Trust the Media

https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/13...-nancy-pelosi/

"Corporate media journalists and left-wing activists took to social media on Wednesday to spread claims that Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas is in favor of inciting insurrection.

“Here’s a quote. ‘I just don’t even know why there aren’t more uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be,’” Gohmert said on the House floor during the impeachment debate.

While Gohmert specified that what he was saying was a quote, taken directly from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s previous statements encouraging uprisings, journalists and activists quickly twisted his words, publicly speculating and claiming he was calling for increased political violence around the nation.

“Louis Gohmert: ‘I don’t know why they aren’t more uprisings all over the country,’” Blake News, a Politico editor tweeted."

ROFLMAO

As always. context is king
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...eparation.html

She clearly wasn't talking about violent uprisings. Gohmert, OTOH, openly acknowledges taking the time to personally talk to and support individuals who forced their way into the Capitol, after they had done so, and condoned violence before the incident. His context is also clear. He meant it exactly how it was reported. It doesn't matter who you quote if you don't intend the quote to mean the same thing in context. At best it's a transparent tracing of a fig leaf.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

As always. context is king
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...eparation.html

She clearly wasn't talking about violent uprisings. Gohmert, OTOH, openly acknowledges taking the time to personally talk to and support individuals who forced their way into the Capitol, after they had done so, and condoned violence before the incident. His context is also clear. He meant it exactly how it was reported. It doesn't matter who you quote if you don't intend the quote to mean the same thing in context. At best it's a transparent tracing of a fig leaf.

---

You do realize domestic terrorism remains domestic terrorism regardless of the reason you are doing it, right? Attacking the White House, the Capital, a police station or a court house are all examples of domestic terrorism. Yeah?

https://www.c-span.org/video/?507879...-232-197&live=

3:38

He literally starts by saying "Here's a quote." Now you can play your little dancing game all you want but how can you justify people playing the clip without the very first part where he says "HERE'S A QUOTE" and then selling it in the context that he is saying there should be more uprisings. Its not defensible and you know it.

Lewk, if you were around in 1932, you'd undoubtedly be complaining about the unfair treatment of you know who by the Jewish media.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Lewk, if you were around in 1932, you'd undoubtedly be complaining about the unfair treatment of you know who by the Jewish media.

---

Since we are on the subject of media and domestic terrorism - Loki do you support the actions domestic terrorists took during some of the riots this summer?

Oooh Loki he got you good I don't know how you're gonna get outta this one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Since we are on the subject of media and domestic terrorism - Loki do you support the actions domestic terrorists took during some of the riots this summer?

---

People who break the law should be punished. How about you stop the pathetic whataboutism after your heroes first tried to cancel election results and then to overthrow the government?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

You do realize domestic terrorism remains domestic terrorism regardless of the reason you are doing it, right? Attacking the White House, the Capital, a police station or a court house are all examples of domestic terrorism. Yeah?

https://www.c-span.org/video/?507879...-232-197&live=

3:38

He literally starts by saying "Here's a quote." Now you can play your little dancing game all you want but how can you justify people playing the clip without the very first part where he says "HERE'S A QUOTE" and then selling it in the context that he is saying there should be more uprisings. Its not defensible and you know it.

---

Because he did think there should be violent insurrection *unlike Pelosi, when she used the term*, he still thinks that, and he's using "I quote" as a tongue-in-cheek way to say what he really means. And yes, Lewk, we are well aware that you do the exact same thing, always make this exact same protest when we call you on it, and not one person here believes you when you protest that just because you quote material doesn't mean you think it yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Since we are on the subject of media and domestic terrorism - Loki do you support the actions domestic terrorists took during some of the riots this summer?

---

I don't know about Loki but I for one strongly oppose the state-sponsored domestic terrorism seen in places like Portland, where they abducted and falsely imprisoned protestors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

People who break the law should be punished. How about you stop the pathetic whataboutism after your heroes first tried to cancel election results and then to overthrow the government?

---

This isn't about whataboutism at all. From day 1 I've fully condemned the actions of those evil little shits who decided to use violence at the capital. What I care about is the blatant hypocrisy of those who wish to excuse the actions of the domestic terrorists over the summer. The media and politicians who wanted their evil excused. What's good for the goose is ALWAYS good for the gander. And only the worst sort of hypocrite would say otherwise.

I haven't heard you once about a president eroding the democratic process America was founded upon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

This isn't about whataboutism at all. From day 1 I've fully condemned the actions of those evil little shits who decided to use violence at the capital. What I care about is the blatant hypocrisy of those who wish to excuse the actions of the domestic terrorists over the summer. The media and politicians who wanted their evil excused. What's good for the goose is ALWAYS good for the gander. And only the worst sort of hypocrite would say otherwise.

---

Are you really going to equate looting KFC with trying to overthrow the US government?

Of course he would.

Always remember, it's a protest that turned sadly and inexcusably violent if conservatives and white supremascists kill a cop while storming federal property (but it's not if they just seize it and hold it with the threat of lethal force but without actually killing people, like Bundy's son did) but it's domestic terrorism if liberals and blacks peaceably protest by exercising their right of assembly and legally blocking a roadway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

Always remember, it's a protest that turned sadly and inexcusably violent if conservatives and white supremascists kill a cop while storming federal property (but it's not if they just seize it and hold it with the threat of lethal force but without actually killing people, like Bundy's son did) but it's domestic terrorism if liberals and blacks peaceably protest by exercising their right of assembly and legally blocking a roadway.

---

It's felony domestic terrorism—you have to pin the blame for the people who got blinded by cops on someone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

(but it's not if they just seize it and hold it with the threat of lethal force but without actually killing people, like Bundy's son did)

---

He has also defended Daleiden, which explains why he is so cool with the state sponsored (or approved) content manipulation that has ruined so many of these gullible people's lives now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Are you really going to equate looting KFC with trying to overthrow the US government?

---

Domestic Terrorism is Domestic Terrorism, through typically this is an intention based crime and looting a KFC is probably just robbery (which should also put you in prison for many years).

No Lewk, property damage is not the same as trying to overthrow the government

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

No Lewk, property damage is not the same as trying to overthrow the government

---

Ah yes so vandalizing a court house or the capital is "worse" because it is the government which is far more sacred to you than a private business. Got it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

This isn't about whataboutism at all. From day 1 I've fully condemned the actions of those evil little shits who decided to use violence at the capital. What I care about is the blatant hypocrisy of those who wish to excuse the actions of the domestic terrorists over the summer. The media and politicians who wanted their evil excused. What's good for the goose is ALWAYS good for the gander. And only the worst sort of hypocrite would say otherwise.

---

You're all about the whataboutism. :haha: Hey, where's your outrage at *right-wing* media and *Republic* politicians spewing conspiracy theories and disinformation --- posing as democracy loving Law & Order constitutionalists, selling their Big Lies --- that eventually led to the violent insurrection at the Capitol? You get more worked up when a homeless guy steals toothpaste. :donkey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Ah yes so vandalizing a court house or the capital is "worse" because it is the government which is far more sacred to you than a private business. Got it.

---

You equate vandalising a KFC or a McDonalds with insurrection?

:haha::haha::haha:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Ah yes so vandalizing a court house or the capital is "worse" because it is the government which is far more sacred to you than a private business. Got it.

---

If you ignore all the evidence about the plans to assassinate Pence, Pelosi, and Schumer. :bored:

And the fact it was instigated by the lies of the President.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

You're all about the whataboutism. :haha: Hey, where's your outrage at *right-wing* media and *Republic* politicians spewing conspiracy theories and disinformation --- posing as democracy loving Law & Order constitutionalists, selling their Big Lies --- that eventually led to the violent insurrection at the Capitol? You get more worked up when a homeless guy steals toothpaste. :donkey:

---

Anyone who planned a violent instruction is bad. Anyone using rhetoric to talk about how bad one side is or isn't hasn't done anything illegal. Anyone who goes to or helps get people to rally that has a peaceful purpose is also blameless.

The idea that we should tone down rhetoric is a laughable charge from anyone on the left who have done FAR worse when it comes to inciting violence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Anyone who planned a violent instruction is bad. Anyone using rhetoric to talk about how bad one side is or isn't hasn't done anything illegal. Anyone who goes to or helps get people to rally that has a peaceful purpose is also blameless.

The idea that we should tone down rhetoric is a laughable charge from anyone on the left who have done FAR worse when it comes to inciting violence.

---

Lmao you fucking clown

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Anyone who planned a violent instruction is bad.

---

:rolleyes: :haha:

Quote:

---

Anyone using rhetoric to talk about how bad one side is or isn't hasn't done anything illegal. Anyone who goes to or helps get people to rally that has a peaceful purpose is also blameless.

The idea that we should tone down rhetoric is a laughable charge from anyone on the left who have done FAR worse when it comes to inciting violence.

---

I was going to ask if you see the differences between "normal political rhetoric" and inciting insurrection -- even if it's a non-violent coup meant to overthrow the government -- but since whataboutism is just part of your trolling...well, never mind. :donkey:

Look until we have a video of Trump explicitly telling people to commit specific crimes with a serious face we just won't be able to know anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Anyone who planned a violent instruction is bad. Anyone using rhetoric to talk about how bad one side is or isn't hasn't done anything illegal. Anyone who goes to or helps get people to rally that has a peaceful purpose is also blameless.

---

When teens trespass on a person's lawn and he shoots and kills one of them, you froth at the mouth and demand all the teens get convicted of felony murder. When BLM activists throw rocks in the general direction of police without injuring anyone, you shriek for everyone there to be shoved into prison for assault. But when conservative activists engage in criminal trespass and their compatriots in criminal trespass assault actually KILL cops, you think they're blameless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

When teens trespass on a person's lawn and he shoots and kills one of them, you froth at the mouth and demand all the teens get convicted of felony murder. When BLM activists throw rocks in the general direction of police without injuring anyone, you shriek for everyone there to be shoved into prison for assault. But when conservative activists engage in criminal trespass and their compatriots in criminal trespass assault actually KILL cops, you think they're blameless.

---

You are delusional. All I ask is the same standard be applies regardless of the reason for the domestic terrorism. Don't like how cops behave? Don't like abortion providers? Don't like gays in the military? Don't like election results? NONE of these allow for domestic terrorism, assaults and looting. The law has to be applied equally *regardless of cause.* The fact that you want one rule for morons who use violence for a political cause you detest and another for for political causes you agree with ought to be shameful. But somehow I doubt you see it that way. Ends justify the means, eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

You are delusional. All I ask is the same standard be applies regardless of the reason for the domestic terrorism. Don't like how cops behave? Don't like abortion providers? Don't like gays in the military? Don't like election results? NONE of these allow for domestic terrorism, assaults and looting. The law has to be applied equally *regardless of cause.* The fact that you want one rule for morons who use violence for a political cause you detest and another for for political causes you agree with ought to be shameful. But somehow I doubt you see it that way. Ends justify the means, eh?

---

I feel like this might not be the brightest argument to raise, for a person who routinely tries to find ways to justify police brutality and extrajudicial killings. The reality is that an attack—with murderous intent—on a govt and on the actual democratic process itself is far worse and far more ominous than an attack on a clothing store. It's worse wrt direct effects—both actual and potential—as well as wrt broader, indirect effects. The plans to hunt down, capture and likely harm legislators—and eliminate the first two in the line of succession—is far worse than anything that was seen during the BLM protests, and speaks towards motives and a type of organization that requires a completely different political, judicial and LE response. It's even worse than eg. what those racist fuckwits who killed Ahmaud Arbery did. Frankly, if you can't understand the difference between a random attack on a closed GAP and a highly organized attack on the very heart of your govt. you must have your head stuck up your ass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

NONE of these allow for domestic terrorism, assaults and looting. The law has to be applied equally *regardless of cause.* The fact that you want one rule for morons who use violence for a political cause you detest and another for for political causes you agree with ought to be shameful. But somehow I doubt you see it that way. Ends justify the means, eh?

---

Aha. So you understand domestic terrorism, assaults and looting are different crimes.

If you use that knowledge and apply it, you might figure out why you're talking bollocks. The charges aren't different because it's a different political cause, it's different because of different crimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

You are delusional. All I ask is the same standard be applies

---

No you're not. All three of those examples were ones drawn from your posts.

Quote:

---

regardless of the reason for the domestic terrorism.

---

See, this is just your cop-out. You or someone you saw used the label "domestic terorrism" and so you've decided you can play with that point. Me, I used "felony-murder." Others here used "insurrection". We don't accept your terminology or conceptual space for this.

Quote:

---

The law has to be applied equally *regardless of cause.*

---

We are. You're not. Different crimes have different consequences. They didn't just riot. There was an attempt to overturn the democracy, for some, and for me, I'm content to hang my hat on the dead cop, and the abetting act of mass-criminality, primarily because it's YOUR standard and I'm posting to point out YOUR rampant hypocrisy and inconsistency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust

Aha. So you understand domestic terrorism, assaults and looting are different crimes.

If you use that knowledge and apply it, you might figure out why you're talking bollocks. The charges aren't different because it's a different political cause, it's different because of different crimes.

---

Correct. If you rob a place for money that is not domestic terrorism. If you rob a place for a political cause that is domestic terrorism. If you set fire to a courthouse because you want more work as a firefighter you're an arsonist, if you set fire to it because you dislike cops and the courts you are a domestic terrorist. If you scale the capital building as a publicity stunt you are a lame Youtuber and a trespasser, if you invade the capital because you didn't like the results of an election you are a domestic terrorist. I'm fully aware of the difference. The key point I am making is that violence for a political cause directed at the capital, the police, businesses, courthouses etc are all domestic terrorism. What some people on this forum like to do is excuse rioting when its for a cause they have sympathy with.