Trump's Second Term

Shrinker said:
All this talk of people being killed in their Teslas and killed at showrooms is meant to manifest in the minds of his moron followers the idea that people have been killed, without ever having to say it. A viewer might think they missed the news about somebody being killed and then agree with with all this 'terrorist' and 'death penalty' rhetoric. He may be a moron in some regards, but he's a very cunning liar and what he's doing is very effective.
Click to expand...
Maybe one of his handlers told him someone was killed or he's conflating people killed in Tesla accidents and fires previously.

He probably thinks it's true anyway
 
Two months ago, Enrique Tarrio and other men and women convicted over their roles in the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, were behind bars, serving lengthy sentences.

Now the group, dubbed J6 hostages by US President Donald Trump, are free, and they’re suing the US government, claiming they were mistreated by federal agencies including the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Prisons.


In an exclusive interview with 60 Minutes, Tarrio, leader of the far-right Proud Boys, says he’s determined to seek retribution.

“The people that did this to us need to be investigated,” he says. “We’re suing them for multiple reasons, and the main reason is violation of civil rights.”

In May 2023, a federal jury found Tarrio guilty of multiple felonies for his actions before and during the breach of the Capitol.
Click to expand...

www.theage.com.au

‘Violation of civil rights’: Emboldened by Trump, US Capitol rioters seek retribution

Not content with being released from prison, Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and others charged over the January 6 riots are determined to prove they are the victims.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au

Oh, great.
 
bruto said:
Mind you, I also agree with Stacy that comparing this to the actual terrorism, treason and personal injury of the Capitol riots is stupid, excessive and wrong, and of course that did result in one death, of a terrorist not a heroine. But realizing that something is not as bad does not make it good.
Click to expand...
It's probably worth a small reminder that Ashli Babbitt was not the only one who died in connection to the Jan 6 riots, just the one who likely earned it the most and deserves the least sympathy. There were also 2 heart attack deaths and an overdose death among Trump's mob and little to no chance of medical attention because of the rioting. Further, police officer Brian Sicknick died of a stroke a couple hours after, almost certainly directly related to actions of the rioters. More indirectly, 4 police officers committed suicide in relation to the riot. Not to delve into this deeply, but given how suicide works, it's unlikely that Jan 6 would have been the only major factor at hand, but that doesn't do much to diminish the fact that chances are decent that they wouldn't have committed suicide without it being added to the pile.
 
Aridas said:
It's probably worth a small reminder that Ashli Babbitt was not the only one who died in connection to the Jan 6 riots, just the one who likely earned it the most and deserves the least sympathy. There were also 2 heart attack deaths and an overdose death among Trump's mob and little to no chance of medical attention because of the rioting. Further, police officer Brian Sicknick died of a stroke a couple hours after, almost certainly directly related to actions of the rioters. More indirectly, 4 police officers committed suicide in relation to the riot. Not to delve into this deeply, but given how suicide works, it's unlikely that Jan 6 would have been the only major factor at hand, but that doesn't do much to diminish the fact that chances are decent that they wouldn't have committed suicide without it being added to the pile.
Click to expand...
True enough, and no doubt I was being excessively kind or cautious. Without any partisanship, extrapolation or even basic in-your-face fact, Trump's statement was characteristically false, stupid and misleading. But then, what else to expect?

I am reminded of another thread, in which our erstwhile prophet "Partskeptic" predicts a die off and downfall, because too few people follow his regimen of quack medicine, magical thinking and far-right politics. And yet, in a bizarre and inverted way, his prophecy may come true for all the opposite reasons. There's an old expression "Herostratic fame," based on the story of a person so notoriously bad it was forbidden to say his name. Of course the importance of this made his name and his crime (he burned down a temple just to become well known) last forever.

I forecast that some time in the future, people will understand when you call a statement or an action a trumpism, as they do now for a spoonerism, or a "Kafkaesque" absurdity or an Orwellian nightmare state, and Trump, by then long dead, will be famous after all, not for his great deeds, but as an eponym for his failings.
 
Hercules56 said:
Subpoenas from the House? Certainly
They will start impeachment hearings of Judges that rule against Trump so as to start it intimidation campaign.
Click to expand...
Oh please they can go a lot further than that. A judge with a non-WASP name? 'Accidentally' have them rounded up by ICE.
 
Who needs laws or courts to enforce them?

Homan on a judge blocking Trump's rendition flights to a slave prison in El Salvador: "I don't care what that judge thinks as far as this case. We're gonna continue to arrest public safety threats, national security threats. We're gonna continue to deport them."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1903825619994972442
 
bruto said:
The tea tax was a specific issue. The Tesla is symbolic. I certainly hate Musk and would not want to buy a Tesla.
Click to expand...
Tesla is not symbolic.

Musk uses his wealth to primary challenge any Republican who defies him. $50 million to flip from a GOP with a spine to a GOP who follows Musk's lead is nothing to him.

So hitting his wealth has real impact. Real, not symbolic. Taking his money away takes his influence away. This is how we fight the oligarchy - by targeting their wealth.

There is no symbolism in going after Tesla locations. It is real world practicality, reducing consumer demand for his products and destroying his wealth so that he cannot buy primaries or any other elections and offices.
 
bruto said:
I'm not convinced the Boston Tea Party is comparable, and not just because things have changed in two hundred years. The tea tax was a specific issue. The Tesla is symbolic. I certainly hate Musk and would not want to buy a Tesla. But targeted property damage of this sort is likely to have a contrary effect, and risks collateral damage that is not acceptable, such as accidentally killing someone or burning more than you intended, and though it might constitute a public gesture, its harm to Musk is essentially nil.

Mind you, I also agree with Stacy that comparing this to the actual terrorism, treason and personal injury of the Capitol riots is stupid, excessive and wrong, and of course that did result in one death, of a terrorist not a heroine. But realizing that something is not as bad does not make it good.
Click to expand...
I also think of the people who might lose their jobs. Do the arsonists compensate the employees who no longer have a job to go to because their workplace literally burned down? I get that Teslas are indeed a symbol of fascism at this point, and I have no love for the company, but it's one thing to vandalize or burn Teslas at a dealership or deface the premises with grafitti, but literally burning it down? Same basic objection I have to shaming and review-bombing the workplaces of people who do terrible things (be them employees or bosses). I seem to remember a story about a dentist's office (?) where the business, and thus employees, suffered because there were protests outside or whatever, because the boss had done or said something terrible. Probably feels gratifying in the moment, but it hurts not just the person targetted but also everyone else who works there.

And no, anyone who's an actual adult with more than minimal life experience knows that you can't neccessarily 'just quit' Tesla and go work for someone more ethical. Job hunting can take a long time and there may not even be openings. Lots of people don't have money saved up for the transition period, or they may depend on the health insurance provided by their job.
 
To add to my post of a few minutes ago:

Yesterday there was a little protest at a Tesla location in Littleton, Colorado (a suburb of Denver). I wasn't there, but I have been to protests at a different location.

Anyway, people who were there yesterday counted seven police cars at that location. They made a few phone calls and determined that the police presence was paid for by Tesla. In the U.S. (depending upon the city you live in) you can often hire real police to work as private security, in which they are allowed to wear their regular uniforms and sometimes regular police vehicles as well: that's what Tesla did. It's perfectly legal, but you have to pay for it.

Which means those cops were not free. The locations often close during protests, even if (as has been the case with the weekly protests in Colorado), there is no trespassing, no sit-ins, no vandalism or destruction of any kind. Just people on public sidewalks with signs and slogans, not blocking any access or traffic or anything. So low key that permits are not required. Even that little level of action can shut down a shop for a day and require purchase of the services of a half dozen cops for the day, along with their vehicles.

Now imagine that at nearly every Tesla location nationwide.

That hurts Tesla's bottom line, which in turn hurts Musk's ability to buy seats in congress via mass election spending. That matters, and it isn't just symbolic.

ETA: Attempted assault (or even murder) at a Tesla protest in Florida. A man drove an SUV into the protest group. No injuries and he claims it was an accident. :rolleyes:

Protesters denounce Musk, DOGE outside Tesla showroom​

(The headline completely fails to mention the assault attempt, but it is in the first paragraph of the article)
 
Last edited:
Andy_Ross said:
Who needs laws or courts to enforce them?

Homan on a judge blocking Trump's rendition flights to a slave prison in El Salvador: "I don't care what that judge thinks as far as this case. We're gonna continue to arrest public safety threats, national security threats. We're gonna continue to deport them."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1903825619994972442
Click to expand...
I wonder how long it will be before we hear this:

"I don't care what that judge thinks as far as this case. We're gonna continue to shoot public safety threats, national security threats. We're gonna continue to extrajudicially kill them."
 
Common Dreams reported, "On Saturday, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows wrote on Bluesky: "Can confirm 'state of Maine' hasn't apologized. (As the official keeper of all state records and guardian of the seal ;))." Jonathan Ladd, an associate professor at Georgetown University's public policy school, wrote that "Trump is constitutionally required to take care that U.S. laws be faithfully executed. On what legal basis can he treat the people of Maine differently depending on if their governor apologizes to him? None."" The legal points are above my pay grade, but from the cheap seats, it does seem like there is selectivity in who is getting hit with various sanctions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom