Information Warfare Education, Propaganda, and How to Tell the Difference

Meh, you’ve accused me of devaluing or even dismissing the Constitution dozens of times in these threads. At least I’ve offered a substantive reason why I think you may have been projecting that claim onto me the whole time :wink:

What do you call it, the 3rd Person God view? Very authoritative, incredibly judgemental and dismissive, and full on dialog killer.

If it’s a “dialogue killer” for you, it’s because you chose not to be informed about the facts from the very beginning, despite originally insisting to me that you were going to watch. It seems your info terrain convinced you not to.

And that’s kind of the thing – the developmental analysis I offered to you was tracking responses among people who actually watched the hearing. Because you are consciously deciding to ignore the evidence — yes, 3rd-person objective evidence — you aren’t really in a position to criticize that analysis one way or the other. You simply are not qualified to comment on this analysis one way or the other, because you refused to perform the necessary injunction (look carefully at the evidence). You are like the Church insisting Galileo is wrong about the moons of Jupiter, while refusing to look through the telescope for themselves :slight_smile:

By the way, you know what a “conversation killer” is? Refusing to look at evidence (after clearly stating that you would), calling the hearings a “clown circus”, and trying to shut down my views. Sounds pretty authoritative, judgmental, and dismissive of you. Once again, you are accusing me of violating standards you yourself refuse to live up to. Same kind of “rules for thee, not for me!” game I was just describing in terms of the Constitution :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

I’m not the only person that’s pointed this out. Just drop a 3 page Integral-splain and watch the dialog die. Perhaps that’s your intent.

You asked me for an “Integral-splain”, and then when I offered one, you accuse me of trying to use integral to kill the dialogue. Neat trick!

It comes across as an anti-discourse for you to want to roto-root those you don’t agree with (GOP, MAGA, Qanon, Trump,…),

It’s funny you say that, because I specifically mentioned white-hat Republicans that we should collectively be celebrating.

Since you worked in a lower case integral, I assume you’re not specifically referring to Integral Theory in the vein of Ken Wilber.

Huh? No, Ken has laid out these stages very clearly in his Integral Theory. And I made clear several times that my analysis was a product of my own view.

It is interesting that in 4 of 5 scenarios, the only actor(s) you mention are the GOP even while today the Democrats control of the Senate, House, Whitehouse and Administrative State.

I’m pretty sure I mentioned the DOJ in most of those.

They are well written to appeal to your chosen audience.

No, this was written in response to you. Who I suppose is my “chosen audience” right now. But thank you for the compliment, I may fold this into a larger presentation/discussion for our supporting members.

If you really wanted to think multi-perspectively you might practice dropping that condemnation and judgement. Usually your words belie your thinking - and it’s clear you have no interest in finding any common ground with the upcoming “red wave”.

Just so I understand, it’s okay for you to use “condemnation and judgment” when you are talking about the left, LGBTQ, Marxist collectivists, etc. — but there’s no room for such a thing when criticizing Trump’s illegal attempt to extinguish our democracy. I don’t know man, it looks to me like you are trying to rig the discourse here.

But yes, it’s true. I don’t have a lot of room for moral relativism when it comes to the question “should a sitting President be allowed to declare himself the winner of an election he objectively lost”. I ABSOLUTELY condemn and hold judgment over Presidents who would attempt such a blatantly corrupt and anti-American action, and political parties who try to excuse or cover for those actions.

It’s absolutely insane to me that this itself does not itself create the “shared reality”. Presidents should not be able to override the voters and declare themselves winner. It’s pretty much American Civics 101. There was a time not long ago when both the right and the left would have easily united around that very basic, core principle of our democracy. There is zero plausible deniability here.

I also don’t have a lot of room for relativism when it comes to issues like rape, political assassinations, purposeful environmental degradation, etc. When it comes to the question, “should we keep having a democracy, or should we become a one-party fascist state”, surprise surprise, I am a bit of an absolutist. My inner amber really comes out. My own interior conservative values get flared up, particularly when it comes to things like “sanctity”.

I also don’t make a lot of room for perspectives that are intentionally avoiding the objective facts of the case, so they can continue to hide behind a veil of plausible deniability, which I see as a coping mechanism to avoid the sort of cognitive dissonance I described above.

the GOP will likely fragment into Right, Right Center and Left Center factions to incorporate all of the US.

One of the very best things that could happen in this country is to eliminate first past the post voting, which would allow both the GOP and the DNC to splinter into their respective factions. Until then, it’s winner-take-all, so that simply cannot/will not happen.

delay in Ukraine support

I think Trump was already impeached for that :wink:

Outrage noted. So what do you recommend the Democrats do to quench their self immolation? Maybe drop the Intersectionality Marxism? Just a thought.

Creating a living Martyr… They may get Bad Orange Man this time, then what?

Here’s a real interview with AG Barr. Fast forward to 44:00 for a few minutes setup then direct address of incitement to riot.

But lets say Liz and Co do nail Trump, then what Corey?

I’ve already agreed that your scenarios are pretty good ones. And 4 of 5 were all a bunch of whining about “those people” that you’re so morally indignant about. And #5 was the classic Leftist “got no clue” unintended consequences scenario.

You’re oh so mightily indignant about Trump, MAGAsters, your fictitious Qanoners, and the 10M’s of Proud Boys roving the nation. All of which you HAVE NO INFLUENCE.

Seriously, WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND THE LEFTISTS DO?

@corey-devos. Dude, this is a general info/propaganda thread. Seems you’ve got some very deep points to make. Why not kick off a Jan 6 thread?

Have we heard anything new yet? Anything indictable yet?

So what do you recommend the Democrats do to quench their self immolation? Maybe drop the Intersectionality Marxism?

As you know, I have criticized the extremes and excesses of the Left many, many times throughout these threads, and throughout the content I produce. And yet I am still left wondering why you are apparently unable to criticize the faction of your own party that literally attempted to undermine our democracy and our Constitution and declare themselves the winner of a Presidential election.

You’re oh so mightily indignant about Trump, MAGAsters, your fictitious Qanoners, and the 10M’s of Proud Boys roving the nation. All of which you HAVE NO INFLUENCE.

Interesting. Couldn’t I say the same about you and all those hordes of Marxists, Wokists, and Collectivists who are roaming the country and burning our cities to the ground? Are you again trying to hold me to some imaginary standard that you yourself refuse to live up to?

They may get Bad Orange Man this time, then what?
But lets say Liz and Co do nail Trump, then what Corey?

Good question! Hopefully something like the following:

  • Establish a very strong and clear precedent that any future attempts to dismantle our democracy, steal an election, and undermine our Constitution will be met with the harshest possible punishment, because the risk needs to far, far outweigh the reward.

  • Use this attack on our Constitution as an opportunity to regenerate and rehabilitate unity in this country, similar to what naturally happened after the 911 attack.

  • Give the GOP an opportunity to drive extremism and Trump/MAGA malignancy out of its party.

  • Give the DNC an opportunity to drive extremism and illiberal malignancy out of its party.

  • Re-establish the notion of “loyal opposition” and eliminate the “I hate the left/right more than I love this country” mentality that has become so prevalent in our culture. For example, I may disagree with 99% of Pence’s personal and political worldview, but I very much see him as an American hero who should be celebrated for refusing to go along with Trump and his crackpot lawyer’s plan to steal the election. Same with Cheney, and I continue to think it’s ridiculous that she was excommunicated from your party simply because she is courageous enough to support an investigation that might hurt Trump. This, to me, is demonstrative of total party-wide cowardice, which is a quality I typically associate with the left in the past.

  • Harden the institutions, basically following conservative judge Michael Luttig’s suggestions during yesterday’s hearing.

  • Incentivize the GOP and the DNC to re-establish the sanctity and legitimacy of our Constitutional institutions, as intended and designed by our Founders. Make the implicit explicit, so that Biden can’t use made-up lies about election fraud to force Kamala Harris to personally decide the winner of the 2024 election.

  • Create bi-partisan efforts to eliminate extremism and radicalization wherever we find it, whether it’s in our own party or in the other’s. Find the courage to stand up for what’s right, to stand up for the Constitution itself, even if that hurts us in the short term within our winner-take-all political system.

  • Recognize and readjust the media/informational paradigms that are generating so many routes to extremism in the first place.

WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND THE LEFTISTS DO

Remind people that they are the only major political party in the country who has not attempted to blatantly and illegally undermine and overthrow our Constitutional democracy. And maybe try to get a handle on this whole inflation thing if they want any chance at all of maintaining any semblance of power.

Dude, this is a general info/propaganda thread.

Yes, and disinfo/propaganda is precisely what enabled the failed coup of Jan 6 to occur, and is what is now preventing many people from watching these hearings and taking in the evidence. Case in point, just last week you told me, “Have no fear that ‘people that really need to see this won’t watch’ isn’t the case for me. I’m not convinced, but at least questioning whether you were right all this time.” And yet, somehow over this past week you apparently made a 180 degree turn.

Besides, this has kinda become a political catch-all thread, hasn’t it?

That said, yeah, maybe I will start a new thread. Perhaps it should be limited only to people who have watched the hearings for themselves! We want informed discussions, after all.

I watched day one of the made-for-tv hearings and simply don’t find it OMG riveting enough to watch. As we’ve discussed many times, the Democrats are “on the job” with the full force of the United States Goverment.
Remember that you have me pegged as a White Nationalist Literal Mythic. You know, one of “those people” that’s worshipping at the Alter of the Personality Cult. Lol.
So why are you continually confused that I am willing to wait and see if the Democrats can get Trump on this glorious Impeachment 3.0 attempt?
Or are you just venting your frustrations?

Is the fundamental issue that now that the Progressive agendas are exposed to everyone you’re not seeing the adulation expected?
Climate Change is the most critical issue humanity has ever faced. We bought it and put Progressives in power. Now the young Navajo couple can’t afford to take their child to see grandma, buy baby formula, and drive to work.
Their nephew can’t afford to drive to the community college. Does he drop out now?

And all the while YOU KNOW that your Zero Carbin initiative is about grabbing power and control AT ANY COST. It worked - Progressives won it all and see what that did for us. So what if this agenda destroys the lives, it’s worth it, right?

So instead of getting nitpicky over whether I’m watching the Liz Show, why don’t we discuss how we can come together to make the world a better place?

Why are seemingly are we looking at a Red Wave?
Why will the Progressives not compromise? They are delivering on unification.

I couldn’t find a Pelosi/Trump Cage Match Meme, but this ones close.

I believe it was already after the first hearing that you said you planned on watching the whole thing. Was it something in your info terrain that convinced you to stop watching, at some point between your comment to me and the second hearing?

Either way, it shows you are unwilling to look at the evidence that conclusively shows Trump knew what he was doing was illegal, and he did it anyway. If you actually cared enough to look at the evidence you would know this isn’t the “Liz show”, this is the “administration insiders testifying against Trump and exposing his crimes” show. Calling it the “Liz Show” is yet another poor effort to distract and minimize. Because again, there is no principle in this stance, only political games.

But I get it — the evidence kills all plausible deniability, and that plausible deniability is the only thing preventing total cognitive dissonance.

Apparently you think it will be okay for Biden to make up lies about the 2024 election, and then force Kamala to call it for the Dems. Who knows, maybe Biden and company will start fighting dirty like your boy Trump!

Remember that you have me pegged as a White Nationalist Literal Mythic. You know, one of “those people” that’s worshipping at the Alter of the Personality Cult. Lol.

I do believe you are straw manning me once again and putting words in my mouth I never said. When did I ever call you a “white nationalist literal mythic”?

So why are you continually confused that I am willing to wait and see if the Democrats can get Trump on this glorious Impeachment 3.0 attempt?

Because the truth about Trump’s attempted overthrow of the Constitution is more important than the political games, but that is all you want to play. Which indicates to me that there are no genuine principles behind your stance, just more team sports. Win at any cost!

Is the fundamental issue that now that the Progressive agendas are exposed to everyone you’re not seeing the adulation expected?

No the fundamental issue is your hypocrisy when you try to call me out for things you regularly do. You want license to be as authoritative, judgmental, and dismissive as you want when it comes to the Left as a whole, but you cannot tolerate my criticism of a President who deliberately tried to overthrow the Constitution, and knew what he was doing was illegal. (I thought the left were supposed to be the snowflakes!) And yes, it is staggering to me that you simply do not care about this, after all your previous bloviating about how much the left (and myself personally) hates the Constitution, and only the GOP is trying to defend it. Which has now been disproven beyond all reasonable doubt.

And all the while YOU KNOW that your Zero Carbin initiative is about grabbing power and control AT ANY COST. It worked

LOL you think the left was voted in because of climate change? I wish that was true. If it was, the progressives like Bernie probably would have won instead of Biden, we would see some actual legislation, and our little Navajo bro would have access to free community college :slight_smile:

why don’t we discuss how we can come together to make the world a better place?

Cool! We can start by gathering enough courage to hold Trump accountable for trying to dismantle our Constitutional democracy. That will prevent this from happening again, and we can still have a democracy in the decades to come. Congratulations, the world is a better place! But I don’t think your “never apologize, always double down” tactic is going to allow that to happen.

Also, your meme makes no sense. Who is the unimpeached champion? Certainly not Trump, he was rightfully impeached two times.

But I do think it’s hilarious how conservatives seem to love photoshopping Trump’s head onto sexy oiled masculine muscular bodies :rofl:

Ah, I just realized that if I did watch the Liz Show the cognitive dissonance would set up a positive feedback resonance between 3rd and 5th harmonics which would explode my bwain.

Am I not in your mind?

So given that we’ve seen 2 Impeachment Nothingburgers already, you’re hanging your hat yet again on the DNC controlled House to conduct an adequately truthy investigation devoid of political bias?

You’re not “staggered”. This is faux outrage, mock shock, and you’re loving it. I like your pivot to adopting MAGA / Qanon talking points.

Promise of Free shit and Not Trump, along with all chicanery possible got Sleepy elected. It’s given the Nation the opportunity to really see the free stuff (vote your self interest, right) is unbelievably expensive and physically dangerous. “Won’t cost a dime” free stuff ends up costing the average household $6,800 per year.

“little Navajo bro” might like free tuition at CC. What about the 23 year old husband and wife trying to raise their possibly Trans daughter? Guess you have a program for them as well?
What about the husband and wife plumbers that now can’t afford to hire and equip their first employee? That’s a good thing since the Progressives decided that kind of “extractive capitalism” is immoral.

Nice meme. Here’s another good one…

No, you would see fellow Republicans testifying against Trump’s plan to overthrow our democracy, and see the conclusive, unassailable third-person evidence that would disprove and dispel your first-person beliefs and the plausible deniability you continue to insulate your views with. That’s when the cognitive dissonance kicks in, as you figure out how to be pro-Constitution and anti-Constitution at the same time. But if you don’t look at the evidence, your 1st-person can continue believing whatever it wants to believe, and doubling down about “stolen elections” as much as you want! Another neat trick!

And you haven’t answered my questions about what it would be like if Democrats tried this trick. Do you think Biden would have been within his right to decide Hillary was the winner of 2016? There was much more substantial evidence of election tampering back then, after all. We have a whole Republican-led bipartisan Senate report establishing exactly that, while all of Trump’s crackpot “stolen election” lies were dismissed from every court, and many of the lawyers disbarred for perpetrating such obvious fraud.

If that happened, wouldn’t you be cheering Jim Jordan on as he ran the investigation into the Democrats plainly stealing the election and overthrowing the Constitution? Wouldn’t you take every possible opportunity to show how much antipathy the Left has for the Constitution, something only the right holds sacred? I think you would. Just like you deeply cared about the Sussman trial, and posted about it regularly, and how it would completely take down the corrupt DNC — right up until it was dismissed, and then you really didn’t have anything to say about it anymore. And I imagine you also supported the 33 Benghazi hearings that spanned over two years!

Am I not in your mind?

If I thought you were a white supremecist, I would call you a white supremecist. Not only that, but I would remove you from this forum. And I never have called you that, and as far as I can tell, you remain the most prolific commenter on this member-supported community site.

You are imagining your persecution :slight_smile:

In fact, on several occasions I have told you that in I fact quite like you, and I think you can be quite reasonable when you want to be. I also think you have deep tribal loyalties to your party that prevents you from looking at them objectively. I also think you may be buying into the “I hate the left more than I love the Constitution” line of thinking that is so pervasive in right-wing media, which as far as I can tell, is the only reason a person could justify their party trying to illegally overthrow our Constitutional democracy.

You’re not “staggered”. This is faux outrage, mock shock, and you’re loving it.

Wrong. You are really floundering. But thanks for this clumsy attempt to make an object out of my subject!

I view Trump’s attempted assassination of our Constitutional processes similar to how I would see any other political assassination, whether they are a member of the right or the left. Trump’s nearly successful attempt to extinguish our American democracy and our Constitutional principles is easily the most disturbing political event of my lifetime. A mountain to Watergate’s molehill. I am also staggered (but not necessarily surprised) that disinformation prevents people from looking objectively at the facts.

As I said, this hits me right in the “sanctity” line of values. What Jonathan Haidt might describe as “purity” values. It also offends my own “fairness” values, my “liberty” values, my “loyalty” values (my loyalty to the Constitution easily trumps my loyalty to any political party), and my “authority” values (watching our Constitutional authority be so eagerly undermined by the party that pretends to protect it).

I am being genuine here. I am not trying to play political or optical games, as you seem to be doing.

I like your pivot to adopting MAGA / Qanon talking points

Maybe, just maybe, the GOP aren’t the only ones who actually deeply care about the Constitution? I understand that your frame has been “Republicans are pro-Constitution, Democrats are anti-Constitution”, and I understand that my suggestion completely breaks that frame. But that frame has already been thoroughly demolished, because y’all don’t seem to care that your own President tried to attack the very heart of the Constitution. So you don’t get to use that frame any more. Time to find a new one!

“DONALD TRUMP and his allies and supporters are a clear and present danger to American democracy.” — Conservative judge Michael Luttig

Hey Ray, I missed this comment the first time. Sorry about that!

I largely agree this is the most likely outcome. I personally think that the cases in New York and Georgia have a greater chance of holding Trump accountable than anything from the DOJ. But I am also hoping that there are enough institutionalists within the DOJ who understand the severe short- and long-term risks to our democracy if this blatantly illegal, treasonous, anti-American behavior goes unpunished.

I have to retain some shred of hope, or else I risk lapsing into the “unhealthy green” response I described above :slight_smile:

1 Like

I guess here, each person has to go with what they hope will be true. @FermentedAgave is hoping for Fascism with open arms. I judge @corey-devos and IDK maybe even Ken may be in denial because as far as I know, there seems to be a belief that as Nations get more developed they will advance more towards Integral.
I just don’t think Liberals have the “guts” to do what is necessary. The Boomer and Gen X Left is, in my opinion too weak willed to make hard decisions. I could list a dozen, first among them an inability to do without “stuff” they really don’t need. The two generations leading our Nation live in fear that they may have to spend over $100 to fill up their SUV with gas twice a week or more. Oh, wait - we are there - which is why Biden will lose. Can’t expect Boomers and Gen X to give up commuting alone every day in a vehicle over 5,000 pounds. So, fascism will win because they promise cheaper gas and hamburgers.
Or, I may be completely wrong myself. If I am, all the better.
If I am correct that the USA is headed towards fascism, well I have wisely avoided establishing roots in the USA and instead have roots spread across the world - in the Pacific, Europe and South America, and funnily enough, soon in China.
Yeah, that last one was completely unexpected. But when Chaos brings such gifts all I can do is hold on for my dear life, lol.
“Look deeper through the telescope and do not be afraid when the stars collide towards the darkness, because sometimes the most beautiful things begin in chaos.”

  • Robert M Drake

I say this with all the best spiritual intent: You see two ways that are currently known to you. These are what are known to you, and the mind fears the unknown. Yet it’s only in the unknown that we will find new and alternative ways to look at things.

1 Like

there seems to be a belief that as Nations get more developed they will advance more towards Integral.

Quick correction/clarification — I think it’s kind of the inverse actually. As we advance more towards integral, our nations get more developed.

It all depends on what we mean by “development”. Development in the horizontal sense, or in the vertical sense?

Horizontal development would include things like economic opportunities, social mobility, wealth distribution, quality of life indicators, overall GDP, etc. And of course, the views and values surrounding each of these can be enacted very differently by different vertical stages of development.

And by vertical development we mean the stages themselves. We observe that new stages only emerge as a corrective response to the excesses of the previous stage. Green emerged once Orange excesses could no longer be suffered. Orange emerged when Amber excesses could no longer be suffered. Etc.

But I think the Teal stage is a bit different — it doesn’t just grow out of Green excesses, it grows out of the collapse of the entire spiral of development. And I don’t think Ken or I would say this is a linear process — as I mentioned earlier, it is a very bumpy road, with lots of peaks and valleys along the way. I think we are likely about to enter a dark age where regressive anti-democratic views and values win the day, and that will be tremendously painful for a great many people. And, I think, out of that pain will eventually come a new emergence. Problems can not be solved from the same stage they are created.

Another thing that makes vertical development to Teal so difficult, is that it is a totally different kind of stage transition. When Green emerged out of unhealthy orange, it was a purely “forward” movement into the next stage. But in order for Teal to emerge, we need to not only take a step “forward” into the next stage, but also step “back” to re-integrate all prior stages within us and within our society. (I put my prepositions in quotes, because their usefulness is somewhat limited here :slight_smile: )

Which means, the path to the Teal stage remains mostly unknown at this point. And I find myself more or less comfortable with that unknowing. That’s why I say that all I can really do is meditate, eat my veggies, attend to my own limited sphere of influence, and try to find the most skillful leverage points to help the human spiral pull itself back together.

We did a great episode about uncertainty that you might enjoy:

And we followed this with another episode calling for more epistemic humility in the face of the unknown:

You might also enjoy some of the “integral caricatures” I included on that page :wink:

1 Like

Texas GOP, classy as ever. It appears the lunatics have fully taken over the asylum.

Having followed the story pretty closely and having watched all three hearings, my own opinion is that if there is not a criminal indictment of Trump (and others), that will be a great miscarriage of justice.

Some pundits and others say the DOJ may be afraid that it will look “political” if they bring charges; I think we’re to the point now that many people think it will look “political” if they don’t. Some people belabor the fact that indicting Trump may create more polarization, violence or civil war. While I appreciate that concern, I’m more with the camp that says “what? you’re not going to indict criminals for fear of what the criminals will do next??”

The media is already running strong with the narrative that ‘criminal intent’ has to be proven in the courts, and I’ve seen enough in the hearings and otherwise to think that criminal intent was/is there. Just my opinion.

The J6 House Committee opened the hearings by saying Trump and friends had an organized and well-coordinated “7-point plan” to thwart the peaceful transfer of power and overturn the election so he could stay in power. They have been methodically laying out that plan, using evidence and video and live testimony with much if not most of that testimony coming from Republicans themselves and people in the Trump administration.

Trump set up the expectation among his supporters of a rigged election months before the election, telling people if he didn’t win, then it would be because the election was rigged. He and supporters have tried to use litigation to overturn the election, failing in 60 cases out of 61. He and supporters interfered with the work of state election officials, trying to get them to “find me just 11,000+ more votes” (Georgia). That Georgia election official will be testifying on Tuesday, along with one from Arizona. The “fake slates of electors” is another one of those points in the plan, as is the attempt to put in a new DOJ director at the last minute, who was willing to go along with the violations of law in support of overturning the election, giving it to the non-winner, Trump. And of course there’s the insurrection itself, and the pressure campaign on the VP to reject the state-certified election results, including threats on Pence’s life, to the point that his aides notified the Secret Service the day before the insurrection.

So yes, from where I sit, I think there are indictable crimes. And if any prosecution leads to violence or civil war, so be it. Like the first Civil War, this one too will have been in the name of a necessary righteousness.

1 Like

I don’t know Ray, I sort of think liberals are getting more gutsy all the time, maybe only because it’s ‘push come to shove’ time, but still, I’m oddly somewhat optimistic. Adam Schiff leads the questioning for the 4th hearing coming up on Tuesday; he’s got “fire in his eyes,” if you ask me, and I think sometimes Democrats, because they are not as loud in voice volume as some of their other-side-of-the-aisle counterparts, and generally seem more forbearing in manner versus given to impromptu outbursts of outrage, get underestimated in terms of their ‘warrioring’ skills.
Forbearance and perseverance are strong “guts” traits, if you ask me.

But you may be right. The AG is hard to get a read on (unlike the ones preceding him at DOJ, Barr, Sessions, Comey). He’s described as “deliberative” a lot. That the DOJ wants transcripts from the J6 Committee means something. (I’ve read some reports speculating that Meadows may be cooperating with DOJ, which may be why no contempt charges have been brought yet. If that’s the case, and we certainly don’t know that it is, that would maybe bode well for some justice action.)

It’s gonna be a hot hot summer, with the Roe v Wade decision to come, Bannon’s trial in July, and however the J6 Committee wraps up, among other things. Hopefully DOJ will act on some of this stuff in a timely manner (deliberatively but timely still), rather than it all stretching out for years, like some say the war in Ukraine is probably going to do. I just feel/sense that regardless, it’s all going to start getting better within the next year, not without some fallbacks and further difficulties, but still, on the road to better.

You may not need China, etc.!

If inflation continues and if people make that their primary issue for the midterms and sink the Dems, well, so be that too. I remind myself 50-60% of the US population have not reached the rational stage, and so prioritizing inflation over the threat to democracy may indeed be their choice du jour. But there is still a ways to go before the midterms, so we’ll see what else arises that may affect things. I personally doubt Biden will run in 2024, and I don’t think Trump will be the Republican candidate, so we may be in totally new territory before too long.

Our base line “frames” are significantly different Corey. And as I’ve said, you want to argue “in the weeds” when it comes to those you don’t agree with you in order to step right in to morality judgements in order to foist your views/desires into a position of “moral authority”. I hope that makes you feel better, but it’s not likely to “open up dialog”.

You’ve glomed on to Haidt like a lighthouse in stormy weather wielding his references like a guidance tracking laser. Are their other thought leaders/philosophers you would recommend we all read/listen?

LOL. So now we’re scope creeping Trump Derangement into GOP Derangement Syndrome, which really comes down to “if they don’t agree, they must be silenced at all costs”.

You’ll need more than a step ladder to reach the lofty position of Moral Authority I’m thinking.

The hearings are fully of snippets. It’s a really good thing Liz, the DNC candidates, MSDNC, DNN, NYT, WaPo are getting the “truth” out. It’s an incontrovertible ray of truthiness in a sea of inky black disinformation.

Stitching Liz’s “7 Point Plan” together is perhaps a newer analysis. Has the Jan6 Committee shared a single shred of exculpatory evidence or is it a straight up prosecution? This could get very awkward for the prosecutors in Jan '23.

The Jan. 6 committee plan is to argue:
  1. Trump spread false information about the 2020 election.
  2. Trump tried to install loyalists at the DOJ so the department would “support his fake election claims.”
  3. Trump pressured former Vice President Mike Pence to help overturn the election.
  4. Trump urged on state election officials and legislators to change the election results.
  5. Trump’s legal team “instructed Republicans in multiple states to create false electoral slates and transmit those slates to Congress and the National Archive.”
  6. Trump summoned and assembled the mob in D.C. and directed them to march on the Capitol.
  7. Trump ignored pleas for assistance from his team and failed to take action to stop the violence.

We could go line item by line item (with all of your note), but the time is running out quickly so will get answers soon enough.

So what’s the Integral response some or all of the following plays out:

  • President Trump is not indicted
  • House and Senate both swing to decisive GOP majorities in 2022?
  • GOP NeoCons and SwampCons are drastically weaken (Grahams, McConnells, Cheney’s,…)
  • GOP 2023 hearings result in investigation and Impeachment of:
    • State: Blinken
    • Homeland: Mayorkas
    • Treasury: Yellen
    • Energy: Granholm
    • Interior: Haaland
    • EPA: Regan
    • SBA - Guzman
    • Mgmt&Budget - Young
  • Biden pardon’s his entire cabinet in 2023
  • GOP is perceived as helping fixing the economy in 23/24
  • GOP takes super majorities in both House and Senate in 24
  • GOP takes Whitehouse in 24
  • GOP continues taking “down ballot” elected positions - Gov, State AG, State Houses/Senates, County, City
  • GOP decides that packing SCOTUS is a great idea after all and adds 4 more 40 year old Justices
    • SCOTUS deliberation and rulings now strand Leftist’s.
    • All meaningful discussion now happens Center and Right

Many are predicting that the Far Leftists will continue destruction the Democratic party.
My prediction is the GOP would then fragment into Center, Moderate Right, Hard Right and NeoCon subgroups. Essentially this would excise Far Left from any meaningful influencing position except at State level in CA, WA, NY, OR, IL, MI.

We’ve seen very little Right wing violence to date and much Left supported violence, arson, and destruction. With the “red wave” coming, blue cities continuing with their prerational policies, I do think it highly likely we see significant burning in the blue strong holds.
Unlikely this will spill into red areas beyond the occasional shopping mall incident.

Here are a couple of “Issues” survey’s that might provide a bit of data. I admit they are survey’s worded out of the Conservative frame so likely don’t capture Far Left concerns as accurately (Equity, LGBTQIA++, Climate Change,etc)

Given the extreme Left ability to hamstring any meaningful pivot by the NeoLibs, I’m not seeing any way for “Economy” to not become an every greater concern going into this years mid-terms.
IF the economy does start turning around in 23/24, it’s highly likely the GOP political momentum continues to pick up leading to greater exorcism of DNC from the national political scene.

Nah, when it comes to the question “should a sitting President be allowed to declare himself the winner of an election he objectively lost”, I don’t even need to stand on my tippy toes to feel like I have the high ground.

I also think it’s immoral to murder people, to rape people, and to kick puppies. What a dramatic moral high ground this is!

I’ll say again: you want license to be as authoritative, judgmental, and dismissive as you want when it comes to the Left as a whole, but you cannot tolerate any criticism of a President who deliberately tried to overthrow the Constitution, and knew what he was doing was illegal, and immediately slide into weird moral relativism when faced with those criticisms.

So now we’re scope creeping Trump Derangement into GOP Derangement Syndrome

I agree, Trump’s derangement has thoroughly infected the GOP, almost like a syndrome. Well said! You can see the evidence in the Texas GOP’s temper tantrum declaring Biden an “illegitimate President”.

The hearings are fully of snippets.

Actually, they are full of powerful testimony that make it clear that Trump is a thoroughly corrupt con man who tried to overthrow the Constitution. But I understand that you are willfully refusing to look at the testimony and irrefutable evidence, so you remain unqualified to comment on the legitimacy of the testimony and evidence presented.

And as I’ve said, you want to argue “in the weeds”

I don’t even know what that means. Presidents should not be allowed to steal elections. That’s hardly “in the weeds”. You think they should, which requires far more mental gymnastics to justify.

Maybe you will answer me this time: do you think it was within Biden’s right to throw out the electoral slates and declare Hillary the winner in 2016?

It seems to me that, when it comes to today’s GOP, democracy is wonderful as long as they can win. If not, fascist takeover is totally justified, because at least that’s better than letting those damn leftists govern the country!

It’s a really good thing Liz, the DNC candidates, MSDNC, DNN, NYT, WaPo are getting the “truth” out.

Yes, it’s a really good thing that the Republicans who are testifying against Trump’s illegal plot to extinguish our democracy are getting the TRUTH out.

Beautiful thing about this little ole thing called Democracy is that when mistakes are made (Trump) we are only 4 years at most from course correcting. The US Citizens can now see just how horrific their mistake was given the the 2 years of transcendent develop ushers in by the higher altitude Democratic majority government in the White House, Senate, and House.
Rejoice and be glad in the incredible progress that the Progressives have created as we move closer to 2nd Tier.

See, that doesn’t really happen when the party as a whole continues to lie about stolen elections, even explicitly baking it into their platform, and excommunicating anyone who doesn’t believe these lies from the party.

Should Biden have been allowed to declare Hillary the winner in 2016? How about Gore? Should he have been able to declare himself winner in 2000?

Rejoice and be glad in the incredible progress that the Progressives have created

If “not throwing the Constitution into the shredder and extinguishing democracy” counts as “incredible progress”, I will happily take it.

As of today, only one of our two major political parties has NOT attempted a fascist takeover of our democracy. But I get it, optics and political games are more important than the Constitution itself.