites are happy to sell out America. Americans are easy to get into another invasion with lots of war crimes, heck Hillary Clinton was eager to attack Iran sooner than later.
Keep in mind that the 9/11 attackers were mostly Saudis and ISIS was largely funded from there. If they think it'll benefit them, they'll burn the US to the ground.
The people who stormed the capital were able to do so because intelligence was WILLFULLY ignored. Trump and his appointees downplayed the risk of violence and denied reinforcing the capital.
Without those loyal to Trump ignoring refusing to increase security for the capital, the storming of Congress would not have been successful.
The absence of the vast majority of the Capitol Police (in stark contrast to, for example, the Black Lives Matter protests the summer before) was part of the coup attempt.
Don't rule Saudi Arabia out either there.
I wouldn't say anything was strengthened.
Im willing to bet that this involved assistance from the Russians.
It pisses me off that I continually hear people call it a "riot".
It wasn't a "riot", that's a republican rebranding of what happened that day. It wasn't a bunch of people that got pissed off and suddenly decided to start breaking things.
It was a planned and coordinated attack on our nation's capitol with the specific goal of stopping the peaceful transfer of power and installing an unelected individual as head of government by any means necessary, up to and including the attempted assassination of members of both houses of Congress.
That's a coup d'etat, Not a riot. Normalizing the phrase "capitol riot" is rewriting history.
The attack on the capitol was just a small piece of the coup. It was a delay/scare/chaos tactic to use the alternative electoral certificates. There is no doubt or subjective interpretation here, this was a coup attempt, and there is a long trail of evidence due to the many layers of government they had to go through to make it happen.
It is past time caring how the members of this hostile faction are calling and interpreting it. They've been denying their intentions, crimes, and reality for a god-damned long time. They're even denying the weather of the day. You're right, and don't dignify their rebranding with a response, just call it what it is.
riot /'rī′ət'/ noun -
The Cline Center is responsible for categorizing and describing coups and what kind of coups those coups were. They called it a self-coup attempt. It was a coup. It's not up for debate. They are the authority on whether or not something is/was a coup/coup attempt.
https://clinecenter.illinois.edu/coup-detat-project/statement_jan.27.2021
I had not heard this before, thanks for sharing! Fascinating.
Hitler got a slap on the wrist for his first coup attempt (nine months in prison), we all know what happened next.
However, there have been less successful coup attempts in US history. The only other major one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
Less coup-y, but more successful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot
Hmm... I wonder what those all have in common?
(Also, "fun" fact related to the Brooks Brothers Riot: no less than three of the lawyers who worked on the Bush side of the subsequent Bush v. Gore case are now Supreme Court justices.)
And we're still in the midst of that coup.
Absolutely.