Election Denialism

[shunyadragon]

I've always been more concerned with actions than words.

January 6?!?!?!

[rogue06]

So what?!?!?! dummy. It does not change my response concerning continuous streams of demeaning useless videos and cartoons to just insult with no constructive content..

Just admit that you thought a video was a comic

[rogue06]

January 6?!?!?!

Definitely a riot. Bookmarked by numerous left-wing ones that were typically at least as bad if not worse.

But they don't count since they mess up the narrative, right?

[shunyadragon]

s

Definitely a riot. Bookmarked by numerous left-wing ones that were typically at least as bad if not worse.

But they don't count since they mess up the narrative, right?

Everything counts, but Election Denialism and related violence remains front and center in conservative America for a noncontroversial election approved by ALL the judges in the USA. The only explanation I have received is their was a conspiracy by the Judicial system in the USA, and 'no judge would dare to object to the results.'

False information concerning election machines, and polling practices remain and issue.

[rogue06]

s

Everything counts, but Election Denialism and related violence remains front and center in conservative America for a noncontroversial election approved by ALL the judges in the USA. The only explanation I have received is their was a conspiracy by the Judicial system in the USA, and 'no judge would dare to object to the results.'

False information concerning election machines, and polling practices remain and issue.

The left started rioting and Election Denialism on the day after Trump won, which was deemed right and natural by Democrats and the MSM.

For instance, there was rioting in Oakland for three or four days, mostly caused by students from Berkeley, right after Trump won. And when school authorities claimed the violence was done by outside agitators a number of students stepped forward and denied this was the case and proudly took responsibility^[1]. And it wasn't just Oakland. Similar rioting took place in a number of other cities as well. Enough so that a reporter for the Chicago Tribune actually boasted that, unlike everywhere else, the protests in that city were actually "devoid of any of the heavy vandalism of effigy burning that occurred elsewhere" It isn't often that Chicago can boast about being more peaceful than other cities.

Hundreds of peaceful Trump protests overshadowed by violent acts, arrests

From immediately after the election...

Source: Anti-Trump protests, some violent, erupt for 3rd night nationwide

For the third night in a row, anti-Donald Trump demonstrators took to the streets in several big cities and on college campuses across the United States, including an outburst of smashed windows and a dumpster fire in Portland that police countered with pepper spray and flash-bang devices.

About 4,000 protesters assembled downtown late Thursday chanting “we reject the president-elect!” the Associated Press reported. Some among the crowd vandalized 19 cars at a dealership in Northeast Portland, according to a sales manager, Oregonlive.com reports. Protesters then headed west, over the Broadway Bridge and into the Pearl District, where the windows of several businesses were smashed.

The protest was mostly peaceful until demonstrators met with an anarchist group, after which demonstrators vandalized buildings, kicked cars and knocked out power, KGW-TV reported.


Source

© Copyright Original Source

American feminist academic and social critic Camille Paglia took the left and Democrat leadership to task for how they responded:

After Trump's victory (for which there were abundant signs in the preceding months), both the Democratic party and the big-city media urgently needed to do a scathingly honest self-analysis, because the election results plainly demonstrated that Trump was speaking to vital concerns (jobs, immigration, and terrorism among them) for which the Democrats had few concrete solutions. Indeed, throughout the campaign, too many leading Democratic politicians were preoccupied with domestic issues and acted strangely uninterested in international affairs. Among the electorate, the most fervid Hillary acolytes (especially young and middle-aged women and assorted show biz celebs) seemed obtusely indifferent to her tepid performance as Secretary of State, during which she doggedly piled up air miles while accomplishing virtually nothing except the destabilization of North Africa.

Had Hillary won, everyone would have expected disappointed Trump voters to show a modicum of respect for the electoral results as well as for the historic ceremony of the inauguration, during which former combatants momentarily unite to pay homage to the peaceful transition of power in our democracy. But that was not the reaction of a vast cadre of Democrats shocked by Trump's win. In an abject failure of leadership that may be one of the most disgraceful episodes in the history of the modern Democratic party, Chuck Schumer, who had risen to become the Senate Democratic leader after the retirement of Harry Reid, asserted absolutely no moral authority as the party spun out of control in a nationwide orgy of rage and spite. Nor were there statesmanlike words of caution and restraint from two seasoned politicians whom I have admired for decades and believe should have run for president long ago—Senator Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. How do Democrats imagine they can ever expand their electoral support if they go on and on in this self-destructive way, impugning half the nation as vile racists and homophobes?

And it Never let up. The WaPo reported that in the year after Trump was sworn in that there had been a protest every single day -- and much like the MSM chanted during the summer of 2020 -- they declared that the majority of them were nonviolent (which is a tacit admission that there was violence at the protests).

And just like the leftwing rioting, the leftwing election denialism started immediately afterwards -- actually it started in 2000, over twenty years ago -- as shown here. You had a hard time not tripping over a leading Democrat not saying that the election was "stolen."

But all of this is tolerated and accepted since it comes from the left.






1. Robert Reich (Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton and then Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at UC Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California Berkeley) declared that the riots were actually part of a secret plot carried out by undercover right-wing infiltrators working with Breitbart (a claim repeated by UC Berkeley's official alumni website). In response, in a series of op-eds published in the UC Berkeley's student run newspaper, The Daily Californian, were run, all of which supported the violent rioting with one even sneering at attempts to pin it on outsiders, declaring

We were not, as the news, the chancellor and concerned progressives have alleged, "unaffiliated white anarchists". Behind those bandanas and black T-shirts were the faces of your fellow UC Berkeley and Berkeley City College students, of women, of people of color, of queer and trans people.

[oxmixmudd]

Definitely a riot. Bookmarked by numerous left-wing ones that were typically at least as bad if not worse.

But they don't count since they mess up the narrative, right?

There hasn't been a 'worse' wrt jan 6 in terms of how close we came to having an election stolen violently. There hasn't been a worse in terms of the long term effect of the irrational paranoia about our elections that the rhetoric and lies leading up to and following it have fostered. And there has not been a worse in terms of the number of elected officials willing to compromise their oaths of office and to the constitution in order to stay in good graces with a man.

Officially, our nation requires all its military and elected officials to pledge themselves to our constitution above any man or personality. With jan 6, a substantial number, both state and federal, have abandoned that principle, if not in word, in deed.

[rogue06]

There hasn't been a 'worse' wrt jan 6 in terms of how close we came to having an election stolen violently. There hasn't been a worse in terms of the long term effect of the irrational paranoia about our elections that the rhetoric and lies leading up to and following it have fostered. And there has not been a worse in terms of the number of elected officials willing to compromise their oaths of office and to the constitution in order to stay in good graces with a man.

Officially, our nation requires all its military and elected officials to pledge themselves to our constitution above any man or personality. With jan 6, a substantial number, both state and federal, have abandoned that principle, if not in word, in deed.

We had one where they tried -- and succeeded -- in stalling the nomination of a Supreme Court justice. In that one we had a U.S. Senator acquiesced to strong arm intimidation (being kept in an elevator by hostile protesters). The reaction? They were lauded by the MSM.

Then after the J6 riot we were warned that another one was imminent. National Guard troops were crammed into parking garages in anticipation. Then, the capital was closed down in March because of protests that never took place. IIRC, more protests were expected in May.

Then in September there was something called the the Justice for January 6 rally where the undercover cops, not to mention those in uniform, outnumbered the attendees^[1], who by all accounts were entirely peaceful as opposed to the liberal standard of mostly peaceful and fiery but peaceful.

Finally, in October, the long predicted insurrectionist riot took place where those involved stormed a federal office in Washington in opposition to some legislation and mimicked the worst actions of the J6 crowd. They pushed through security, vandalized the place, and took it over. While there wasn't anyone wearing a buffalo horned hat, they did manage to send a number of cops to the hospital.

But wait! Why didn't you hear about this treasonous attack on democracy? There was some initial coverage but the story was immediately dropped like the proverbial hot potato when it was discovered left-wing environmentalists who were involved.

leslie-nielsen-nothing-to-see-here.gif

Source: Last Week’s Insurrection Attempt In D.C. Exposes the Media for the Biased Positions They Hold

After months of the media promising us that violence would erupt in the nation’s capital once again, it finally happened late last week. Protestors, upset with the federal government, stormed a federal building in a violent fashion and occupied the place for a time that afternoon. If this comes as a surprise to you do not be surprised. Likely those who do know of this event came to learn about it from our own site, but there is little chance of seeing it covered elsewhere.

Interesting, because the press has been eagerly awaiting this very activity ever since January 6. Just last month their latest promised uprising — the Justice for January 6 Rally — was a complete bust of a news event. This continued their string of assured continued violence adding up to nothing, so certainly a mob overrunning a government building would be just the thing to have tongues in hypercaffeinated overdrive all weekend as they delivered hysterical bromides of their predictions coming true. Yet these seers took one look at the crowd and walked out on the story faster than cutting out the back door while on a blind date with Sebastian Gorka.

The reason is that the crowd that pushed its way into the Interior Department building was a group of leftists, environmentalists who are as far away on the political spectrum from Donald Trump as from the horizon. Not only is there reticence to be critical of these groups, but there is nothing in the way of forwarding their 10-month long narrative of demonizing Trump and the Republican party. If they were to highlight this attack on a building by polar opposites of their preferred targets it would dilute their contentions.

So after some cursory coverage, the story was dropped entirely.

It is not as if there were not a string of identifiers that would qualify Thursday’s attack as another insurrection. They stormed a government building. They clashed with police on site. They illegally entered the building. There were signs of vandalism. And all of this was done in stated opposition to Joe Biden’s agenda. All of the hallmarks of January’s mob hit were in play, complete with police being injured.

Climate demonstrators were attempting to occupy the Interior Department, with dozens entering the Stewart Lee Udall Main Interior Building on C Street NW. Those who remained outside clashed with police as they tried to keep the one unlocked door open. At times, protesters attempted to push past the police line.

There is one other element in play that looks worse for the media mavens. This attack was far more organized. Rather than a group splintering from a gathering held elsewhere, these environmentalists were in town as part of a number of organizations participating in days of protests and demonstrations. The intent to have Biden overturn a number of environmental initiatives had been expressed throughout the week and a number of facilities have been the target of protests.

[...]


Source

© Copyright Original Source

The article concludes with something dealing with the entire J6 is different because they were trying to overthrow a government claim

Source: ibid

One of the convenient dodges you see is that the supposed difference here is no one was attempting to overthrow the government, unlike the organized treason that was on display in January. One problem here; the darned FBI has all but scuttled this end of the narrative by confirming there was no organization behind the attack on the Capitol. This has not deterred the press from declaring that the fateful day in January was an Insurrection, and neither has another harsh reality — that nobody from that riot has been charged with insurrection, nor sedition.

© Copyright Original Source

1. Forgot the mandatory footnote

bf5cf61b-dc20-4a1f-855a-a48cbf5ac995.jpg

[oxmixmudd]

We had one where they tried -- and succeeded -- in stalling the nomination of a Supreme Court justice. In that one we had a U.S. Senator acquiesced to strong arm intimidation (being kept in an elevator by hostile protesters). The reaction? They were lauded by the MSM.

Then after the J6 riot we were warned that another one was imminent. National Guard troops were crammed into parking garages in anticipation. Then, the capital was closed down in March because of protests that never took place. IIRC, more protests were expected in May.

Then in September there was something called the the Justice for January 6 rally where the undercover cops, not to mention those in uniform, outnumbered the attendees^[1], who by all accounts were entirely peaceful as opposed to the liberal standard of mostly peaceful and fiery but peaceful.

Finally, in October, the long predicted insurrectionist riot took place where those involved stormed a federal office in Washington in opposition to some legislation and mimicked the worst actions of the J6 crowd. They pushed through security, vandalized the place, and took it over. While there wasn't anyone wearing a buffalo horned hat, they did manage to send a number of cops to the hospital.

But wait! Why didn't you hear about this treasonous attack on democracy? There was some initial coverage but the story was immediately dropped like the proverbial hot potato when it was discovered left-wing environmentalists who were involved.

leslie-nielsen-nothing-to-see-here.gif

Source: Last Week’s Insurrection Attempt In D.C. Exposes the Media for the Biased Positions They Hold

After months of the media promising us that violence would erupt in the nation’s capital once again, it finally happened late last week. Protestors, upset with the federal government, stormed a federal building in a violent fashion and occupied the place for a time that afternoon. If this comes as a surprise to you do not be surprised. Likely those who do know of this event came to learn about it from our own site, but there is little chance of seeing it covered elsewhere.

Interesting, because the press has been eagerly awaiting this very activity ever since January 6. Just last month their latest promised uprising — the Justice for January 6 Rally — was a complete bust of a news event. This continued their string of assured continued violence adding up to nothing, so certainly a mob overrunning a government building would be just the thing to have tongues in hypercaffeinated overdrive all weekend as they delivered hysterical bromides of their predictions coming true. Yet these seers took one look at the crowd and walked out on the story faster than cutting out the back door while on a blind date with Sebastian Gorka.

The reason is that the crowd that pushed its way into the Interior Department building was a group of leftists, environmentalists who are as far away on the political spectrum from Donald Trump as from the horizon. Not only is there reticence to be critical of these groups, but there is nothing in the way of forwarding their 10-month long narrative of demonizing Trump and the Republican party. If they were to highlight this attack on a building by polar opposites of their preferred targets it would dilute their contentions.

So after some cursory coverage, the story was dropped entirely.

It is not as if there were not a string of identifiers that would qualify Thursday’s attack as another insurrection. They stormed a government building. They clashed with police on site. They illegally entered the building. There were signs of vandalism. And all of this was done in stated opposition to Joe Biden’s agenda. All of the hallmarks of January’s mob hit were in play, complete with police being injured.

Climate demonstrators were attempting to occupy the Interior Department, with dozens entering the Stewart Lee Udall Main Interior Building on C Street NW. Those who remained outside clashed with police as they tried to keep the one unlocked door open. At times, protesters attempted to push past the police line.

There is one other element in play that looks worse for the media mavens. This attack was far more organized. Rather than a group splintering from a gathering held elsewhere, these environmentalists were in town as part of a number of organizations participating in days of protests and demonstrations. The intent to have Biden overturn a number of environmental initiatives had been expressed throughout the week and a number of facilities have been the target of protests.

[...]


Source

© Copyright Original Source

The article concludes with something dealing with the entire J6 is different because they were trying to overthrow a government claim

Source: ibid

One of the convenient dodges you see is that the supposed difference here is no one was attempting to overthrow the government, unlike the organized treason that was on display in January. One problem here; the darned FBI has all but scuttled this end of the narrative by confirming there was no organization behind the attack on the Capitol. This has not deterred the press from declaring that the fateful day in January was an Insurrection, and neither has another harsh reality — that nobody from that riot has been charged with insurrection, nor sedition.

© Copyright Original Source

1. Forgot the mandatory footnote

bf5cf61b-dc20-4a1f-855a-a48cbf5ac995.jpg

Rogue, to be honest, none of this can come close to what happened jan 6. It is just a long list of basic denial, playing up small things, and ignoring the history before and after the 6th, the lies, the incitement of months to get the crowd there and in a frame of mind that would construct a gallows, call for the execution of the vice president and speaker, the violence by thousands to get in, the preparations including zip ties to detain, protective armor, and firearms at least outside. The trauma and injury to the police.

there is so, so much denial here, i really wish i had the time to push through and try to deal with it in detail, but I probably don't.

But the bottom line is that the denials on the right that surround this event is what I would call a just so story that ignores the facts and pretends there is some plausible way this 'just happened' wo careful thought and planning, or that tries to say 'it wasnt so bad after all'. It reminds me of Sarfati trying to find some explanation for how all those lake suigetsu varves all happened to get the c14 dates for the plant material in the varves to line up with the implied annual deposition.

Yeah, you cant prove there isn't some other explanation, but really?

[Teallaura]

Typical anti-democratic rhetoric. Would you prefer a theocracy?

We don't have a democracy - we're a democratic republic. What you are not going to like is that there WILL BE election integrity (don't feel bad a lot of RINOs will feel your pain). No more cheating.

The leftist mafia are losing power. All your Orwellian cries about 'democracy' won't change that.

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE=Teallaura;n1433550]

We don't have a democracy - we're a democratic republic. What you are not going to like is that there WILL BE election integrity (don't feel bad a lot of RINOs will feel your pain). No more cheating. [/quote\

I will stand by my criticism of your anti democratic rhetoric. A democratic republic is a form of democracy.

The leftist mafia are losing power. All your Orwellian cries about 'democracy' won't change that.

You're piling your violent anarchist attitude higher and deeper with this remark. Your extreme right angry bias is more than obvious,

[Teallaura]

[QUOTE=shunyadragon;n1433555]

We don't have a democracy - we're a democratic republic. What you are not going to like is that there WILL BE election integrity (don't feel bad a lot of RINOs will feel your pain). No more cheating. [/quote/

I will stand by my criticism of your anti democratic rhetoric. A democratic republic is a form of democracy.

Nope - literally not possible. Democracy is government by the people - literally. A democratic republic is a REPUBLIC in which people elect representatives to governing bodies. A democracy doesn't ever have elections - it just makes decisions. This is why it works okay at the city-state level and fails utterly to scale up.

A democratic republic is a form of republican governance, not a form of democracy.

One of us has degrees in political science. Hint: not you.

You're piling your violent anarchist attitude higher and deeper with this remark. Your extreme right angry bias is more than obvious,

You're just mad 'cause you can't win without cheating. Hint: you'd lose in a real democracy, too. Identifiers and crazies are not exactly the same thing as being a true majority. The fact that the Democrats keep cheating is a really good indication that they already know they are in the minority.

Hint: cheaters never prosper, Oh, probably a little late for that now, huh?

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE=Teallaura;n1433577]

Nope - literally not possible. Democracy is government by the people - literally. A democratic republic is a REPUBLIC in which people elect representatives to governing bodies. A democracy doesn't ever have elections - it just makes decisions. This is why it works okay at the city-state level and fails utterly to scale up.

A democratic republic is a form of republican governance, not a form of democracy.

One of us has degrees in political science. Hint: not you.



You're just mad 'cause you can't win without cheating. Hint: you'd lose in a real democracy, too. Identifiers and crazies are not exactly the same thing as being a true majority. The fact that the Democrats keep cheating is a really good indication that they already know they are in the minority.

Hint: cheaters never prosper, Oh, probably a little late for that now, huh?

Huh? You're piling it higher and deeper.

[rogue06]

Rogue, to be honest, none of this can come close to what happened jan 6. It is just a long list of basic denial, playing up small things, and ignoring the history before and after the 6th, the lies, the incitement of months to get the crowd there and in a frame of mind that would construct a gallows, call for the execution of the vice president and speaker, the violence by thousands to get in, the preparations including zip ties to detain, protective armor, and firearms at least outside. The trauma and injury to the police.

there is so, so much denial here, i really wish i had the time to push through and try to deal with it in detail, but I probably don't.

But the bottom line is that the denials on the right that surround this event is what I would call a just so story that ignores the facts and pretends there is some plausible way this 'just happened' wo careful thought and planning, or that tries to say 'it wasnt so bad after all'. It reminds me of Sarfati trying to find some explanation for how all those lake suigetsu varves all happened to get the c14 dates for the plant material in the varves to line up with the implied annual deposition.

Yeah, you cant prove there isn't some other explanation, but really?

What you are saying can only be true if you distort what happened on J6 all out of historic proportion and minimize much worse incidents -- where attackers actually shot and some times killed people.

[Teallaura]

[QUOTE=shunyadragon;n1433579]

Huh? You're piling it higher and deeper.

Is it lonely in that delusional world of yours?

[shunyadragon]

[QUOTE=Teallaura;n1433582]

Is it lonely in that delusional world of yours?

Take off your hat and take walk in the rain.