SCOTUS stops the election interference....cold!

Hi Skip! I had never paid attention to media matters until this case came up:
(writeup by Reuters)

In the lawsuit filed in a U.S. District Court in Texas, X claimed Media Matters "manipulated" the social media platform by using accounts that exclusively followed major brands or users known to produce fringe content, and "resorted to endlessly scrolling and refreshing" the feed until it found ads next to extremist posts.
Media Matters' report misrepresented the typical experience on X "with the intention of harming X and its business," the company said in the lawsuit.

 

...

 

We don't have to wonder anymore at least.
Trump had requested national guard backup for the area prior to the rally. He was declined by then house speaker Pelosi who had the final say on security detail.

It would appear that the demonstrators were enticed into a trap.

Police were seen removing barricades and opening doors for "insurrectionists" as if they were visitors.

The crazy looking guy with the horns hat was literally escorted throughout the building by Capitol police. That detail was kept secret until after the country was successfully enraged.

The whole shebang had and still has a very strange vibe to it

 

This needs to be saved for posterity!

 

Easily amused.

 

Are you being sarcastic here?

You seem to be saying lack of security means criminals should be absolved of their crimes. That can't be right. If I came into your house and robbed you, would you be okay with it because the door was unlocked?

 

This is the reality of which I speak:

The only rights we truly have are those we are able to successfully defend. All others are illusory or, at best, temporary.

Politicians, with the possible exception of Ron Paul, don’t seek power with the intention of giving it up or making the government interfere less in people’s lives. Political office is the home of the scolding busybody or the thieving sociopath.

 

Yes. Those who supposedly attacked the capitol did not expect the rest of us to grovel for their forgiveness.

 

Haha! Oh crap. Wait a minute. That was all his opinion, based on his personal observations and experiences. Even worse; he was expecting his audience to understand and agree based on their own observations and experience. He didn’t cite a single source! Oh well, must all be lies then.

 

There is, in this country, a cadre of people who think violence is OK, who watched the January 6 insurrection and think it was a peaceful protest, who watched Josh Hawley of Missouri scurrying away and think he was not afraid. This same group bases their conclusions on factoids, baseless anecdotes, and outright lies from sketchy sources. Money and power at any cost are their ethical goals. It is useless to debate with these folks because they lack the capacity for rational thinking or reasoned investigation. Not a pretty picture.

 

...

 

...

 

And it will be those at the top who make the money. Those mortals who do the stuff on the street, such as Jan 6th, will not seen any of it and will at some point realise they are just being exploited. That may be a long time away. They will be slow to learn and slower to admit.

 

...

 

Your making a pretty silly assumption there. You've no idea whom I follow or what my politics is.

 

...

 

There you go again, trying to show you know more than you do.

So what way do you 'think' my leaning is?