23 votes

Daily thread - United States 2021 transition of power - January 11

This thread is posted daily - please try to post all relevant US political content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Extremely significant events may warrant a separate topic, but almost all should be posted in here.

This is an inherently political thread; please try to avoid antagonistic arguments and bickering matches. Comment threads that devolve into unproductive arguments may be removed so that the overall topic is able to continue.

45 comments

  1. [2]
    dubteedub
    Link
    The National Park Service has closed the Washington Monument through January 24 due to the threats of further riots. Record of Determination for the Temporary Closure of Public Facilities, Parking...

    The National Park Service has closed the Washington Monument through January 24 due to the threats of further riots.

    Pursuant to 36 CFR § 1.5(a)(1) the National Mall and Memorial Parks is implementing temporary closures of National Park Service public facilities, parking areas and roadways in response to credible threats to visitors and park resources. Groups involved in the January 6, 2021 riots at the US Capitol continue to threaten to disrupt the 59th presidential inauguration on January 20, 2021. This includes the set up and execution of inaugural events, which occur in several park areas. In response, the National Park Service will suspend tours of the Washington Monument beginning January 11, 2021 through January 24, 2021 and may institute temporary closures of public access to roadways, parking areas and restrooms within the National Mall and Memorial Parks if conditions warrant, to protect public safety and park resources. These temporary closures may be extended if the conditions persist. The National Park Service will reopen areas as it determines that the conditions of concern are no longer present.

    Looking back at 2015, Rick Perry literally warned of an attack on the Washington Monument if Trump were elected.

    Perry described an 1854 assault on the nation’s capital in which members of the nativist Know-Nothing movement accosted a guard and destroyed slabs of marble that were meant to complete the Washington Monument. Their goal was to thwart an imagined conspiracy about the Pope taking over the government.

    15 votes
    1. SantalBlush
      Link Parent
      Good stuff. To expand on this, I encourage everyone to remind others when Rep. Matt Gaetz and other Republicans stormed the private impeachment hearing to appease Trump: This might be the clearest...

      Good stuff. To expand on this, I encourage everyone to remind others when Rep. Matt Gaetz and other Republicans stormed the private impeachment hearing to appease Trump:

      The storm-the-room stunt came two days after Trump said that he thought Republicans “have to get tougher and fight.” Many of the Republicans engaged in the protest were at a White House on Tuesday meeting with Trump, and a person familiar with the matter told CNN that Trump had advance knowledge of the plans to enter the space.

      This might be the clearest line connecting Republicans' prior disregard for the law to last week's insurrection.

      16 votes
  2. dubteedub
    Link
    This article is from January 9th. Police departments across the U.S. open probes into whether their own members took part in the Capitol riot - Washington Post Here is another article on the FBI...

    This article is from January 9th.

    Departments in California, Washington state, and Texas are among those that have announced investigations into their officers based on tips, social media posts and other evidence, though more officers could be identified as evidence emerges in the coming days.

    Here is another article on the FBI investigations into various police departments across the country as well.

    The commanding officers or officials involved in the cases in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Texas and Washington State stressed that while the officers attended as private citizens, the question of whether they broke the law would be investigated.

    And another from Reuters from yesterday:

    Fire departments in Florida and New York City have also said they reported to federal authorities allegations that some of their members may have been present when the mob broke into the Capitol as Congress met to certify the results of the Nov. 3 presidential election.

    The police department in the small town of Rocky Mount, Virginia, said on Sunday it had placed two officers on administrative leave after it learned they attended an “event” in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday while off-duty.

    Seattle’s police department (SPD) said it also placed two officers on administrative leave while an investigation takes place into any role they may have played in the chaos that unfolded on the other side of the country.

    Representative Jamaal Bowman is introducing a legislation to further investigate the ties between white nationalism within the U.S. Capitol Police specifically. Via Twitter:

    I’m introducing the Congressional Oversight of Unjust Policing Act to uncover how the terrorist attack on our Capitol was able to breach the Capitol building.
    This bill will establish a commission to investigate the attack, and ties between white supremacists and Capitol Police.

    This is not entirely a story of incompetence on the part of law enforcement, and we have to ask:
    Did some of those charged with protecting us willingly lay down their posts?
    Was there a coordinated effort to take over the United States government with violence?

    This has been a very long-time coming and we are decades late in addressing the infiltration of white supremacists into our law enforcement and military agencies.

    13 votes
  3. spit-evil-olive-tips
    Link
    The Philly detective reassigned for going to Trump’s D.C. rally called Pence a ‘traitor’ after he condemned the violence Oh, and her previous role with the Philly police? Doing background checks...

    The Philly detective reassigned for going to Trump’s D.C. rally called Pence a ‘traitor’ after he condemned the violence

    “You’re a swap creature and fooled us all!” Detective Jennifer Gugger posted on Twitter on Friday

    Oh, and her previous role with the Philly police? Doing background checks on new police recruits, which included checking their social media.

    Gugger, 51, was removed from her position in the Recruit Background Investigations Unit last weekend amid an investigation into whether she participated in any wrongdoing at the Capitol.

    How many police recruits who posted about QAnon or other deranged shit did she wave through? And how many recruits who said something in support of Black Lives Matter did she flag as being "too political" or whatever?

    12 votes
  4. [23]
    Eabryt
    Link
    Semi-related, the House is meeting this morning and are expected to introduce a resolution calling for Mike Pence to invoke the 25th. It is a unanimous consent decree (which I expect will fail),...

    Semi-related, the House is meeting this morning and are expected to introduce a resolution calling for Mike Pence to invoke the 25th.

    It is a unanimous consent decree (which I expect will fail), and if it does not get unanimous consent, the House will most likely debate/vote on the resolution tomorrow.

    10 votes
    1. [4]
      stu2b50
      Link Parent
      I don't know why they're bothering to ask Pence to invoke the 25th. It's immensely dubious as to whether or not the current cabinet technically can invoke it, because the constitution specifies...

      I don't know why they're bothering to ask Pence to invoke the 25th. It's immensely dubious as to whether or not the current cabinet technically can invoke it, because the constitution specifies "officers which Congress may provide", but actually almost all of the cabinet members are acting heads, not Congressionally appointed heads, because Jesus our executive branch is a mess.

      Additionally, the 25th allows a president to contest a VP who invokes it - and if they don't resolve who is President then Congress needs a supermajority in both chambers to keep the 25th invoke. So, actually harder than impeachment and conviction.

      The 25th won't be invoked unless Trump does loco again (then, the fact he is immediately deprived of presidential powers temporarily is useful), he will be impeached again most likely, the trial for that will likely be after the 20th. It is highly unlikely he is removed before then.

      9 votes
      1. psi
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        This was originally my thought too, but the process can be drawn out long enough for these matters to be moot. Although the President can formally object to the declaration, which limits the time...

        Additionally, the 25th allows a president to contest a VP who invokes it - and if they don't resolve who is President then Congress needs a supermajority in both chambers to keep the 25th invoke. So, actually harder than impeachment and conviction.

        This was originally my thought too, but the process can be drawn out long enough for these matters to be moot.

        1. Although the President can formally object to the declaration, which limits the time the VP can be acting President to four days, the cabinet and VP can issue a second declaration that extends the VP's duration as acting President to 21 days (which, of course, is greater than the amount of time left on the President's term).
        2. If the President objects, then the issue is taken up by Congress. While a 2/3 vote by both houses is necessary to remove the President, Congress could sit on the matter -- there's no requirement that they act immediately. Of course, after 21 days, the power would revert back to the President. But Trump has fewer than two weeks left on his term, and the Senate is currently is Pro Forma sessions until Jan 19, making it unlikely the Senate or House would act on the President's objection in a timely manner.

        Edit: also regarding this:

        It's immensely dubious as to whether or not the current cabinet technically can invoke it, because the constitution specifies "officers which Congress may provide", but actually almost all of the cabinet members are acting heads, not Congressionally appointed heads, because Jesus our executive branch is a mess.

        There's an OLC memo that suggests otherwise (of course, OLC memos are not legally binding, so take from that what you will). But on its face, it seems reasonable that acting heads would be able to invoke the 25th amendment; otherwise the President could just remove half the members of their Cabinet to inoculate themselves against removal via the 25th.

        6 votes
      2. [2]
        MimicSquid
        Link Parent
        It gives Republicans a chance to show where they stand. Will they support ousting a president that whipped up a mob to attack them, even though he's (theoretically) part of their party?

        It gives Republicans a chance to show where they stand. Will they support ousting a president that whipped up a mob to attack them, even though he's (theoretically) part of their party?

        5 votes
        1. stu2b50
          Link Parent
          Surely a resolution on impeachment would also do that. And tbh we already know the answer in the house: absolutely, yes, they will stand behind the president. Unlike the senate, house Republicans...

          Surely a resolution on impeachment would also do that. And tbh we already know the answer in the house: absolutely, yes, they will stand behind the president. Unlike the senate, house Republicans are 100% drinking the Trump kool-aid. Over 50% of House Republicans voted to reject certification of AZ and Penn.

          Someone ran Shapely-Kubrick power shares on the House caucus and Trumpist have 80% control over House republican votes.

          5 votes
    2. [2]
      dubteedub
      Link Parent
      Well GOP blocked the measure so now the Dems just introduced new impeachment articles for Trump. An impeachment charge against Trump is introduced as Republicans block a measure demanding Pence...

      Well GOP blocked the measure so now the Dems just introduced new impeachment articles for Trump.

      House Democrats on Monday introduced an article of impeachment against President Trump for inciting a mob that attacked the Capitol last week, vowing to press the charge as Republicans blocked their move to formally call on Vice President Mike Pence to strip him of power under the 25th Amendment.

      Direct link to the impeachment articles here - https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/articles-impeachment-trump-xml/b0422e292cebafda/full.pdf

      9 votes
      1. dubteedub
        Link Parent
        Speaker Pelosi has now put out a statement on the GOP blocking the unanimous consent request. Pelosi Statement on House Republicans Blocking Unanimous Consent Request

        Speaker Pelosi has now put out a statement on the GOP blocking the unanimous consent request.

        “On Wednesday, the President incited a deadly insurrection against America that targeted the very heart of our Democracy. The President represents an imminent threat to our Constitution, our Country and the American people, and he must be removed from office immediately.

        “Today, in pro forma session, Leader Hoyer introduced a Unanimous Consent request to take up legislation by Congressman Jamie Raskin calling on the Vice President to mobilize the Cabinet to activate the 25th Amendment to remove the President.

        “The House Republicans rejected this legislation to protect America, enabling the President’s unhinged, unstable and deranged acts of sedition to continue. Their complicity endangers America, erodes our Democracy, and it must end.

        “The House will next take up the Raskin legislation in regular order to call upon the Vice President to activate the 25th Amendment to remove the President. We are further calling on the Vice President to respond within 24 hours after passage.

        “As our next step, we will move forward with bringing impeachment legislation to the Floor. The President’s threat to America is urgent, and so too will be our action.”

        10 votes
    3. [13]
      xnaas
      Link Parent
      Almost assuredly. And even if it passes, it's far too little far too late. The time for Trump to be removed was during his first impeachment.

      which I expect will fail

      Almost assuredly. And even if it passes, it's far too little far too late. The time for Trump to be removed was during his first impeachment.

      6 votes
      1. [10]
        nacho
        Link Parent
        Although it may have absolutely no practical consequences, formally following this procedure is important for the history books. Both in 2 years and 4 years, but also in 20 and 50 years' time....

        Although it may have absolutely no practical consequences, formally following this procedure is important for the history books. Both in 2 years and 4 years, but also in 20 and 50 years' time.

        Just like it'd be equally important to formally start another impeachment process just to show how completely unacceptable post-election Trump has been.

        13 votes
        1. [9]
          vord
          Link Parent
          This is true, however I think it really shows the true colors of the people in power. Nothing of substance was done until right-wing nutjobs stormed the building. Maybe the left needs to do the...

          This is true, however I think it really shows the true colors of the people in power.

          Nothing of substance was done until right-wing nutjobs stormed the building.

          Maybe the left needs to do the same. Course, that'll probably mean immediate deployment of national guard and teargas.

          3 votes
          1. [8]
            Kuromantis
            Link Parent
            Well it does check out with the code of conduct /s 'Jokes' aside, how would this result in something good for the left, rather than just substantial? I'm assuming you think Democratic...

            Nothing of substance was done until right-wing nutjobs stormed the building.

            Maybe the left needs to do the same.

            Do not incite or encourage harm against people.

            Well it does check out with the code of conduct /s

            'Jokes' aside, how would this result in something good for the left, rather than just substantial? I'm assuming you think Democratic congresspeople would pass lots of welfare legislation to "placate" whoever did such a thing?

            5 votes
            1. [7]
              vord
              (edited )
              Link Parent
              Nah, I suspect you're very right that (as I kinda laid out) wouldn't be a net good. But I think, what I may have intended to hint, is that pacifism on its own is insufficient for change. There...

              Nah, I suspect you're very right that (as I kinda laid out) wouldn't be a net good.

              But I think, what I may have intended to hint, is that pacifism on its own is insufficient for change. There must, at the least, a stance that you will respond to violence in the face of violence to get progress. Martin Luther King would not have had nearly the same level of influence if not for the Black Panthers.

              Earlier this year, there were numerous protests about police brutality met with even more police brutality and national guard deployed immediately. How many people lost their lives over that? And in the end there were largely token gestures of support while nothing fundamentally changed.

              Trump's violations went almost completely unchecked for 4 years. Only at the absolute last minute have Republicans jumped ship, when Trump's supporters finally took it too far. While their charge is creating the opposite affect they might have hoped for, that's because their goal was likely "completely subvert democracy" and they had virtually 0 public support.

              7 votes
              1. [6]
                skybrian
                Link Parent
                Nonviolence not working doesn't imply that violence would work. Maybe nothing would work? But actually, Democrats taking the House did a lot to derail the Republican agenda and it looks like this...

                Nonviolence not working doesn't imply that violence would work. Maybe nothing would work? But actually, Democrats taking the House did a lot to derail the Republican agenda and it looks like this election will end Trumpism, so although not very timely, it seems like new elections did some work?

                We are talking about history very crudely, but to be slightly more detailed, one reason that the Civil Rights movement was effective is that it put pressure on LBJ to do civil rights legislation before the other things he wanted to do. It probably wouldn't have worked against a President Goldwater, or if there weren't still a lot liberal Republicans back then that were gettable with pressure from northern religious leaders.

                3 votes
                1. [4]
                  vord
                  (edited )
                  Link Parent
                  Addressing this seperatly, We are a bit, but I dug through the Wikipedia article as a refresher. Non-violent protest certainly laid a foundation. But change did not get enacted until violent...

                  We are talking about history very crudely, but to be slightly more detailed, one reason that the Civil Rights movement was effective is that it put pressure on LBJ to do civil rights legislation before the other things he wanted to do. It probably wouldn't have worked against a President Goldwater, or if there weren't still a lot liberal Republicans back then that were gettable with pressure from northern religious leaders.

                  Addressing this seperatly, We are a bit, but I dug through the Wikipedia article as a refresher. Non-violent protest certainly laid a foundation. But change did not get enacted until violent actions started backing up that foundation.

                  JFK had introduced the civil rights bill to congress in June of 1963. It was still languishing in congress as of March 1964, which is when Malcom X broke ties with Nation of Islam and began to lend support to any movement that supported black nationalism and self-defense.

                  LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on July 2nd, over a year later, after the following events occurred (copied and paraphrased from WP):

                  • [In response to KKK killings], St. Augustine [civil rights] movement practiced armed self-defense in addition to nonviolent direct action. In June 1963, Hayling publicly stated that "I and the others have armed. We will shoot first and answer questions later. We are not going to die like Medgar Evers." When Klan nightriders terrorized black neighborhoods in St. Augustine, Hayling's NAACP members often drove them off with gunfire. In October 1963, a Klansman was killed.
                  • The repression of sit-ins in Jacksonville, Florida, provoked a riot in which black youth threw Molotov cocktails at police. Malcom X then gave a speech in April 1964, "The Ballot or the Bullet", Malcolm presented an ultimatum to white America: "There's new strategy coming in. It'll be Molotov cocktails this month, hand grenades next month, and something else next month. It'll be ballots, or it'll be bullets."
                  • In 1964, a series of almost nightly protests brought chaos to Chester [PA] as protestors argued that the Chester School Board had de facto segregation of schools. The mayor of Chester, James Gorbey, issued "The Police Position to Preserve the Public Peace", a ten-point statement promising an immediate return to law and order. The city deputized firemen and trash collectors to help handle demonstrators. The State of Pennsylvania deployed 50 state troopers to assist the 77-member Chester police force. The demonstrations were marked by violence and charges of police brutality.

                  The teachings of the Civil Rights Act in US schools immensely downplays the roles violence played in bookending the actual progression of the movements. If not for the violence taken in 1963-1968, we would still be fighting these issues today. In fact, the Black Panthers were the target of much counter-intelligence and suppression, and their 10-point program was:

                  1. We want freedom. We want power to determine the destiny of our Black Community.
                  2. We want full employment for our people.
                  3. We want an end to the robbery by the Capitalists of our Black Community.
                  4. We want decent housing, fit for shelter of human beings.
                  5. We want education for our people that exposes the true nature of this decadent American society. We want education that teaches us our true history and our role in the present day society.
                  6. We want all Black men to be exempt from military service.
                  7. We want an immediate end to POLICE BRUTALITY and MURDER of Black people.
                  8. We want freedom for all Black men held in federal, state, county and city prisons and jails.
                  9. We want all Black people when brought to trial to be tried in court by a jury of their peer group or people from their Black Communities, as defined by the Constitution of the United States.
                  10. We want land, bread, housing, education, clothing, justice and peace.

                  How many of those bullet points have been accomplished since, despite the continuing call for it?

                  5 votes
                  1. [3]
                    skybrian
                    Link Parent
                    Yes, there was a lot of violence. Blacks in the South sometimes armed themselves, despite being discouraged from that by King. But, with all the stuff going on, it’s not clear which events...

                    Yes, there was a lot of violence. Blacks in the South sometimes armed themselves, despite being discouraged from that by King.

                    But, with all the stuff going on, it’s not clear which events resulted in votes?

                    Cause and effect can be difficult to establish. I think we would need to go a lot deeper into the history.

                    I think that, when advocating some particular strategy, there should be a theory of how it’s supposed to work. Having a righteous cause doesn’t do that.

                    3 votes
                    1. [2]
                      vord
                      Link Parent
                      I think you're right about cause and affect, they're all deeply intertwined. However, in my opinion, the votes from the citizens didn't matter quite so much as the votes from the representatives...

                      I think you're right about cause and affect, they're all deeply intertwined.

                      However, in my opinion, the votes from the citizens didn't matter quite so much as the votes from the representatives on legislation that had already been introduced. To me it is quite clear representatives are happy to do nothing until violence escalates.

                      And to that end, I think a very valid strategy is: Come up with a non-violent plan. When you are ignored and/or suppressed, escalate. When you are met with violence, respond with violence. For these purposes, I also consider arresting for non-violent involvement as violence.

                      2 votes
                      1. skybrian
                        Link Parent
                        When you say "it is quite clear representatives are happy to do nothing until violence escalates," I agree that the past week alone shows that violence gets attention. But, often it's negative...

                        When you say "it is quite clear representatives are happy to do nothing until violence escalates," I agree that the past week alone shows that violence gets attention. But, often it's negative attention.

                        Back in the civil rights era, an essential part of King's strategy was to get in the news being attacked by segregationists. He was using the violence of the racists to turn public opinion against them.

                        These days this strategy is well known. To the extent that the anti-police protests worked for changing public opinion, it seems it was by provoking the police to do bad things on camera? Certainly the people sharing those photos and videos all over Twitter thought so.

                        It seems like when the protestors are themselves doing bad stuff on camera, that might have the opposite effect when those photos are published by their enemies? It's kind of a bold strategy to assume you can hit people and look sympathetic.


                        All of this assumes that publicity has some purpose, and if that purpose is to affect what legislators do, we could look at what they did and try to figure out why.

                        There's a common theory that Malcolm X made King look good in comparison, but I haven't seen compelling evidence that it changed any votes in Congress. (This is what I meant by votes.) A historian of the civil rights era could look at each member of Congress and see what might have influenced them and make a judgement call. Like, was it LBJ, pressure from constituents, or maybe they were affected by what they saw in the news? There are a lot of theories but what's the evidence for each of them?

                        I read a very long biography of King and it seems like his influence is pretty easy to trace since sometimes he was directly negotiating with the Johnson administration. Everything in the news affected things too, but exactly how might be harder to find evidence for. (I don't remember all the other stuff going on and huge books like that are hard to wade through on Kindle. I probably should have taken notes.)


                        So, my recommendation would be to try to get publicity however you can, but escalating is a dangerous game that could blow up in your face. (As it did for the Trumpists.) Maybe try something else?

                        Bringing weapons is crossing a line. Bringing guns is crossing another. And, if you don't know what's going on, make sure you're not joining a lynch mob. Is anyone else bringing weapons? How about rope?

                        Also, it would be a very bad idea for any leftist protestors to trespass on federal property right now. Why take the spotlight off the Capitol riots?

                        3 votes
                2. vord
                  Link Parent
                  I seriously doubt this. The conditions that brought about "Trumpism" still exist. Trump's agenda largely fell in line with the broader Republican agenda. The Republicans had a chance to oust Trump...

                  looks like this election will end Trumpism

                  I seriously doubt this. The conditions that brought about "Trumpism" still exist. Trump's agenda largely fell in line with the broader Republican agenda. The Republicans had a chance to oust Trump and replace with Pence and they did not take it.

                  They will use "Trump was the bad guy" rhetoric as the shield for their broader agenda, while simultaneously fighting against undoing any of the changes Trump made.

                  Trump is not an anomaly, he is the byproduct of 36+ years of Republican agenda and the propaganda networks to build support for that agenda.

                  4 votes
      2. [2]
        vord
        Link Parent
        Well, his first impeachment was what...2 years too late? The last 20 years have really highlighted how badly we need reform of the federal government.

        Well, his first impeachment was what...2 years too late?

        The last 20 years have really highlighted how badly we need reform of the federal government.

        9 votes
        1. xnaas
          Link Parent
          Also yes. Ideally he'd've never been elected at all, but... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          Well, his first impeachment was what...2 years too late?

          Also yes. Ideally he'd've never been elected at all, but... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          5 votes
    4. vord
      Link Parent
      Well, that was a waste of time. Debate/vote should have begun immediately, especially the person objecting.

      Well, that was a waste of time. Debate/vote should have begun immediately, especially the person objecting.

      3 votes
  5. [3]
    streblo
    Link
    Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf resigns after Trump supporters’ riot on Capitol Hill
    8 votes
    1. [2]
      Amarok
      Link Parent
      I do question if the word 'huge' actually appears in this bulletin, but at least the FBI is paying attention. ... Let's take care of our staffing issues at government halls, yeah? Just in case.

      I do question if the word 'huge' actually appears in this bulletin, but at least the FBI is paying attention.

      Investigators have been told that if "Congress attempts to remove POTUS via the 25th Amendment a huge uprising will occur," says an FBI daily bulletin obtained by ABC News.

      ...

      Armed protests are being planned at all 50 state capitols from 16 January through at least 20 January, and at the US Capitol from 17 January through 20 January," the bulletin reportedly states.

      Let's take care of our staffing issues at government halls, yeah? Just in case.

      5 votes
      1. suspended
        Link Parent
        Here are some quotes that I've pulled from this NYT article:

        Here are some quotes that I've pulled from this NYT article:

        Even as businesses and elected officials try to distance themselves from the violence and its perpetrators, supporters of President Trump are openly planning attacks in Washington and around the country in the days leading up to President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s inauguration on Jan. 20. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has sent information to local law enforcement about the potential for armed protests outside all 50 state capitols, which are being organized and promoted by far-right extremist groups like the Boogaloo movement.

        In a video news conference on Monday, Gov. Gavin Newsom of California said that the National Guard would be sent in to help “as needed” at the State Capitol in Sacramento, and that the California Highway Patrol, which is in charge of protecting the Capitol, was planning ahead to address potential violence without infringing on free speech rights.

        “I can assure you we have a heightened, heightened level of security,” Mr. Newsom said.

        In Michigan, a commission that oversees the State Capitol voted on Monday to ban the open carry of firearms inside the Capitol, something Democratic lawmakers had been demanding for months. In Wisconsin, workers boarded up the windows of the State Capitol.

        Democratic officials in Clark County, Nev., which includes Las Vegas, sent out a public safety alert on Sunday about potential violence across the state, writing, “Over the past 48 hours, the online activity on social media has escalated to the point that we must take these threats seriously.”

        That alert came after a Republican leader in neighboring Nye County posted a letter on Friday that promoted wild, discredited conspiracy theories and likened protests of the election results to the American Revolution, declaring: “The next 12 days will be something to tell the grandchildren! It’s 1776 all over again!”

        5 votes
  6. cfabbro
    (edited )
    Link
    A bunch of random ones from today, roughly grouped by subject matter. Law: New York State Bar Association Launches Historic Inquiry Into Removing Trump Attorney Rudy Giuliani From Its Membership...
    7 votes
  7. [2]
    skybrian
    Link
    Only one person showed up to the pro-Trump protest outside Twitter's San Francisco HQ
    4 votes
    1. Amarok
      Link Parent
      If twenty people had shown up I'd have been worried someone would drive a car through that crowd. Gatherings of Trump protesters have a non-zero probability of being targeted by pissed off...

      If twenty people had shown up I'd have been worried someone would drive a car through that crowd. Gatherings of Trump protesters have a non-zero probability of being targeted by pissed off Americans, especially if they are small.

      2 votes
  8. [9]
    RapidEyeMovement
    (edited )
    Link
    This is weird Screenshot if it changes Edit: Can someone tag this as noise, I don't think it means anything we want it to mean

    This is weird
    Donald J. Trump's term ended on 2021-01-11 19:40:41.

    Screenshot if it changes

    Yes that is a time stamp in the future

    Edit: Can someone tag this as noise, I don't think it means anything we want it to mean

    10 votes
    1. wycy
      Link Parent
      Pence's page says his term ends today too. Different time.

      Pence's page says his term ends today too. Different time.

      4 votes
    2. [2]
      psi
      Link Parent
      I don't see entries for other Presidents, so I'm not sure what to make of this.

      I don't see entries for other Presidents, so I'm not sure what to make of this.

      3 votes
    3. [3]
      Fal
      Link Parent
      The page doesn't look like its working now, but Pence's is still up

      The page doesn't look like its working now, but Pence's is still up

      3 votes
    4. Tygrak
      Link Parent
      That really is weird. Did something happen we don't know about?

      That really is weird. Did something happen we don't know about?

      2 votes
    5. RapidEyeMovement
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      Pompeo Speaking Live at Voice of America in Washington DC [1] edit: Other than Pompeo sounding stilted nothing has come up

      Pompeo Speaking Live at Voice of America in Washington DC [1]

      edit:
      Other than Pompeo sounding stilted nothing has come up

      1 vote