poindexter FORTRAN wrote to jimmylogan <=-

jimmylogan wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

And again, I wasn't there, but I'm pretty sure he didn't bus in people
to protest and provide bricks to throw...

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/10/details-of-the-money-behind-jan -6-protests-continue-to-emerge/

I have read the OpenSecrets piece, and unless I'm misunderstanding it,
it documents where money came from to support the rally (permits,
staging, logistics, travel), not the Capitol breach itself.

Funding a rally -- even a politically charged one -- is not the same
as funding or directing the illegal actions that happened later. The
article doesn't show money flowing to people who broke into the Capitol,
nor does it establish coordination or intent for violence.

If there is evidence tying donors or organizers directly to planning or financing the attack itself, that would be a different discussion. That
is not what this article demonstrates.



... WARNING!! Do NOT reuse tagline. Please dispose of it properly after use. --- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

poindexter FORTRAN wrote to jimmylogan <=-

jimmylogan wrote to Arelor <=-

I don't disagree... I almost brought up the burnings and the killings
and such. Kinda odd that that's okay because it's not "DC" you know?

Which killing? George Floyd? Breonna Taylor? The people that Kyle Rittenhouse killed?

You're comparing protests against systemic racism with a violent
protest attempting to disrupt an election.

I wasn't equating causes or outcomes. My point was simply that violence, arson, and loss of life were broadly tolerated or excused in some protests, while Jan 6 is treated as uniquely defining for everyone present.

Those are different conversations, and collapsing them doesn't help clarity.



... -- FOR SYSOP USE ONLY - Do not write below this line!!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Logic44 wrote to Gamgee <=-

Not our fault the president fulfills almost all 14 points of fascism
lol ANTIFA is an ideology, not a group. Everyone sensible is
anti-fascist, because the only alternative is fascist...

Saying someone is a fascist because they don't support Antifa is a
false binary. That's like saying someone must be a racist because
they don't fly a BLM flag. You can reject an organization's tactics
or ideology without rejecting the underlying moral concern.

As for the '14 points of fascism,'' those aren't a diagnostic checklist.
They are a descriptive framework (often attributed to Laurence Britt)
that can be selectively applied to many governments across history, left
and right. Cherry-picking overlaps doesn't establish that a country or
leader is fascist in any rigorous sense.

If we are going to use serious political terms, they should clarify
reality, not just function as insults for people we disagree with.



... Back the Metric System every inch of the way!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

I have read the OpenSecrets piece, and unless I'm misunderstanding it,
it documents where money came from to support the rally (permits,
staging, logistics, travel), not the Capitol breach itself.

Funding a rally -- even a politically charged one -- is not the same
as funding or directing the illegal actions that happened later. The
article doesn't show money flowing to people who broke into the Capitol,
nor does it establish coordination or intent for violence.

I partially agree, although it could be argued that if the persons who
later broke into the Capitol hadn't had their "logistics and travel" to the rally paid, they wouldn't have been in DC at all.


* SLMR 2.1a * Money is the root of all evil. Send $250 for more info.
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * Capitol City Online

You're comparing protests against systemic racism with a violent
protest attempting to disrupt an election.

I wasn't equating causes or outcomes. My point was simply that violence, arson, and loss of life were broadly tolerated or excused in some protests, while Jan 6 is treated as uniquely defining for everyone present.

You have the difference stated right above your response. Some people see violent protests against "systemic racism" as somehow productive uses of time and any collateral damage... arson, looting, death... as unfortunate but necessary.

They seem to totally ignore that no trials had even been held yet or that justice for George Floyd might later be served (which it indeed was)
without *any* such collateral damage taking place. They also either ignore,
or see as icing on the cake, the fact that those riots also helped shape (disrupt?) the ultimate outcome of the upcoming election.

They also ignore that the "MAGAs" spent most of the summer watching people
act out without many/any consequences and cannot (or don't want to) see
any link between that and how people might have been mislead to believe that violent actions had become acceptable.

So that all justifies the toleration and excusing of "their" side, while clutching their pearls about what the other side did.

OTOH, if you look at it without any filters, you see the actions of *both* groups as *wrong* and wonder how and why anyone was allowed to get away with those things. You *should* be wondering not only why the government put up with the Summer 2020 rioters, but also why just about everyone tied to
January 6th was pardoned.


* SLMR 2.1a * Any given program will expand to fill available memory
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * Capitol City Online

Re: Re: Our President doesn't
By: jimmylogan to Logic44 on Fri Dec 26 2025 17:08:43

If we are going to use serious political terms, they should clarify
reality, not just function as insults for people we disagree with.

We are. That's how we're using them, I already said there's a difference between meeting just a few, and almost all of them. I'd argue, however, It IS all of them.

****************************************
Every good wizard needs a wand, so I carved a Glock and loaded it with
DEATHLY HOLLOWS.

---
þ Synchronet þ The LNRC-IN Official BBS

Dumas Walker wrote to JIMMYLOGAN <=-

I have read the OpenSecrets piece, and unless I'm misunderstanding it,
it documents where money came from to support the rally (permits,
staging, logistics, travel), not the Capitol breach itself.

Funding a rally -- even a politically charged one -- is not the same
as funding or directing the illegal actions that happened later. The
article doesn't show money flowing to people who broke into the Capitol,
nor does it establish coordination or intent for violence.

I partially agree, although it could be argued that if the persons who later broke into the Capitol hadn't had their "logistics and travel" to the rally paid, they wouldn't have been in DC at all.

Very true. But I don't think that equals causation.


... I put a dollar in one of those change machines...nothing changed.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Dumas Walker wrote to JIMMYLOGAN <=-

You're comparing protests against systemic racism with a violent protest attempting to disrupt an election.

I wasn't equating causes or outcomes. My point was simply that violence, arson, and loss of life were broadly tolerated or excused in some protests, while Jan 6 is treated as uniquely defining for everyone present.

You have the difference stated right above your response. Some people
see violent protests against "systemic racism" as somehow productive
uses of time and any collateral damage... arson, looting, death... as unfortunate but necessary.

They seem to totally ignore that no trials had even been held yet or
that justice for George Floyd might later be served (which it indeed
was) without *any* such collateral damage taking place. They also
either ignore, or see as icing on the cake, the fact that those riots
also helped shape (disrupt?) the ultimate outcome of the upcoming election.

They also ignore that the "MAGAs" spent most of the summer watching
people act out without many/any consequences and cannot (or don't want
to) see any link between that and how people might have been mislead to believe that violent actions had become acceptable.

So that all justifies the toleration and excusing of "their" side,
while clutching their pearls about what the other side did.

OTOH, if you look at it without any filters, you see the actions of
*both* groups as *wrong* and wonder how and why anyone was allowed to
get away with those things. You *should* be wondering not only why the government put up with the Summer 2020 rioters, but also why just about everyone tied to January 6th was pardoned.

I agree with you on the core point: violence and destruction should not
be condoned, regardless of cause or side. And you are right that inconsistent enforcement and messaging from the media and from the government can
and does create the distinct impression that some crimes carry no real consequences.

That inconsistency was reinforced when high-profile politicians publicly supported bail or legal defense funds for people arrested during the 2020 riots.
Even if the stated intent was due process, the public signal was that certain kinds of political violence would be treated more leniently.

That's a serious failure, and it understandably fed cynicism and mistrust -- worse yet, it widened the already fractured culture.

Where I'm cautious is drawing a straight line from that failure to responsibility for later actions. I think it helps explain confusion and misperception, but it still does not justify or excuse individual choices.

If we are to be consistent, the standard has to be the same across the board: individual accountability; equal application of the law; and zero tolerance for political violenceƒ€”no carve-outs, no exceptions.



... What's worse than raining cats and dogs? Hailing taxis!
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

I partially agree, although it could be argued that if the persons who later broke into the Capitol hadn't had their "logistics and travel" to the rally paid, they wouldn't have been in DC at all.

Very true. But I don't think that equals causation.

You cannot break in if you cannot get there. ;)


* SLMR 2.1a * If it don't cook, it ain't jazz.
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * Capitol City Online

That inconsistency was reinforced when high-profile politicians publicly supported bail or legal defense funds for people arrested during the 2020 riots.
Even if the stated intent was due process, the public signal was that certain kinds of political violence would be treated more leniently.

That's a serious failure, and it understandably fed cynicism and mistrust -- worse yet, it widened the already fractured culture.

Agreed. It did nothing to narrow the divide.

Where I'm cautious is drawing a straight line from that failure to responsibility for later actions. I think it helps explain confusion and misperception, but it still does not justify or excuse individual choices.

I also agree. You have to take responsibility and make proper choices
despite the poor examples those in charge might be setting regarding consequences of your actions.

If we are to be consistent, the standard has to be the same across the board: individual accountability; equal application of the law; and zero tolerance for political violenceƒ€”no carve-outs, no exceptions.

Agreed 100%. Speaking of individual accountability...

I feel badly for the persons who have been killed in MN and their families.
I do question whether or not ICE acted responsibly. That said, I am also
smart enough to see that those in charge are going to back the actions of
ICE over the actions of those confronting them, so it is up to the
individual to be accountable for their own safety.

You have to have your own responsibility in mind and should not be
confronting, blocking, or following around federal agents, no matter who
the President is. If you want to protest, do it at the state capitol, local courthouse, federal building, or some other public space... *NOT* the area where ICE is located.

Otherwise, you are getting close to "suicide by cop" territory.

I am really confused... the left has claimed that ICE are nothing but a
bunch of Jan 6'ers that Trump pardoned and gave guns, so why would those on
the left want to be anywhere *near* them? I sure don't want to be anywhere near them if I can help it.

They would probably be better off finding a charity that helps immigrants
with their legal processes and volunteering their time, or mobilizing to
find some other way to assist without confronting federal agents.

Mike

* SLMR 2.1a * Beam me aboard Scotty. Aye, will a 2x4 do captain?
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * Capitol City Online