|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 11 2021 22:29 mikedebo wrote:
I didn't realize AWS was also withdrawing services from Parler, that's really something. I guess they'll be down for quite awhile. We might see a resurgence of people building their own in-house datacenters.
Probably going to be buried in the more prominent "fuck them, they're terrorist enablers" message, but the fact that AWS can just pull the rug out from a company like that is definitely concerning. It's definitely something I'd be worried about when mulling a shift to cloud services. Here it's done to disavow a coup; tomorrow it'll be done as a hit by the US government on a foreign competitor or something.
Certainly could be prudent to politics-proof your cloud services by having hosting abroad. And there are certainly options - as at least one example, Russia's biggest IT company claims to offer AWS-equivalent capabilities.
|
|
|
On January 12 2021 00:20 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2021 00:04 Slydie wrote:On January 11 2021 23:47 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 23:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:On January 11 2021 23:25 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 04:10 farvacola wrote:On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Like Zambrah says above with reference to Dangles, don’t even bother engaging with people like this. Those who can’t talk about the literal storming of the Capitol without mentioning antifa are not interested in discussion, only in showing off their equivocation skills. It’s not a coincidence that news outlets in the Weimar Republic constantly matched reporting on Nazi shit with mentions of communism, this pattern isn’t new. Hello Mr. Godwin. The issue was explicitly raised as to what would have happened if the situation were reversed. On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Yes, if you just let people in there's naturally less violence. It's not a perfectly analogous situation. Another one was when BLM burned down a police station in Minneapolis. Still another, protesters attacked a federal courthouse in Portland. I think those transpired without any deaths? Even though one was a federal building, the same as the Capitol. Have you seen the shooting video of the woman who died at the Capitol? When I look at it, I really think if her skin had been another color, the incident would have sparked its own protests or riots about police brutality. So it's an interesting question. The difference again seems to be that when the violence is local, progressive officials have used their own discretion to try to appease those groups through leniency. Whereas something about the Capitol is more high-risk and one might have "expectation" that the police would take fewer chances and be more likely to shoot someone.. It's hard to compare anecdotes to anecdotes but on balance it doesn't seem like the difference in treatment swings that seriously in either direction. You think that people would be outraged and call racism if a black woman was shot inside the Capitol as part as a coup trying to overthrow the government? Are you high? I'll be charitable and assume you can differentiate between a riot and a fucking coup. No, rather like I said, people would be faster to call it police brutality, due to being more conditioned to recognize it with a black and especially woman victim, and being far more easily motivated to protest in the aftermath of such an incident, with the news spreading faster on both traditional and social media and being editorialized as police brutality more readily. Have you watched the video sir? + Show Spoiler +1) Breaking windows of locked, guarded doors
2) "He (police) has a gun" -> Everybody backs up, except:
3) One unarmed woman who didn't get the memo starts climbing through a window, is shot dead with one bullet and falls back out
People would be asking where the warning was, and why the police didn't know how to use a nonlethal alternative like a stungun, and asking for them to be fired and charged instantly. Come on, they were doing an actual coup attempt, and you complain about the ONE person who got killed? The police did an amazing job at keeping the casualties low in this case, and narrowly kept the leaders of the country unharmed as well. The subject was something else, but since you asked, yes, killing people seems not good unless it had been the guy who was bludgeoning the police officer or some other case of attempted murder. Other than that, they did, yes. "The police," an abstract entity, didn't shoot her, an individual policeman did. Show nested quote +On January 12 2021 00:01 evilfatsh1t wrote:On January 11 2021 23:47 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 23:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:On January 11 2021 23:25 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 04:10 farvacola wrote:On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Like Zambrah says above with reference to Dangles, don’t even bother engaging with people like this. Those who can’t talk about the literal storming of the Capitol without mentioning antifa are not interested in discussion, only in showing off their equivocation skills. It’s not a coincidence that news outlets in the Weimar Republic constantly matched reporting on Nazi shit with mentions of communism, this pattern isn’t new. Hello Mr. Godwin. The issue was explicitly raised as to what would have happened if the situation were reversed. On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Yes, if you just let people in there's naturally less violence. It's not a perfectly analogous situation. Another one was when BLM burned down a police station in Minneapolis. Still another, protesters attacked a federal courthouse in Portland. I think those transpired without any deaths? Even though one was a federal building, the same as the Capitol. Have you seen the shooting video of the woman who died at the Capitol? When I look at it, I really think if her skin had been another color, the incident would have sparked its own protests or riots about police brutality. So it's an interesting question. The difference again seems to be that when the violence is local, progressive officials have used their own discretion to try to appease those groups through leniency. Whereas something about the Capitol is more high-risk and one might have "expectation" that the police would take fewer chances and be more likely to shoot someone.. It's hard to compare anecdotes to anecdotes but on balance it doesn't seem like the difference in treatment swings that seriously in either direction. You think that people would be outraged and call racism if a black woman was shot inside the Capitol as part as a coup trying to overthrow the government? Are you high? I'll be charitable and assume you can differentiate between a riot and a fucking coup. No, rather like I said, people would be faster to call it police brutality, due to being more conditioned to recognize it with a black and especially woman victim, and being far more easily motivated to protest in the aftermath of such an incident, with the news spreading faster on both traditional and social media and being editorialized as police brutality more readily. Have you watched the video sir? + Show Spoiler +1) Breaking windows of locked, guarded doors
2) "He (police) has a gun" -> Everybody backs up, except:
3) One unarmed woman who didn't get the memo starts climbing through a window, is shot dead with one bullet and falls back out
People would be asking where the warning was, and why the police didn't know how to use a nonlethal alternative like a stungun, and asking for them to be fired and charged instantly. yeah i dont think you got the original point. the woman was taking part in an active coup attempt. no one could argue its police brutality because the police were completely justified in firing Interesting point, when did the police know it was an active coup attempt, or when did the police decide "this is a coup, weapons free," or is this one of those feel-it-out and hope the situation justifies you after it kind of things? I would like you to watch the video for argument's sake just so we can have a determination whether the police would have been justified in massacring the eight people standing around her as well because "coup," or who you think a higher priority target might have been, for example, or why this policeman, fearing for his life, had the sense to conserve ammunition and not fire a second time.
it doesnt matter whether the police knew it was a coup attempt or when they found out. the police are tasked with defending the federal building and the people inside and if an aggressive mob is trying to break in obviously the police are entitled to take action.
ive seen the video, and honestly i dont even understand whats so controversial about it. the doors are barricaded on the other side and the mob is literally at the doors shouting/trying to get in. the woman decides shes going to be a hero and jumps through the window in an attempt to bypass the barricade. are police supposed to just let her enter and let the rest of the mob follow suit? might as well not have barricaded the door to begin with
|
Parler's ENTIRE database has been hacked. Email, phone, everything:
|
On January 12 2021 00:38 Doublemint wrote:the consensus seems to be that it was a coup or at least an attempt at a coup but I am not so sure. that would involve a good deal of planning before to be honest. I would rather stay, at least for now, with the terror angle since they wanted to intimidate and use fear and violence in order to reach a political goal. it's a moot distinction currently as all facts are not known yet but I still think it's more apt. Show nested quote +On January 12 2021 00:20 oBlade wrote:On January 12 2021 00:04 Slydie wrote:On January 11 2021 23:47 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 23:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:On January 11 2021 23:25 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 04:10 farvacola wrote:On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Like Zambrah says above with reference to Dangles, don’t even bother engaging with people like this. Those who can’t talk about the literal storming of the Capitol without mentioning antifa are not interested in discussion, only in showing off their equivocation skills. It’s not a coincidence that news outlets in the Weimar Republic constantly matched reporting on Nazi shit with mentions of communism, this pattern isn’t new. Hello Mr. Godwin. The issue was explicitly raised as to what would have happened if the situation were reversed. On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Yes, if you just let people in there's naturally less violence. It's not a perfectly analogous situation. Another one was when BLM burned down a police station in Minneapolis. Still another, protesters attacked a federal courthouse in Portland. I think those transpired without any deaths? Even though one was a federal building, the same as the Capitol. Have you seen the shooting video of the woman who died at the Capitol? When I look at it, I really think if her skin had been another color, the incident would have sparked its own protests or riots about police brutality. So it's an interesting question. The difference again seems to be that when the violence is local, progressive officials have used their own discretion to try to appease those groups through leniency. Whereas something about the Capitol is more high-risk and one might have "expectation" that the police would take fewer chances and be more likely to shoot someone.. It's hard to compare anecdotes to anecdotes but on balance it doesn't seem like the difference in treatment swings that seriously in either direction. You think that people would be outraged and call racism if a black woman was shot inside the Capitol as part as a coup trying to overthrow the government? Are you high? I'll be charitable and assume you can differentiate between a riot and a fucking coup. No, rather like I said, people would be faster to call it police brutality, due to being more conditioned to recognize it with a black and especially woman victim, and being far more easily motivated to protest in the aftermath of such an incident, with the news spreading faster on both traditional and social media and being editorialized as police brutality more readily. Have you watched the video sir? + Show Spoiler +1) Breaking windows of locked, guarded doors
2) "He (police) has a gun" -> Everybody backs up, except:
3) One unarmed woman who didn't get the memo starts climbing through a window, is shot dead with one bullet and falls back out
People would be asking where the warning was, and why the police didn't know how to use a nonlethal alternative like a stungun, and asking for them to be fired and charged instantly. Come on, they were doing an actual coup attempt, and you complain about the ONE person who got killed? The police did an amazing job at keeping the casualties low in this case, and narrowly kept the leaders of the country unharmed as well. The subject was something else, but since you asked, yes, killing people seems not good unless it had been the guy who was bludgeoning the police officer or some other case of attempted murder. Other than that, they did, yes. "The police," an abstract entity, didn't shoot her, an individual policeman did. On January 12 2021 00:01 evilfatsh1t wrote:On January 11 2021 23:47 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 23:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:On January 11 2021 23:25 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 04:10 farvacola wrote:On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Like Zambrah says above with reference to Dangles, don’t even bother engaging with people like this. Those who can’t talk about the literal storming of the Capitol without mentioning antifa are not interested in discussion, only in showing off their equivocation skills. It’s not a coincidence that news outlets in the Weimar Republic constantly matched reporting on Nazi shit with mentions of communism, this pattern isn’t new. Hello Mr. Godwin. The issue was explicitly raised as to what would have happened if the situation were reversed. On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Yes, if you just let people in there's naturally less violence. It's not a perfectly analogous situation. Another one was when BLM burned down a police station in Minneapolis. Still another, protesters attacked a federal courthouse in Portland. I think those transpired without any deaths? Even though one was a federal building, the same as the Capitol. Have you seen the shooting video of the woman who died at the Capitol? When I look at it, I really think if her skin had been another color, the incident would have sparked its own protests or riots about police brutality. So it's an interesting question. The difference again seems to be that when the violence is local, progressive officials have used their own discretion to try to appease those groups through leniency. Whereas something about the Capitol is more high-risk and one might have "expectation" that the police would take fewer chances and be more likely to shoot someone.. It's hard to compare anecdotes to anecdotes but on balance it doesn't seem like the difference in treatment swings that seriously in either direction. You think that people would be outraged and call racism if a black woman was shot inside the Capitol as part as a coup trying to overthrow the government? Are you high? I'll be charitable and assume you can differentiate between a riot and a fucking coup. No, rather like I said, people would be faster to call it police brutality, due to being more conditioned to recognize it with a black and especially woman victim, and being far more easily motivated to protest in the aftermath of such an incident, with the news spreading faster on both traditional and social media and being editorialized as police brutality more readily. Have you watched the video sir? + Show Spoiler +1) Breaking windows of locked, guarded doors
2) "He (police) has a gun" -> Everybody backs up, except:
3) One unarmed woman who didn't get the memo starts climbing through a window, is shot dead with one bullet and falls back out
People would be asking where the warning was, and why the police didn't know how to use a nonlethal alternative like a stungun, and asking for them to be fired and charged instantly. yeah i dont think you got the original point. the woman was taking part in an active coup attempt. no one could argue its police brutality because the police were completely justified in firing Interesting point, when did the police know it was an active coup attempt, or when did the police decide "this is a coup, weapons free," or is this one of those feel-it-out and hope the situation justifies you after it kind of things? I would like you to watch the video for argument's sake just so we can have a determination whether the police would have been justified in massacring the eight people standing around her as well because "coup," or who you think a higher priority target might have been, for example, or why this policeman, fearing for his life, had the sense to conserve ammunition and not fire a second time. police were flabbergasted and in shock as they were overwhelmed. their commanding officers planning for the event completely failed them. they were acting from a position of weakness rather than strenght (when compared to BLM protests for instance) and it really seems to be remarkable not more people were shot - maybe it also has to do with the fact that it was a mob of overwhelming force that you maybe get off a couple of shots but then you are done for. add to that fact that they are people you generally largely align with, a good amount of off duty officers from around the country were at the "event" for example.
I think it's in the interests of a bunch of people to call this a coup. The Democrats get to play tough, the intelligence community gets a new set of villains and the media gets to hype up the event as a supreme act of high treason that nearly toppled the government from within. The MSM is still obsessed with American exceptionalism and notion of patriotism. They are influenced by images from Latin American states where angry mobs can actually topple governments, but they forgot to include the part where the various global powers then choose sides and support one or the other side behind the scenes. In the USA the powers that be are probably happy to get rid of Trump and they're not personally invested in him whatsoever. They don't share the personality cult around him, nor view him as a useful figure. Trump is too unstable to get institutional support for a coup, hence all this was was yet another ego trip that this time got seriously out of hand.
|
On January 12 2021 00:18 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2021 00:04 Slydie wrote:On January 11 2021 23:47 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 23:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:On January 11 2021 23:25 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 04:10 farvacola wrote:On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Like Zambrah says above with reference to Dangles, don’t even bother engaging with people like this. Those who can’t talk about the literal storming of the Capitol without mentioning antifa are not interested in discussion, only in showing off their equivocation skills. It’s not a coincidence that news outlets in the Weimar Republic constantly matched reporting on Nazi shit with mentions of communism, this pattern isn’t new. Hello Mr. Godwin. The issue was explicitly raised as to what would have happened if the situation were reversed. On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Yes, if you just let people in there's naturally less violence. It's not a perfectly analogous situation. Another one was when BLM burned down a police station in Minneapolis. Still another, protesters attacked a federal courthouse in Portland. I think those transpired without any deaths? Even though one was a federal building, the same as the Capitol. Have you seen the shooting video of the woman who died at the Capitol? When I look at it, I really think if her skin had been another color, the incident would have sparked its own protests or riots about police brutality. So it's an interesting question. The difference again seems to be that when the violence is local, progressive officials have used their own discretion to try to appease those groups through leniency. Whereas something about the Capitol is more high-risk and one might have "expectation" that the police would take fewer chances and be more likely to shoot someone.. It's hard to compare anecdotes to anecdotes but on balance it doesn't seem like the difference in treatment swings that seriously in either direction. You think that people would be outraged and call racism if a black woman was shot inside the Capitol as part as a coup trying to overthrow the government? Are you high? I'll be charitable and assume you can differentiate between a riot and a fucking coup. No, rather like I said, people would be faster to call it police brutality, due to being more conditioned to recognize it with a black and especially woman victim, and being far more easily motivated to protest in the aftermath of such an incident, with the news spreading faster on both traditional and social media and being editorialized as police brutality more readily. Have you watched the video sir? + Show Spoiler +1) Breaking windows of locked, guarded doors
2) "He (police) has a gun" -> Everybody backs up, except:
3) One unarmed woman who didn't get the memo starts climbing through a window, is shot dead with one bullet and falls back out
People would be asking where the warning was, and why the police didn't know how to use a nonlethal alternative like a stungun, and asking for them to be fired and charged instantly. Come on, they were doing an actual coup attempt, and you complain about the ONE person who got killed? The police did an amazing job at keeping the casualties low in this case, and narrowly kept the leaders of the country unharmed as well. I don't think the police did an amazing job if it was only by chance that they didn't get a mob of armed lunatics in the same room as all the senators. Crowd control is one thing that the police are heavily armed and trained for, ostensibly with non-lethal weaponry such as tear gas and rubber bullets and so on. Instead they just let them in and were armed with live ammunition. Why should the safety of a bunch of senators depend on, like, Bruce Willis being there by chance?
Some individual cops did an amazing job (and presumably have amazing training). The overall police shit the bed hard.
On January 12 2021 00:38 Doublemint wrote:
the consensus seems to be that it was a coup or at least an attempt at a coup but I am not so sure. that would involve a good deal of planning before to be honest. I would rather stay, at least for now, with the terror angle since they wanted to intimidate and use fear and violence in order to reach a political goal.
it's a moot distinction currently as all facts are not known yet but I still think it's more apt.
it was 100% a coup attempt by sizable portions. There were people there with equipment to hold senators hostages and execute the VP for not trying to force Trump in as president.
|
|
|
I have to say I'm quite disgusted with a lot of people for actively doxxing all these qanon people. You're basically siccing the same security state on them that a few years ago was disappearing people into offshore torture dungeons for life. Most of these people are mentally ill or deranged in some ways, they need help, not imprisonment. I know a bunch of people in the Netherlands who could have, in different circumstances, easily have been part of this mob and they don't have bad intentions really, but are mostly just victims of mental health issues coupled with online propaganda. I saw this thread on reddit where a bunch of people admitted to snitching on close family members and friends to the FBI.
And some people are really obsessed with this notion of "treason" and calling them "traitors". Treason is good. The united states should be destroyed, even if Trump and Qanon aren't the right people to do it. Snowden was a traitor too according to the MSM.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
|
|
On January 12 2021 00:58 Grumbels wrote:I have to say I'm quite disgusted with a lot of people for actively doxxing all these qanon people. You're basically siccing the same security state on them that a few years ago was disappearing people into offshore torture dungeons for life. Most of these people are mentally ill or deranged in some ways, they need help, not imprisonment. I know a bunch of people in the Netherlands who could have, in different circumstances, easily have been part of this mob and they don't have bad intentions really, but are mostly just victims of mental health issues coupled with online propaganda. I saw this thread on reddit where a bunch of people admitted to snitching on close family members and friends to the FBI. And some people are really obsessed with this notion of "treason" and calling them "traitors". Treason is good. The united states should be destroyed, even if Trump and Qanon aren't the right people to do it. Snowden was a traitor too according to the MSM.
How would you compare Snowden and the Coup Klux Klan? Saying both are labeled traitors doesn't say a lot. If an attempted coup isn't the threshold, what is the threshold for you? The fact that some have mental issues does not mean we let the whole thing fester. In your eyes, what is the correct response to an insurrection?
|
On January 12 2021 00:58 Grumbels wrote:I have to say I'm quite disgusted with a lot of people for actively doxxing all these qanon people. You're basically siccing the same security state on them that a few years ago was disappearing people into offshore torture dungeons for life. Most of these people are mentally ill or deranged in some ways, they need help, not imprisonment. I know a bunch of people in the Netherlands who could have, in different circumstances, easily have been part of this mob and they don't have bad intentions really, but are mostly just victims of mental health issues coupled with online propaganda. I saw this thread on reddit where a bunch of people admitted to snitching on close family members and friends to the FBI. And some people are really obsessed with this notion of "treason" and calling them "traitors". Treason is good. The united states should be destroyed, even if Trump and Qanon aren't the right people to do it. Snowden was a traitor too according to the MSM.
Ordinarily I would think doxxing is over the line, but in this case, the FBI and other law enforcement have literally asked for help identifying people who participated. Also, their posts in and of themselves are frequently crimes : the only reason they would not be prosecuted normally is the lack of resources to do so.
The US government does not disappear white looking people from within the US. They've done this to non-whites plenty (we know they've deported US citizens who didn't look white on accident many times), but these insurrectionists in specific have nothing to worry about on that issue.
Also, even the pretty awful US MSM is a lot more nuanced on Snowden than that. The only networks that have consistently called Snowden a traitor were Fox News and other right wing sources, who were the ones that helped foment this.
I'm someone who thinks the US has done massive amounts of really shitty stuff... but the sort of replacement that would have resulted (a fascist ethnostate) would be so much worse for the world (and the US) on most of those fucked up issues.
|
On January 12 2021 00:20 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2021 00:04 Slydie wrote:On January 11 2021 23:47 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 23:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:On January 11 2021 23:25 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 04:10 farvacola wrote:On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Like Zambrah says above with reference to Dangles, don’t even bother engaging with people like this. Those who can’t talk about the literal storming of the Capitol without mentioning antifa are not interested in discussion, only in showing off their equivocation skills. It’s not a coincidence that news outlets in the Weimar Republic constantly matched reporting on Nazi shit with mentions of communism, this pattern isn’t new. Hello Mr. Godwin. The issue was explicitly raised as to what would have happened if the situation were reversed. On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Yes, if you just let people in there's naturally less violence. It's not a perfectly analogous situation. Another one was when BLM burned down a police station in Minneapolis. Still another, protesters attacked a federal courthouse in Portland. I think those transpired without any deaths? Even though one was a federal building, the same as the Capitol. Have you seen the shooting video of the woman who died at the Capitol? When I look at it, I really think if her skin had been another color, the incident would have sparked its own protests or riots about police brutality. So it's an interesting question. The difference again seems to be that when the violence is local, progressive officials have used their own discretion to try to appease those groups through leniency. Whereas something about the Capitol is more high-risk and one might have "expectation" that the police would take fewer chances and be more likely to shoot someone.. It's hard to compare anecdotes to anecdotes but on balance it doesn't seem like the difference in treatment swings that seriously in either direction. You think that people would be outraged and call racism if a black woman was shot inside the Capitol as part as a coup trying to overthrow the government? Are you high? I'll be charitable and assume you can differentiate between a riot and a fucking coup. No, rather like I said, people would be faster to call it police brutality, due to being more conditioned to recognize it with a black and especially woman victim, and being far more easily motivated to protest in the aftermath of such an incident, with the news spreading faster on both traditional and social media and being editorialized as police brutality more readily. Have you watched the video sir? + Show Spoiler +1) Breaking windows of locked, guarded doors
2) "He (police) has a gun" -> Everybody backs up, except:
3) One unarmed woman who didn't get the memo starts climbing through a window, is shot dead with one bullet and falls back out
People would be asking where the warning was, and why the police didn't know how to use a nonlethal alternative like a stungun, and asking for them to be fired and charged instantly. Come on, they were doing an actual coup attempt, and you complain about the ONE person who got killed? The police did an amazing job at keeping the casualties low in this case, and narrowly kept the leaders of the country unharmed as well. The subject was something else, but since you asked, yes, killing people seems not good unless it had been the guy who was bludgeoning the police officer or some other case of attempted murder. Other than that, they did, yes. "The police," an abstract entity, didn't shoot her, an individual policeman did. Show nested quote +On January 12 2021 00:01 evilfatsh1t wrote:On January 11 2021 23:47 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 23:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:On January 11 2021 23:25 oBlade wrote:On January 11 2021 04:10 farvacola wrote:On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Like Zambrah says above with reference to Dangles, don’t even bother engaging with people like this. Those who can’t talk about the literal storming of the Capitol without mentioning antifa are not interested in discussion, only in showing off their equivocation skills. It’s not a coincidence that news outlets in the Weimar Republic constantly matched reporting on Nazi shit with mentions of communism, this pattern isn’t new. Hello Mr. Godwin. The issue was explicitly raised as to what would have happened if the situation were reversed. On January 11 2021 04:04 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On January 11 2021 03:55 oBlade wrote:On January 10 2021 21:19 Silvanel wrote:BBC is reporting on charges being brought against some of insurgents: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55606044 And judging from charges those people are getting it seems like this might become new norm. Apparently You can just force Yourself into US Capitol trying to take hostegs and get: "violent entry and disorderly conduct". I know this has been repeated time after time but if they were brown & muslim they would end spending their lfies in prison (if by some miracle they would surrive entry attempt). Different crimes have different punishments - the guy with molotov cocktails will obviously get a felony, and the people who bludgeoned a police officer to death aren't likely to get off easy when found. I can't speak for skin color but in general antifa riot and loot with impunity in Portland and NYC. In Seattle the officials welcome takeovers of government centers: https://komonews.com/news/local/council-member-sawant-let-protesters-into-city-hall-to-show-it-belongs-to-the-peopleThe difference with January 6th is not that it's particularly violent compared to other protests and riots from 2020 and earlier, but that it took place where those in power work, meaning for the first time it's real for them. Also the FBI aren't ones to sit on their hands at the direction of local officials, unlike municipal law enforcement who stand by or catch and release antifa hooligans. Did you read the article? That has to be the most...relaxed takeover I've ever seen. Yes, if you just let people in there's naturally less violence. It's not a perfectly analogous situation. Another one was when BLM burned down a police station in Minneapolis. Still another, protesters attacked a federal courthouse in Portland. I think those transpired without any deaths? Even though one was a federal building, the same as the Capitol. Have you seen the shooting video of the woman who died at the Capitol? When I look at it, I really think if her skin had been another color, the incident would have sparked its own protests or riots about police brutality. So it's an interesting question. The difference again seems to be that when the violence is local, progressive officials have used their own discretion to try to appease those groups through leniency. Whereas something about the Capitol is more high-risk and one might have "expectation" that the police would take fewer chances and be more likely to shoot someone.. It's hard to compare anecdotes to anecdotes but on balance it doesn't seem like the difference in treatment swings that seriously in either direction. You think that people would be outraged and call racism if a black woman was shot inside the Capitol as part as a coup trying to overthrow the government? Are you high? I'll be charitable and assume you can differentiate between a riot and a fucking coup. No, rather like I said, people would be faster to call it police brutality, due to being more conditioned to recognize it with a black and especially woman victim, and being far more easily motivated to protest in the aftermath of such an incident, with the news spreading faster on both traditional and social media and being editorialized as police brutality more readily. Have you watched the video sir? + Show Spoiler +1) Breaking windows of locked, guarded doors
2) "He (police) has a gun" -> Everybody backs up, except:
3) One unarmed woman who didn't get the memo starts climbing through a window, is shot dead with one bullet and falls back out
People would be asking where the warning was, and why the police didn't know how to use a nonlethal alternative like a stungun, and asking for them to be fired and charged instantly. yeah i dont think you got the original point. the woman was taking part in an active coup attempt. no one could argue its police brutality because the police were completely justified in firing Interesting point, when did the police know it was an active coup attempt, or when did the police decide "this is a coup, weapons free," or is this one of those feel-it-out and hope the situation justifies you after it kind of things? I would like you to watch the video for argument's sake just so we can have a determination whether the police would have been justified in massacring the eight people standing around her as well because "coup," or who you think a higher priority target might have been, for example, or why this policeman, fearing for his life, had the sense to conserve ammunition and not fire a second time.
Considering the data we have on how police cracks down black people vs white people protests (they are MUCH more violent against black people), I’ll go ahead and assume that if a bunch of fanatical black extremists had attempted a coup and tried to take the capitol they would have been massacred; it wouldn’t have been 4 dead but hundreds.
I guess that answers your questions?
|
Anyone have any sense for if Parler has a strong legal case to sue companies like Twilio and Amazon for damages caused to their business? I'm sure there will be some suits coming their way for wrongful death and such as a result of the protests, but it also does seem like they would have some legitimate claims of business harm.
|
On January 12 2021 00:58 Grumbels wrote:I have to say I'm quite disgusted with a lot of people for actively doxxing all these qanon people. You're basically siccing the same security state on them that a few years ago was disappearing people into offshore torture dungeons for life. Most of these people are mentally ill or deranged in some ways, they need help, not imprisonment. I know a bunch of people in the Netherlands who could have, in different circumstances, easily have been part of this mob and they don't have bad intentions really, but are mostly just victims of mental health issues coupled with online propaganda. I saw this thread on reddit where a bunch of people admitted to snitching on close family members and friends to the FBI. And some people are really obsessed with this notion of "treason" and calling them "traitors". Treason is good. The united states should be destroyed, even if Trump and Qanon aren't the right people to do it. Snowden was a traitor too according to the MSM.
In this case, I disagree. The pro-Trump extremist movement has become too large and too dangerous, there is no way around a full-on confrontation.
I was shocked that just about every insurrectionist was filming with their phones. Did it even occur to them they could fail, and that they were producing conclusive evidence against themselves and their peers?
An online community which rewards this kind of behavior needs to go, and anyone who contributed needs to face the consequences.
|
Is there an actual source for this besides Twitter and Reddit?
|
On January 12 2021 01:14 LegalLord wrote:
Anyone have any sense for if Parler has a strong legal case to sue companies like Twilio and Amazon for damages caused to their business? I'm sure there will be some suits coming their way for wrongful death and such as a result of the protests, but it also does seem like they would have some legitimate claims of business harm.
They don't. It's generally right in the contracts that there are conditions under which they reserve the right to terminate service. They can try on some sort of rights-breaching grounds, I suppose, but this is quite likely right in the agreements they signed to use these services.
I understand the speed with which all these companies are bandwagoning at this specific moment in time, but I find it off-putting. I've been pretty frustrated with the (inevitable) specialization and monopolization of necessary verticals that power high-usage distributed applications, and this is sort of one of my nightmare scenarios come true lol
|
On January 12 2021 00:58 Grumbels wrote:I have to say I'm quite disgusted with a lot of people for actively doxxing all these qanon people. You're basically siccing the same security state on them that a few years ago was disappearing people into offshore torture dungeons for life. Most of these people are mentally ill or deranged in some ways, they need help, not imprisonment. I know a bunch of people in the Netherlands who could have, in different circumstances, easily have been part of this mob and they don't have bad intentions really, but are mostly just victims of mental health issues coupled with online propaganda. I saw this thread on reddit where a bunch of people admitted to snitching on close family members and friends to the FBI. And some people are really obsessed with this notion of "treason" and calling them "traitors". Treason is good. The united states should be destroyed, even if Trump and Qanon aren't the right people to do it. Snowden was a traitor too according to the MSM.
you might want to reconsider and reframe that part?
also goodness gracious lol
parler - backed by a billionaire - used free trial software for user id storage and verification...
|
|
|
On January 12 2021 00:58 Grumbels wrote:I have to say I'm quite disgusted with a lot of people for actively doxxing all these qanon people. You're basically siccing the same security state on them that a few years ago was disappearing people into offshore torture dungeons for life. Most of these people are mentally ill or deranged in some ways, they need help, not imprisonment. I know a bunch of people in the Netherlands who could have, in different circumstances, easily have been part of this mob and they don't have bad intentions really, but are mostly just victims of mental health issues coupled with online propaganda. I saw this thread on reddit where a bunch of people admitted to snitching on close family members and friends to the FBI. And some people are really obsessed with this notion of "treason" and calling them "traitors". Treason is good. The united states should be destroyed, even if Trump and Qanon aren't the right people to do it. Snowden was a traitor too according to the MSM.
Wwwwwwwwwooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
I didn’t know anyone outside North Korea’s state television even talked in such terms. You read such bizarre stuff in that thread it’s quite funny.
|
United States43991 Posts
On January 12 2021 01:14 LegalLord wrote:
Anyone have any sense for if Parler has a strong legal case to sue companies like Twilio and Amazon for damages caused to their business? I'm sure there will be some suits coming their way for wrongful death and such as a result of the protests, but it also does seem like they would have some legitimate claims of business harm.
There's zero chance AWS doesn't have a right to terminate providing services for connection with terrorism clause or whatever but either way I'd imagine that would look a lot like the smackdown Google's lawyer delivered to PragerU. The law is for sale and Amazon's legal team is no doubt as good as Google's.
+ Show Spoiler [PragerU vs Google for anyone interested] +https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_video.php?pk_vid=0000016122
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
