4
1

No army of insurrectionists appeared on March 4 or any other date


735 views  26 comments             share        

by Patrick   $0.61 total tips   💰tip   follow   2021 Jul 29, 11:23am  

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/capitol-hill-conspiracies-january-6-theories/

Workers remove security fencing surrounding the US Capitol, July 2021 (Getty)
Written by:

Peter Wood

Following the Capitol Hill riot of January 6, a fair number of elected leaders — mostly Democrats — and law enforcement officials expressed their belief that an armed insurrection was in the works. Hostile forces were said to ready to attack Washington intent on overthrowing the government. To forestall this, fences topped with razor wire were installed and members of the National Guard were kept on active duty. March 4 was rumored to be the date set for this uprising.

No army of insurrectionists appeared on March 4 or any other date. Nor as far as anyone can tell was there ever a prospect for such an attack. On March 1, the razor wire was removed from one of the tall fences, but reinstalled on a shorter fence across the street, closer to the Capitol. The 2,149 National Guard troops were sent home in late May, their deployment ending officially on May 23. Between July 9 and 11, the remaining fences were removed. Yet still security at the Capitol remains tight. How much of this is prudence — and how much it for show? And if for show, how long will the show go on? Can we have an intermission?

Elaborate preparations for something that never happened and, in all likelihood, was never planned in the first place are all in a day’s (or a half a year’s) work for the US military. But it remains an interesting question of just who set in motion the preposterous idea that the danger was real. Some observers point to the bizarre cult QAnon, which has a history of announcing imaginary plots. I suspect QAnon consists of a dozen FBI agents who spend their days trolling for gullible folks who spend their days trading internet gossip. An army of revolutionary warriors QAnon is not. It’s now been alleged that some other supposedly subversive groups such as the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, along with the 14 men indicted for plotting to kidnap Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer, were organized and led by FBI agents and informants.

But it served some political leaders to pretend that the March 4 ‘storm’ that the QAnon-omists had prognosticated was an actual threat. Hyping the fantasy of the lunatic fringe that itself was probably the conjuring of overly zealous law enforcement officials seems like a strange way to advance the nation’s business. Of course, the fences, razor wire and troops might well have been intended for a purpose other than staving off the Army of the Living Deplorables.

They could have been there, for example, to sustain the panic that many members of Congress voiced immediately after the January 6 riot. Democrats especially were eager to evoke a national emergency based on the idea that Donald Trump’s bloodthirsty supporters would be back, the next time equipped with something more than outlandish costumes and hand-lettered signs. Declared emergencies are good ways to consolidate power, especially if popular support is feeling anemic. ...

The Phantom Razor Wire Rebellion, to give it a name, is a fine example of the murkiness of conspiracy accusations. ... Muirhead and Rosenblum direct withering scorn at people who entertain ideas such as the claim that the FBI spied on Trump’s 2016 campaign (Indeed it did. The FBI called it Crossfire Hurricane.) They laud Robert Mueller’s investigation of ‘a massive conspiracy to breach national security and subvert American elections’. (Oops.) They deride the idea that Democrats might engage in electoral mischief in order to gain power. In other words, what Muirhead and Rosenblum, who style themselves as champions of strict evidence-based theories, haul forth as evidence of ‘conspiracism’ on the part of Trump supporters has, in a few short years, proven to be worthless speculation. Their facts turned out to be ‘facts’, those graceless scarecrows of wishful thinking that dot the information superhighway.

... They lament the fading authority of ‘producers, editors and scholars who decided what was worthy of dissemination’, but who are now outflanked by people who write and publish on the internet without such oversight. The people who suppressed the story of Hunter Biden’s laptop will never, as long as they live, regain the public’s trust in the media. Would Fauci’s troublesome relationship with the truth be known without these outlaw observers? Or would we still be adhering to the ‘Wuhan Wet Market Bat Soup’ Theory?

... Pithy phrases such as ‘fake news’ are not, of course, fine-meshed arguments or propositions backed by sifted evidence. But that doesn’t mean they float around like helium balloons in the breeze. They invite the listener to stop and consider whether the smooth-talking journalist is sneaking suppositions into his questions, or whether his assertions have been cleverly arranged to give misleading impressions. Splicing together two different remarks by Trump to make it appear that he was calling neo-Nazis in Charlottesville ‘very fine people’ is perfect example of such ‘fake news’. Leaving it to others to discover the fakery in jazzed-up CNN or NPR stories is excellent rhetorical technique, not a failure to provide argument and evidence.

Accusations such as ‘fake news’ condense complicated matters to their bare essence. I spent some 200 pages in 1620, providing a detailed, evidence-based, and argued refutation of the New York Times’s 1619 Project. If someone merely labeled the 1619 Project ‘fake history’, he would not have been wrong — and he would not have been engaged in conspiracism. Instead he would have provided an apt phrase that might well put people on the right track. Read my book, or one of the several others that now offer detailed refutations of the 1619 Project, if you want to command the detail. But the term ‘fake history’ won’t mislead you. Nor will the term ‘fake news’ applied in the contexts in which Trump typically deployed it. ...

Today, if our republic is really at risk, it is not the disorganized and demoralized supporters of the old regime who are to be feared. It is the people who executed the head-fake on a Capitol Hill insurrection. What they are really about is a mystery — one that is not quite so baffling as UFOs, nor so tame as an Agatha Christie who-done-it. The conspiracy to watch out for is the one in which the actors declare that they will protect us, provided that we trust them. After what we have seen these last few years, we’d be fools to do so.

Comments 1 - 26 of 26   

1   Patrick   2021 Jul 29, 4:57pm  

"Insurrection" is this years "fine people" hoax.
3   Patrick   2021 Aug 1, 11:19am  

https://www.vox.com/recode/22565926/police-law-enforcement-data-warrant

If you’ve ever read a privacy policy, you may have noticed a section that says something about how your data will be shared with law enforcement, which means if the police demand it and have the necessary paperwork, they’ll likely get it. But maybe, like most American adults, you don’t read privacy policies very carefully if at all. In that case, you might be surprised to learn how much of your data is in the hands of third parties, how much access law enforcement has to it, how it might be used against you, or what your rights are — if any — to prevent it.

Many of the Capitol insurrectionists might be discovering this now, as cases against them are built with evidence taken from internet services like Facebook and Google. While they left a trail of digital evidence for investigators (and internet detectives) to follow, not all of that data was publicly available. If you read through cases of people charged with crimes relating to the events in Washington on January 6, you’ll find the FBI also obtained internal records from various social media platforms and mobile phone carriers.
7   Patrick   2021 Aug 3, 9:30am  




Hmmm, "suicide".
8   Patrick   2021 Aug 3, 9:52am  

https://nypost.com/2021/02/05/calls-for-bank-of-america-boycott-grow-after-data-given-to-fbi/


Customers are calling for a boycott of Bank of America, after a report that the bank handed over the account information of hundreds of innocent people in connection with the Jan. 6 deadly riots at the Capitol.

At the request of the FBI, the country’s second-largest bank allegedly snooped through information of anyone making certain purchases in and around Washington before and after the riots, and handed over the information of 211 people, according to Fox News’ Tucker Carlson.


Kind of like when Chase banned account of Covefe Coffee as soon as Biden was installed by Blackrock.
9   HeadSet   2021 Aug 3, 4:00pm  

Patrick says
Jan. 6 deadly riots at the Capitol.

"Deadly riots"? No honest news would phrase those protests that way.
10   RWSGFY   2021 Aug 3, 5:08pm  

HeadSet says
Patrick says
Jan. 6 deadly riots at the Capitol.

"Deadly riots"? No honest news would phrase those protests that way.


Bbbbbbut 4 Capitol police officers have killed themselves in the months after January! Allegedly.
11   richwicks   2021 Aug 3, 5:18pm  

FuckCCP89 says
HeadSet says
Patrick says
Jan. 6 deadly riots at the Capitol.

"Deadly riots"? No honest news would phrase those protests that way.


Bbbbbbut 4 Capitol police officers have killed themselves in the months after January! Allegedly.


I wonder how many other collaborators will "commit suicide"?

They could speak up though. But they do not. Because they will not, I have little sympathy for them, because they are collaborators.
12   Patrick   2021 Aug 3, 5:20pm  

Lol, true that the riot was deadly only to Ashley Babbitt, who was murdered by the US Capitol Police.

Officer Brian Sicknick died of brain blood clots caused by the jab. The Capitol Police were given the jab ahead of the public.
15   HeadSet   2021 Aug 7, 8:37am  

Reference to the above. "Parading" is just one in a string of charges, although no one has been charged with treason or insurrection.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

Many have been charges with "Using a Dangerous Weapon" but since no guns were there, I wonder just what they considered a dangerous weapon.
16   Onvacation   2021 Aug 7, 8:44am  

HeadSet says
what they considered a dangerous weapon.

Rocks and potty mouths.
17   RWSGFY   2021 Aug 7, 8:57am  

HeadSet says
I wonder just what they considered a dangerous weapon.


Pelosi's lectern or whatever it's called.
18   Patrick   2021 Aug 11, 9:21am  

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/27/liz-cheney-leading-pelosis-weaponized-jan-6-committee-tells-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-partisan-probe/


Liz Cheney Leading Pelosi’s Weaponized Jan. 6 Committee Tells All You Need To Know About The Partisan Probe
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi erased any mirage of bipartisanship when she barred House Republicans Jim Jordan of Ohio and Jim Banks of Indiana from participation.
Tristan JusticeBy Tristan Justice
JULY 27, 2021
Seven months later, Democrats have wasted no opportunity to exploit the January crisis at the U.S. Capitol, gaslighting the public at every turn to brand the riot as the “worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War,” in President Joe Biden’s words. Among the latest to perpetuate the Democrat talking point was Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, who will offer opening remarks as one of two Republicans on the January 6 committee scheduled to commence this morning.

“Congress is obligated to conduct a full investigation of the most serious attack on our Capitol since 1814,” Cheney said when tapped for the committee by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Never mind the 1954 raid by Puerto Rican nationalists who shot five congressmen, the 1983 Senate bombing by left-wing militants granted clemency by Democrats, the al-Qaeda terrorists who flew a plane into the Pentagon on 9/11, or the summer of rage last year that frequently perpetuated political violence in the nation’s capital and repeated it across the country.

In fact, the carnage in the capital last summer excused, endorsed, and encouraged by Democrats and their allies in legacy media was far worse than the riot on January 6 by nearly every metric. More than 30 people died while dozens, if not hundreds, more livelihoods went with them when businesses were destroyed, and the dollar cost far exceeded, by 66 times, the already inflated estimate of the damage to the Capitol.
20   richwicks   2021 Aug 20, 6:15pm  

Patrick says
https://ground.news/article/fbi-finds-scant-evidence-us-capitol-attack-was-coordinated-sources

FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was coordinated


The FBI couldn't find their asshole if a ball of yarn was stuck up their rectum, with a the yarn end tied to their fingers.

FIB are just fucking liars and traitors. They are not a law enforcement agency. They are a corruption enforcement agency.

The "attack" on the capital was a false flag, entirely coordinated - by the FBI. The "unindicted co-conspirators" were FBI agents and informers. The FBI staged January 6th. They are traitors to the nation.
21   Patrick   2021 Aug 20, 9:51pm  


MartyrMade
@martyrmade
7h
If it wasn't an organized plot, then there was no "insurrection." If there was no insurrection, then they've been trying to fire up a "domestic war on terror" over some trespassers and vandals.
22   Patrick   2021 Aug 20, 10:09pm  

Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
15h
"The FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of Donald Trump."

The only thing more deranged than claiming Russia had taken over control of the US through blackmail is calling January 6 an "Insurrection."
23   Ceffer   2021 Aug 20, 10:31pm  

Patrick says
The only thing more deranged than claiming Russia had taken over control of the US through blackmail is calling January 6 an "Insurrection."

LOL! Keystone False Flaggers. FBI is just dialing their crap in now.
25   AmericanKulak   2021 Oct 2, 12:47am  

Free the Justice January Peaceful Protesters!
26   Patrick   2021 Oct 2, 7:56pm  

From a reader's mail to someone else who thinks that the selfie-takers were a "coup", on which I was cc'd:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirohito_surrender_broadcast#Broadcast

THIS is a coup attempt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyūjō_incident

Now, if Trump had incited disaffected elements in the military, or a bunch of armed right-wing militia kooks, to militarily attack and take the Capital, and they had arrested/and/or shot various of the legislators, and Trump had gone on TV and made some speech announcing that he was declaring the Insurrection Act and claiming sole governing authority, and had said something like "at my command, a band of patriots has ousted the non-representative Congress who falsely acclaimed the 'stolen election'" and then maybe added that Biden and other Democrats were being arrested etc etc, then this would be a coup attempt. Especially if elements of the Armed Forces announced their support for Trump.

This is another coup attempt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_Spanish_coup_d'%C3%A9tat_attempt In addition to the armed military seizure of Congress, tanks were ordered into the streets by the Army high command in Valencia. This was a coup attempt, and the King had to intervene to stop it.

This is another coup attempt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanquetazo (the failed coup attempt in Chile before the successful Pinochet coup; loyalist elements of the Army under General Carlos Prats put it down)

so, really, this is just a bunch of hysterical bullshit by liberal Democrats to characterize the affair at the Capitol as "an attempted coup"

I say this in the interest of historical accuracy

Please register to comment:

about   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions