The Goat Pen

hedge wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 10:45 am "so the guys that signed up to take a bullet for the president are saying this eh?"

They signed on to protect the president from harm coming from someone else, not to protect themselves from the president...

semantics

If a Secret Service agent is wringing his hands over the fear of Covid, he must be out of shape or old enough to be retired.

hedge wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 10:44 am

also, if you never want to be a secret service agent, or work in any capacity for the federal government, please reach out to me to start your frivolous lawsuit

hedge wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 10:45 am "so the guys that signed up to take a bullet for the president are saying this eh?"

They signed on to protect the president from harm coming from someone else, not to protect themselves from the president...

Ed Zachary

sardis wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 11:05 am If a Secret Service agent is wringing his hands over the fear of Covid, he must be out of shape or old enough to be retired.

Either that or doesn't want his essential organs including heart reconfigured.

eCat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:09 am yes, he was absolutely brandishing a weapon- he had it in his hand and he was coming up from behind on Rittenhouse. The photo of him screaming out in pain after being shot shows him holding the gun in hand of the arm that was shot. He approached Kyle with a weapon in his hand, after Kyle was just attacked and defended himself while trying to run from the mob chasing him.

In that situation who wouldn't think that this guy - who btw, as a condition of his weapons related charge in the past was not allowed to possess a weapon yet claims he had a legal CCW - was intending to use a drawn weapon?

and no, your final statement was the start of the day actually. The end of the day was a 17 year old fighting for his life against a mob attacking him. While I fully support him facing any criminal charges related to carrying that weapon, any charges for murder, attempted murder or assault are completely bogus and politically driven in support of Antifa. Based on documents I've seen, one person he shot was a convicted pedophile who abused 5 children. I know that's not relative to the situation, but its a sad world when we hold candlelight vigils for convicted pedophiles shot while attacking a 17 year old at a riot.

What about the first person he shot?

I thought all lives mattered to you folks?

hedge wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 4:41 am I absolutely would not put it past Trump to have already known about this and then show up at the debate with the intent to yell in Biden's direction for two hours hoping to infect him. I'm actually sure that would've been his first thought if he found out about this before the debate, how can I make sure Joe gets it too? Of course, paranoid Trumpsters are already floating conspiracy theories that Biden's team deliberately infected Trump at the debate. Immediately look for somebody to blame, regardless of the situation, that's their first response to everything. It's a cornerstone of the mindset and soul of Trump's core supporters and, it goes without saying, Trump himself. It's one of the main points of attraction b/w them. As Plato said, like attracts like...

You're not the only one to think that...

Apparently the entire Trump clan arrived to the debate late -- too late to be tested by the Cleveland Clinic -- and claimed they had been tested before leaving Washington. Every one of them refused to wear masks.

DooKSucks wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 3:37 pm

eCat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:09 am yes, he was absolutely brandishing a weapon- he had it in his hand and he was coming up from behind on Rittenhouse. The photo of him screaming out in pain after being shot shows him holding the gun in hand of the arm that was shot. He approached Kyle with a weapon in his hand, after Kyle was just attacked and defended himself while trying to run from the mob chasing him.

In that situation who wouldn't think that this guy - who btw, as a condition of his weapons related charge in the past was not allowed to possess a weapon yet claims he had a legal CCW - was intending to use a drawn weapon?

and no, your final statement was the start of the day actually. The end of the day was a 17 year old fighting for his life against a mob attacking him. While I fully support him facing any criminal charges related to carrying that weapon, any charges for murder, attempted murder or assault are completely bogus and politically driven in support of Antifa. Based on documents I've seen, one person he shot was a convicted pedophile who abused 5 children. I know that's not relative to the situation, but its a sad world when we hold candlelight vigils for convicted pedophiles shot while attacking a 17 year old at a riot.

What about the first person he shot?

I thought all lives mattered to you folks?

they do, some people just need shooting

According to The Daily Beast, the criminal complaint said Rittenhouse was walking down a street in Kenosha at about 11:45 p.m. alongside the Daily Caller reporter when Rosenbaum approached and tried to "engage" Rittenhouse, who was armed with a rifle.

Investigators said videos they reviewed showed that Rosenbaum, who appeared to be unarmed, chased Rittenhouse as he ran across a parking lot and threw something at him.

"The object does not hit [Rittenhouse] and a second video shows, based on where the object landed, that it was a plastic bag," the complaint said, according to The Daily Beast.

Shortly after, the complaint said, a loud bang can be heard and a man shouts "F--- you!" Another four shots can be heard, and Rosenbaum falls to the ground, it said.

The Daily Caller reporter told investigators that he didn't hear the two exchange words but that he thought Rosenbaum was trying to grab Rittenhouse's gun when the teen fired.


the common theme here is that Antifa thugs thought they could intimidate and chase a teen who was armed when they should have left him alone. Had they made that choice, they'd be alive throwing Molotov cocktails today. In all 3 cases, Rittenhouse was trying to run away from these Darwin award winners.

On the last Sunday in May, Jeremy Lee Quinn, a furloughed photographer in Santa Monica, Calif., was snapping photos of suburban moms kneeling at a Black Lives Matter protest when a friend alerted him to a more dramatic subject: looting at a shoe store about a mile away.

He arrived to find young people pouring out of the store, shoe boxes under their arms. But there was something odd about the scene. A group of men, dressed entirely in black, milled around nearby, like supervisors. One wore a creepy rubber Halloween mask.

The next day, Mr. Quinn took pictures of another store being looted. Again, he noticed something strange. A white man, clad in black, had broken the window with a crowbar, but walked away without taking a thing.

Mr. Quinn began studying footage of looting from around the country and saw the same black outfits and, in some cases, the same masks. He decided to go to a protest dressed like that himself, to figure out what was really going on. He expected to find white supremacists who wanted to help re-elect President Trump by stoking fear of Black people. What he discovered instead were true believers in “insurrectionary anarchism.”

To better understand them, Mr. Quinn, a 40-something theater student who worked at Univision until the pandemic, has spent the past four months marching with “black bloc” anarchists in half a dozen cities across the country, chronicling the experience on his website, Public Report.

He says he respects the idealistic goal of a hierarchy-free society that anarchists embrace, but grew increasingly uncomfortable with the tactics used by some anarchists, which he feared would set off a backlash that could help get President Trump re-elected. In Portland, Ore., he marched with people who shot fireworks at the federal court building. In Washington, he marched with protesters who harassed diners.

Mr. Quinn discovered a thorny truth about the mayhem that unfolded in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd, an unarmed Black man in Minneapolis. It wasn’t mayhem at all.

While talking heads on television routinely described it as a spontaneous eruption of anger at racial injustice, it was strategically planned, facilitated and advertised on social media by anarchists who believed that their actions advanced the cause of racial justice. In some cities, they were a fringe element, quickly expelled by peaceful organizers. But in Washington, Portland and Seattle they have attracted a “cultlike energy,” Mr. Quinn told me.

Don’t take just Mr. Quinn’s word for it. Take the word of the anarchists themselves, who lay out the strategy in Crimethinc, an anarchist publication: Black-clad figures break windows, set fires, vandalize police cars, then melt back into the crowd of peaceful protesters. When the police respond by brutalizing innocent demonstrators with tear gas, rubber bullets and rough arrests, the public’s disdain for law enforcement grows. It’s Asymmetric Warfare 101.

An anarchist podcast called “The Ex-Worker” explains that while some anarchists believe in pacifist civil disobedience inspired by Mohandas Gandhi, others advocate using crimes like arson and shoplifting to wear down the capitalist system. According to “The Ex-Worker,” the term “insurrectionary anarchist” dates back at least to the Spanish Civil War and its aftermath, when opponents of the fascist leader Francisco Franco took “direct action” against his regime, including assassinating policemen and robbing banks.

If that is not enough to convince you that there’s a method to the madness, check out the new report by Rutgers researchers that documents the “systematic, online mobilization of violence that was planned, coordinated (in real time) and celebrated by explicitly violent anarcho-socialist networks that rode on the coattails of peaceful protest,” according to its co-author Pamela Paresky. She said some anarchist social media accounts had grown 300-fold since May, to hundreds of thousands of followers.

“The ability to continue to spread and to eventually bring more violence, including a violent insurgency, relies on the ability to hide in plain sight — to be confused with legitimate protests, and for media and the public to minimize the threat,” Dr. Paresky told me.

Her report will almost certainly catch the attention of conservative media and William Barr’s Department of Justice, which recently declared New York, Portland and Seattle “anarchist jurisdictions,” a widely mocked designation accompanied by the threat of withholding federal funds.

There’s an even thornier truth that few people seem to want to talk about: Anarchy got results.

Don’t get me wrong. My heart broke for the people in Minneapolis who lost buildings to arson and looting. Migizi, a Native American nonprofit in Minneapolis, raised more than $1 million to buy and renovate a place where Native American teenagers could learn about their culture — only to watch it go up in flames, alongside dozens of others, including a police station. It can take years to build a building — and only one night to burn it down.

And yet, I had to admit that the scale of destruction caught the media’s attention in a way that peaceful protests hadn’t. How many articles would I have written about a peaceful march? How many months would Mr. Quinn have spent investigating suburban moms kneeling? That’s on us.

While I feared that the looting and arson would derail the urgent demands for racial justice and bring condemnation, I was wrong, at least in the short term. Support for Black Lives Matter soared. Corporations opened their wallets. It was as if the nation rallied behind peaceful Black organizers after it saw the alternative, like whites who flocked to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. after they got a glimpse of Malcolm X.

But as the protests continue, support has flagged. The percentage of people who say they support the Black Lives Matter movement has dropped from 67 percent in June to 55 percent, according to a recent Pew poll.

“Insurrectionary anarchy” brings diminishing returns, especially as anarchists complicate life for those working within the system to halt police violence.

In Louisville, Ky., Attica Scott, a Black state representative who sponsored a police reform bill, was arrested last week and charged with felony rioting after someone threw a road flare inside a library.

In Portland, Jo Ann Hardesty, an activist turned city councilor, has pushed for the creation of a pilot program of unarmed street responders to handle mental illness and homelessness, a practical step to help protect populations that experience violence at the hands of police. Yet Ms. Hardesty is shouted down at protests by anarchists who want to abolish the police, not merely reform or defund them.

“As a Black woman who has been working on this for 30 years, to have young white activists who have just discovered that Black lives matter yelling at me that I’m not doing enough for Black people — it’s kind of ironic, is what it is,” Ms. Hardesty told me.

In Seattle, Andrè Taylor, a Black man who lost his brother to police violence in 2016, helped change state law that made it nearly impossible to prosecute officers for killing civilians. But he has been branded a “pig cop” by young anarchists because his nonprofit organization receives funds from the city, and because he cooperates with the police.

“When they say, ‘You are working with the police,’ I say, ‘I have worked with police and I will continue to work for reform,’” Mr. Taylor told me. “Remember, I lost a brother.”

"Black people get shot for doing ordinary law-abiding things." They don’t have the luxury of anarchy, he told me.

That’s the thing about “insurrectionary anarchists.” They make fickle allies. If they help you get into power, they will try to oust you the following day, since power is what they are against. Many of them don’t even vote. They are experts at unraveling an old order but considerably less skilled at building a new one. That’s why, even after more than 100 days of protest in Portland, activists do not agree on a set of common policy goals.Even some anarchists admit as much.

read the whole article

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/opin ... atter.html

“We are not sure if the socialist, communist, democratic or even anarchist utopia is possible,” a voice on “The Ex-Worker” podcast intones. “Rather, some insurrectionary anarchists believe that the meaning of being an anarchist lies in the struggle itself and what that struggle reveals.”

In other words, it’s not really about George Floyd or Black lives, but insurrection for insurrection’s sake.

Saying Antifa still cracks me up. Sorta like saying Boogieman

eCat wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 4:02 pm

DooKSucks wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 3:37 pm

eCat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:09 am yes, he was absolutely brandishing a weapon- he had it in his hand and he was coming up from behind on Rittenhouse. The photo of him screaming out in pain after being shot shows him holding the gun in hand of the arm that was shot. He approached Kyle with a weapon in his hand, after Kyle was just attacked and defended himself while trying to run from the mob chasing him.

In that situation who wouldn't think that this guy - who btw, as a condition of his weapons related charge in the past was not allowed to possess a weapon yet claims he had a legal CCW - was intending to use a drawn weapon?

and no, your final statement was the start of the day actually. The end of the day was a 17 year old fighting for his life against a mob attacking him. While I fully support him facing any criminal charges related to carrying that weapon, any charges for murder, attempted murder or assault are completely bogus and politically driven in support of Antifa. Based on documents I've seen, one person he shot was a convicted pedophile who abused 5 children. I know that's not relative to the situation, but its a sad world when we hold candlelight vigils for convicted pedophiles shot while attacking a 17 year old at a riot.

What about the first person he shot?

I thought all lives mattered to you folks?

they do, some people just need shooting

According to The Daily Beast, the criminal complaint said Rittenhouse was walking down a street in Kenosha at about 11:45 p.m. alongside the Daily Caller reporter when Rosenbaum approached and tried to "engage" Rittenhouse, who was armed with a rifle.

Investigators said videos they reviewed showed that Rosenbaum, who appeared to be unarmed, chased Rittenhouse as he ran across a parking lot and threw something at him.

"The object does not hit [Rittenhouse] and a second video shows, based on where the object landed, that it was a plastic bag," the complaint said, according to The Daily Beast.

Shortly after, the complaint said, a loud bang can be heard and a man shouts "F--- you!" Another four shots can be heard, and Rosenbaum falls to the ground, it said.

The Daily Caller reporter told investigators that he didn't hear the two exchange words but that he thought Rosenbaum was trying to grab Rittenhouse's gun when the teen fired.


the common theme here is that Antifa thugs thought they could intimidate and chase a teen who was armed when they should have left him alone. Had they made that choice, they'd be alive throwing Molotov cocktails today. In all 3 cases, Rittenhouse was trying to run away from these Darwin award winners.

Ah....A jury isn't going to buy self defense when the guy was unarmed. At best, he's looking at manslaughter with an imperfect self defense argument, but you can -- and usually -- use circumstantial evidence to establish the mental state and the deliberation needed to show premeditation. I wonder (1) what this doofus' social media shows, and (2)(a) did they get a warrant to access the phone / (2)(b) can they get into the phone?

I wouldn't throw mom out of the equation yet. She will most certainly be a co-defendant in a civil suit if the plaintiff's attorney has half of a brain, and given that she transported the minor across state lines with a firearm that the child was not allowed to possess in either state, I wonder what criminal liability she is facing.

Had a person of color or leftist done this, the right would be up in arms, and don't hand me this bullshit about not seeing right wingers raise hell and riot. We saw Charlottesville. We saw the extreme right trying to agitate protests by trying to blending into the protestors and inciting the crowds, and we saw the extreme right cause issues by "confronting" protestors and "protecting property" like this kid.

If you're so damn pro law enforcement, allow the trained individuals -- the guys in blue you claim to support -- to do the job for which they are trained / sworn to do. Citizens acting like vigilantes or para-military does nothing but make situations worse.

you can't when a liberal mayor tells the police to stand down. When these "protestors" are burning , looting and dedicated to anarchy, taking over city blocks , rioting night after night.

I do agree that citizens acting like vigilantes is a bad decision, but a worse decision is standing back and letting anarchist burn a city and take peoples livelihoods in the name of social justice.

and a jury - a jury of peers and not nutjob liberals is absolutely going to buy self defense when an adult male rioter is chasing a 17 year old trying to defend a local business from being burned.

you've gone from defending the "paramedic" who turned out to armed and waving his gun around to defending the convicted pedophile in your justification to lock up a kid who was fleeing in each case to keep from being attacked by a mob.

Why he was there is no more relevant than why those 3 other men were there. It was a riot. Your argument is he wouldn't have been attacked had he not been there , as if attacking someone is acceptable in that situation or participating in a riot is basic right that shouldn't be infringed by the idea of protecting property or defending yourself against aggression. And your analogy of person of color works both ways. If he was a fellow rioter, there to burn and loot instead of protect, then no one on the left would be up in arms about this, it would be anarchists turning on each other during a riot, nothing to see here, move on. Because he had the nerve to stand his ground against people intent on doing harm, he is a vigilante.

Lets take the gun out of the situation, lets says the 17 year old had a Louisviille slugger and crushed the skull of men who were attacking him. Now that evens the sides up a bit - guy wailing on him with a skateboard, fake paramedic carrying a pistol, convicted pedophile chasing after him because he dared to tell him not to loot a local business. This kid just chose a more lethal form of protection, and whether he intended to shoot someone that night is irrelevant, he was confronted and attacked multiple times. What the attackers didn't realize is that a nerdy looking kid who looks like he should be playing dungeons and dragons isn't an easy target when he has an AR-15.

Rittenhouse should be the poster boy for the second amendment, and the reason why we should be able to purchase assault weapons.

The law may say he couldn't carry an assault rifle but it sure looked like he needed one that night to me. He is alive today because of it.

He should have took his ass whooping like a man instead of the pussy he is. It still makes me laugh when everything is blamed on Democrats and people keep comparing rioters to protesters. The Republicans last chance in the election is by creating an unreasonable fear.

Oh yeah. And another unarmed black man, well respected in his community, was shot dead by another white racist cop while trying to stop a domestic violence attack. At least the DA in this situation did the right thing right away and defused the situation. Unlike the coverup bullshit that is still going on in Louisville.

Sure is quiet around here. I guess reality finally set in after todays events. Don't help any struggling Americans until I am elected. Holy fuck. He just basically lost the election.

I'm sure we'll be hearing from the doctors soon on how he wasn't himself. The covid meds made him act this way. Heh. Not like he hasn't acted this way forever or anything.

The year is 2020, and Rat is a voice of reason.

I'm here for all of you in this time of despair and crisis.

Brought on by a man who never ever should have even been considered for office

Rittenhouse needs to kill Trump before we're all in the poorhouse. Well, I already am but I don't want you fuckers to join me.

"President Trump Authorizes Total Declassification of All Documents Related to Spygate, Hillary Email Scandal – WITH NO REDACTIONS"

this will be fun for awhile

3 years of listening to this bullshit and then this comes out

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe declassified documents that revealed former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s purported “plan” to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server” ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

The remainder of the notes are redacted, except in the margins, which reads: “JC,” “Denis,” and “Susan."

The notes don't spell out the full names but "JC" could be referring to then-FBI Director James Comey, "Susan" could refer to National Security Adviser Susan Rice, and "Denis" could refer to then-Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough.

that explains James Comey suddenly getting forgetful after his press tour and book release on the subject.

“You don’t remember getting an investigatory lead from the intelligence community? Sept. 7, 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to James Comey and Strzok regarding Clinton’s approval of a plan [about] Trump…as a means of distraction?” Graham asked Comey.

what a self righteous rotten son of a bitch he is.

“That doesn’t ring any bells with me,” Comey said.

and every liberal wonk bit it from 2016 to now full bore.