On Assignment with Richard Engel: "Our House" - Trump's Last Stand

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Given your career choice? I can understand your bias, and your lack of understanding of the basic principles, civil rights and civil liberties that are baked into the cake, of what being an American really means?



You seem to be part of the problem, not the solution.

Why Your Privacy Matters, Even If You're Not

We've talked about why privacy matters in the internet age , but it's an ongoing battle . Glenn Greenwald—one of the first reporters to write about

lifehacker.com

". . . Edward Snowden remarked "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say."[9] He considered claiming nothing to hide as giving up the right of privacy which the government has to protect. . . . "

Nothing to hide argument - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 827556

Your reading comprehension is absolutely dismal. The question I cited of "what do you have to hide" is what has been said to me, not a concept that I have difficulty understanding.

And I have Snowden's book "Permanent Record", and I completely understand what he did and why because you can't go to the people who are committing the offenses and seriously expect them to help you or do something other than what they've always done.

I honestly cannot begin to imagine in what way you think I'm biased, but have at it. Let's see if you can hit your target.

 

[SweetSue92]

Your reading comprehension is absolutely dismal. The question I cited of "what do you have to hide" is what has been said to me, not a concept that I have difficulty understanding.

And I have Snowden's book "Permanent Record", and I completely understand what he did and why because you can't go to the people who are committing the offenses and seriously expect them to help you or do something other than what they've always done.

I honestly cannot begin to imagine in what way you think I'm biased, but have at it. Let's see if you can hit your target.

Well now, for my part, I'm seeing you cite the unfairness and corruptness of our justice system being a concern in the past...but when the same comes around, meh, it's people I don't like, so fine.

Does that about sum it up?

 

[MisterBeale]

The question I cited of "what do you have to hide" is what has been said to me, not a concept that I have difficulty understanding.

Precisely. You not only have no difficulty understanding it, you have no problem ceding your right to privacy.

You already made that clear.

"it was fine, it was just and what was needed for everyone to "feel safe" even if nobody actually "is safe"

it was fine, it was just and what was needed for everyone to "feel safe" even if nobody actually "is safe", and my favorite "well if you aren't doing anything wrong what do you have to hide".

After your OP, I posted plenty of evidence, from the both the left, and the right, and an interview with the person that was in charge of security at the time of the riot.

There can be no doubt, that there were at least, several dozens of government intelligence agents in that crowd, if not, many many more, as well as police that were advised ahead of time about what was coming. . . we saw video that the establishment DID NOT WANT the masses to see. . . so from this, we can deduce, that WE DO NOT KNOW, who was screaming and yelling the things you heard in the propaganda video you posted.

TEE VEE is a circus, it is propaganda, meant only to manipulate you emotionally.

Unless you show me documentation that PROVES who said what, your claims are meaningless at this point, just as meaningless as attributing the BLM protests with burning, looting, rioting and destruction . . .

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Mysterious.

So instead of saying, "yes, the system is corrupt and unfair and has been for years...." you're what, just happy the people you don't like were treated unfairly?

No, I'm not going to say "yes, the system is corrupt" because that is not an accurate assessment of the problem especially not as your side sees it.

Unless I'm mistaken the belief that the system is unequal or unfair was originally due to the "expectation" that because the constitutionally protected Black Lives Matter protestors were not jailed and given long sentences, that the J6ers thought that meant that they could organize their own "protest" with no repercussions, probably especially since they were allowed to leave the scene of the crime.

They made a lot of mistakes that day but photographing and videotaping themselves during the commission of said crimes was a really boneheaded move. Leaving feces behind and smearing them on the walls, well "res ipsa loquitur"

So if you want to claim that they're being treated unfairly you have to show (if this were a court of law) another case or instance or whatever where someone else engaged in the same behavior or very similar behavior but was not sentenced as harshly as the J6ers have been. The two cases I cited previously did not ultimately succeed because they were "only" threats that were never carried out. In the J6ers case, we know that Trump had been ginning up his base for weeks leading up to that date. So none of them "just" made threats, they followed through on those threats and tried to get their hands on members of the presidential cabinet.

They rolled the dice and crapped out, no pun intended.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

The convictions were overturned and you're comparing them to people who are going to rot in prison for decades because they "paraded"?

Are you kidding?

WHY was the conviction overturned? What were the grounds the court gave? (I know the answer, I'm trying to get you to see why there is no precedence for the J6 riot).

And surly you don't truly believe that all they did was "parade". You sound like a defense attorney, no offense.

 

[SweetSue92]

No, I'm not going to say "yes, the system is corrupt" because that is not an accurate assessment of the problem especially not as your side sees it.

Unless I'm mistaken the belief that the system is unequal or unfair was originally due to the "expectation" that because the constitutionally protected Black Lives Matter protestors were not jailed and given long sentences, that the J6ers thought that meant that they could organize their own "protest" with no repercussions, probably especially since they were allowed to leave the scene of the crime.

They made a lot of mistakes that day but photographing and videotaping themselves during the commission of said crimes was a really boneheaded move. Leaving feces behind and smearing them on the walls, well "res ipsa loquitur"

So if you want to claim that they're being treated unfairly you have to show (if this were a court of law) another case or instance or whatever where someone else engaged in the same behavior or very similar behavior but was not sentenced as harshly as the J6ers have been. The two cases I cited previously did not ultimately succeed because they were "only" threats that were never carried out. In the J6ers case, we know that Trump had been ginning up his base for weeks leading up to that date. So none of them "just" made threats, they followed through on those threats and tried to get their hands on members of the presidential cabinet.

They rolled the dice and crapped out, no pun intended.

The report of feces came from a Schumer "insider". Do you know already how much these folks exaggerated what happened? You're gonna tell me these people got into the Capitol, went to the bathrooms in all this, took a dump and came out and did that? I say no. That's for starters.

I also reject your claim that "someone had to suffer something similar to show it's unfair". Are you kidding? This is the standard of justice?

 

[SweetSue92]

WHY was the conviction overturned? What were the grounds the court gave? (I know the answer, I'm trying to get you to see why there is no precedence for the J6 riot).

And surly you don't truly believe that all they did was "parade". You sound like a defense attorney, no offense.

Some of them DID just parade and were heavily sentenced for it, yes. I have proven and linked this before.

What happened to these folks after pounding the doors of the SC? What if the SC security had let them in, as the Capitol Police let the J6 folks in?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Well now, for my part, I'm seeing you cite the unfairness and corruptness of our justice system being a concern in the past...but when the same comes around, meh, it's people I don't like, so fine.

Does that about sum it up?

No, it's not even "people I don't like", I can't care enough about them to even dislike them. That's emotion, they don't warrant from me because THEY DID THIS TO THEMSELVES.

As long as you keep trying to compare the January 6th mob attacking the U.S. capital (not parading) while the U.S. Vice President was attempting to certify the election results you will continue to get the same answer.

If you insist that they are being treated unfairly then at least provide some means of comparison, meaning unfairly compared to who exactly? And how please?

 

[SweetSue92]

No, it's not even "people I don't like", I can't care enough about them to even dislike them. That's emotion, they don't warrant from me because THEY DID THIS TO THEMSELVES.

As long as you keep trying to compare the January 6th mob attacking the U.S. capital (not parading) while the U.S. Vice President was attempting to certify the election results you will continue to get the same answer.

If you insist that they are being treated unfairly then at least provide some means of comparison, meaning unfairly compared to who exactly? And how please?

I just did. Those who pounded on the doors of the SC--but were not let in by guards--with the J6 crew. Did any of them suffer 20 year sentences?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

The report of feces came from a Schumer "insider". Do you know already how much these folks exaggerated what happened? You're gonna tell me these people got into the Capitol, went to the bathrooms in all this, took a dump and came out and did that? I say no. That's for starters.

I also reject your claim that "someone had to suffer something similar to show it's unfair". Are you kidding? This is the standard of justice?

That's not what I said. I'll give you an example of what I'm talking about geez.

Gary Ridgeway is a serial killer who's doing a life sentence here in Washington State for the murder of over 60 women. He's know locally as the "Green River Killer". At the time he was convicted Washington State still had the death penalty.

Ridgeway negotiated a deal with the prosecution in which they would take the death penalty off the table if he told them were all the bodies are buried. There is actually a Netflix series in which this story is featured, I don't remember the title though. Ridgeway is white by the way.

So fast forward a few years, and I'm driving home and hear a story on the radio in which a Black guy who was convicted of murder, a murder that he admitted to, but was contesting being put to death on the grounds that he was being discriminated against. He pointed out that Gary Ridgeway had killed more than 60 women while he had killed "only" one, yet Ridgeway wasn't being put to death while he was.

I was intrigued by the argument but never bothered to look up any information on the case and shortly thereafter Washington state abolished the death penalty so he may still be doing a sentence of life with no possibility of parole.

This is what I meant when I said if you're going to claim that one group of people is being treated unfairly, you need something to compare the alleged disparity in treatment to.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Precisely. You not only have no difficulty understanding it, you have no problem ceding your right to privacy.

If this is what you believe, then that shows your ignorance, because there is nowhere in my writing where I have ever advised ANYONE to cede any of their constitutional rights although the right to privacy is a tort.

Yeah, I didn't read any of the stuff you posted because I recognized the first video in which one of the attendees did attempt to dissuade the crowd from storming the capitol building, he was unable to however and it is reported that he didn't enter the building but he was still a part of the mob and I don't know what if any time he received.

What you don't see to understand is that you're not schooling anyone. I have mentors who are much more knowledgeable than either one of us that I seek counsel with when I need advice. I don't take advice from people off of message boards such of this one unless they've actually been able to teach me something and I don't see that happening here.

I've learned more from IM2 whom everyone seems to hate because he refuses to sugar coat the truth about racism in this country to make it more palatable to the racists here, along with the moderator KatSteve who knows some of my family, us both being from southern California.

So quit being bitter, you're outing yourself.

 

[MisterBeale]

Yeah, I didn't read any of the stuff you posted

I didn't really think so, folks don't like to read stuff that conflicts with their PoV.

So quit being bitter, you're outing yourself.

The only thing that makes me bitter, is when folks refuse to listen to, and consider each other's PoV.
. . . rather, from the start, you have attacked me at each turn. A little snipe here, a little snipe there. I don't mind. And I know, you don't care.

I'll not convince you that any of the narratives or epistemologies you have consumed, could possibly have been manipulated, any more than you could ever convince the Trumpers, that they too have been manipulated as well. . .




Thanks, I am not a lawyer, and the tip about privacy and tort law was instructive.

I am not sure, it is entirely applicable in this instance though. . .

The history of this particular issue, make it appear not, as it is more of a 4th Amendment issue?;

electronic surveillance

www.law.cornell.edu

OTH, going way back, yes indeed;

The Right To Privacy by Samuel Warren and Louis D. Brandeis​

Originally published in 4 Harvard Law Review 193 (1890)​

The Right To Privacy by Samuel Warren and Louis D. Brandeis | The Louis D. Brandeis Collection

web.archive.org

 

[Clipper]

Looking at this from a macro level, I think the Dems still don't know what to do about this whole thing. And after seven years of trying to understand it, I can't say that I blame them. There are plenty of REPUBLICANS who don't, either.

I don't think there is much the Dems can do to move the needle. That's my guess as to why they've been so... quiet.

Trump is a deranged criminal lowlife conman who tried to overturn the election that he lost, among other crimes he committed & he'll do it again in '24. What's there to figure out?

If Biden thinks he's going to win by being Mr Nice Guy he & the Dems are in for a rude awakening & we're all going to pay for it. If Trump wins this Country will be a dystopian nightmare to live in. For both sides.

 

[Lastamender]

I look at that day as the end result of decades of manipulation. Hopefully the only one, hopefully that was the big one, but that's 50/50.

It seems to me that it's easy to forget that these are people who do love their country. They have been led to believe that their country is literally under attack, and they have been manipulated to interpret and process reality in a distorted way. They're full of misguided rage, and they have created an enemy that really doesn't exist. Comparing them to jihadis, then, is really not a stretch.

Looking at world history, it's very possible that this doesn't end well. But it's safe to say that this is the biggest test of our Constitution since the Civil War. Now it's on us.

Oh boy. I have heard some shitty propaganda but from a hack like you it is hilarious.

 

[Mac1958]

Trump is a deranged criminal lowlife conman who tried to overturn the election that he lost, among other crimes he committed & he'll do it again in '24. What's there to figure out?

What's left to figure out is how to best deal with it. I look at the polls, and it's clear that the Dems haven't found the key to the car yet.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I didn't really think so, folks don't like to read stuff that conflicts with their PoV.

The only thing that makes me bitter, is when folks refuse to listen to, and consider each other's PoV.
. . . rather, from the start, you have attacked me at each turn. A little snipe here, a little snipe there. I don't mind. And I know, you don't care.

I'll not convince you that any of the narratives or epistemologies you have consumed, could possibly have been manipulated, any more than you could ever convince the Trumpers, that they too have been manipulated as well. . .




Thanks, I am not a lawyer, and the tip about privacy and tort law was instructive.

I am not sure, it is entirely applicable in this instance though. . .

The history of this particular issue, make it appear not, as it is more of a 4th Amendment issue?;

electronic surveillance

www.law.cornell.edu

OTH, going way back, yes indeed;
View attachment 827789

The Right To Privacy by Samuel Warren and Louis D. Brandeis​

Originally published in 4 Harvard Law Review 193 (1890)​

The Right To Privacy by Samuel Warren and Louis D. Brandeis | The Louis D. Brandeis Collection

web.archive.org

The right to be "let alone" went out the window when everybody jumped onboard with the U.S. Patriot Act, have you forgotten "see something, say something"? That created out and out harassment for some people and a court in New York also found that kind of discriminatory profiling to be unconstitutional as well.

You keep talking as if I personally can do anything about the malfeasance that our government engages in at times other than the things I have done and continue to do. Just because YOU don't know those details doesn't mean my efforts are non-existent or that they have been completely useless.

And the reason I respond to you the way I do is because of your condescending tone. You are pontificating to me, assuming that I know nothing of the subject matter just like you assumed I knew nothing of the landmark Supreme Court case that Justice Brandeis is known for, regarding the violation of privacy presented by wiretaps.

 

[MisterBeale]

The right to be "let alone" went out the window when everybody jumped onboard with the U.S. Patriot Act, have you forgotten "see something, say something"? That created out and out harassment for some people and a court in New York also found that kind of discriminatory profiling to be unconstitutional as well.

You keep talking as if I personally can do anything about the malfeasance that our government engages in at times other than the things I have done and continue to do. Just because YOU don't know those details doesn't mean my efforts are non-existent or that they have been completely useless.

And the reason I respond to you the way I do is because of your condescending tone. You are pontificating to me, assuming that I know nothing of the subject matter just like you assumed I knew nothing of the landmark Supreme Court case that Justice Brandeis is known for, regarding the violation of privacy presented by wiretaps.

You posted an OP from MSNBC, which is a known purveyor of propaganda.

I would have been just as condescending with one of the MAGAs pushing a propaganda narrative from Fox News, it was not anything against you personally.

Propaganda by Edward Bernays (1928)

www.historyisaweapon.com

(I tend to always get irritated with the thoughtless divide and rule narrative, when most times, folks are united on the larger issues. . . )

My apologies. You are brilliant, and I always learn much from you.

We all have our strength's and weaknesses, IMO.



The establishment, IMO, has been trying to get this passed, since the OKC bombing, and it was written at the same time as the Patriot Act, which also came out of Joe Biden's Office. The same folks you are currently demonizing, stand with you in opposition to the most onerous portions of the Patriot Act.

1996: Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act

Joe Biden was a key player in writing the precursor to the Patriot Act over the objections of civil liberties advocates.

theintercept.com

Two of the Oklahoma City Bombing's Lasting Legacies

The 20th anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombing presents an opportunity for reflection on its impact on our modern criminal justice system.

www.brennancenter.org

New Anti-Terrorism Law Continues Dangerous Trend Of Stripping Federal Judiciary Of Authority | American Civil Liberties Union

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE WASHINGTON -- At first glance, the anti-terrorism legislation recently signed into law by President Bush appears to only be a means to give law enforcement officials the necessary tools to find terrorists and prevent future attacks. But in reality, the USA Patriot Act...

www.aclu.org

The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act Is Sheer Politics | National Review

Law-enforcement agencies already have a rich arsenal of authorities to monitor and prosecute terrorists.

www.nationalreview.com

Text - H.R.350 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022

Text for H.R.350 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022

www.congress.gov

 

[MisterBeale]

Capitol Police whistleblower memo lays out Jan. 6 'intelligence failures' on Pelosi watch​

Three days after the Jan. 6 riot, a Capitol Police intelligence analyst sent a blistering email to supervisors, blowing the whistle on a failure to heed clear intelligence that right-wing rioters planned to storm the Capitol.​

Capitol Police whistleblower memo lays out Jan. 6 'intelligence failures' on Pelosi watch

Just three days after the Jan. 6 Capitol breach, one of the Capitol Police's top intelligence analysts sent a blistering email to supervisors, blowing the whistle on what he said

www.theohiopressnetwork.com

". . . Just three days after the Jan. 6 Capitol breach, one of the Capitol Police's top intelligence analysts sent a blistering email to supervisors, blowing the whistle on what he said was a failure to heed clear intelligence warning that right-wing rioters planned to storm the Capitol.

"We analysts have been reporting for weeks that Patriot groups are commenting on social media their intentions to storm the U.S. Capitol with overwhelming numbers," Eric Hoar wrote in the Jan. 9, 2021 email to his bosses. "I don't know what was occurring behind the scenes, but I hope that information was briefed with the veracity it deserved, and not just a one-time Event Assessment.

Hoar wrote he feared political considerations had overtaken security needs in the lead-up to the riot. . ."

<snip>

You can read his full memo here:"

https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2022-09/EricHoarIntelligenceFailuresMemo1-9-21RedactedAddresses.pdf

<snip>

". . . .For instance, one threat posted on the site and provided to Capitol Police said the right wing extremists distrusted the Capitol Police force because of “how they defended antifa from proudboys like they were the swiss guard protecting the pope.”

The Dec. 21, 2020 intelligence bulletin that Hoar's division created to summarize the social media chatter about potential violence on Jan. 6 listed specific threats against members of Congress, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Republican Leader Micth McConnell.

It also cited a suggestion to attack the power grid that provided electricity to the Capitol, a vow to burn down the Supreme Court and pleas to bring shovels, nerve gas and weapons to the event. "Bring guns, and don't let any patriot get arrested at any cost," the intelligence bulletin quoted one person planning to attend.. . . "

etc.

File: CapitolPolice#21-TD-159.pdf​

". . . Despite all of the intelligence coming into Capitol Police, the department's final instructions to its front line officers made no mention of the potential warnings.

For instance, the department's Jan. 5, 2021 final Civil Disturbance Units plan for crowd and riot control contained this inexplicable language about threat assessment: "At this time there are no specific known threats related to the Joint Session of Congress - Electoral College Vote Certification."

 

[MisterBeale]

Capitol Police whistleblower delivers scathing rebuke to 2 of its senior leaders Jan. 6​

The whistleblower alleges, among multiple serious allegations, that former acting chief Yogananda Pittman lied to Congress about an intelligence report Capitol Police received before that day’s riot.

Capitol Police whistleblower delivers scathing rebuke to 2 of its senior leaders Jan. 6

The whistleblower alleges, among multiple serious allegations, that former acting chief Yogananda Pittman lied to Congress about an intelligence report Capitol Police received before that day’s riot.

www.politico.com

". . . .The whistleblower, who requested anonymity for privacy reasons and left the force months after the attack, sent the 16-page letter late last month to the top members of both parties in the House and Senate. His missive makes scorching allegations against Sean Gallagher, the Capitol Police’s acting chief of uniformed operations, and Yogananda Pittman, its assistant chief of police for protective and intelligence operations — who also served as its former acting chief.

The whistleblower accuses Gallagher and Pittman of deliberately choosing not to help officers under attack on Jan. 6 and alleges that Pittman lied to Congress about an intelligence report Capitol Police received before that day’s riot. After a lengthy career in the department, the whistleblower was a senior official on duty on Jan. 6.

The whistleblower’s criticism went beyond Capitol Police leaders to Congress. Without naming specific lawmakers, his letter accuses congressional leaders of having “purposefully failed” to tell the truth about the department’s failures.

<snip>

“These officials were the only officials that had all the intelligence information for the 6th,” the whistleblower wrote, regarding Gallagher and Pittman.

“The single most important piece of intelligence information ... was never shared with any members of USCP leadership,” the whistleblower added, asking: “Why did they approve the operational plan for the 6th if they knew the intelligence?”

A senior law enforcement official said that other people in the department actually did have the intelligence, but that it clearly should have been distributed more widely. The Capitol Police spokesperson disputed the allegation that Pittman lied to Congress and noted that the department has changed its internal and external intelligence-sharing practices because of the attack.

<snip>

". . . .Stop the Steal was a movement promoting the conspiracy theory that nefarious forces stole the election from Trump. The movement’s organizers promoted a rally on the National Mall that preceded the attack on the Capitol.

That was “game changing information,” the whistleblower added, but operational commanders — meaning, the law enforcement officers in the field supervising police activity — never learned about it. . . . "

 

[MisterBeale]

Live with Tarik Johnson, Former Lieutenant with Capitol Police - Viva Frei​