‘Prepare for war’: A local GOP official goes all-in with election conspiracy theories

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Just now, moxy said:

Narratives like this are so toxic and damaging. Trying to gaslight people into believing that Trump's behavior is no worse than his predecessor is just so blatantly untrue and disingenuous. The Republican party needs a reformation, a wake-up call, and these kinds of narratives that Trump is a victim, Trump's behavior is normal, and Trump is some kind of misunderstood genius just keeps hitting snooze.

You're free to call them as you like, you can either recognize what happened, which is in a handful of IG reports, litany of FOIA docs, which would only lead one to go, "oh hell no I'd not peacefully transition to that either", or you can push the peaceful transition myth you just did. The outrage stuff because I won't capitulate to such a myth doesn't get anywhere anymore, either.

[moxy 1,051]

5 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

You're free to call them as you like, you can either recognize what happened, which is in a handful of IG reports, litany of FOIA docs, which would only lead one to go, "oh hell no I'd not peacefully transition to that either", or you can push the peaceful transition myth you just did. The outrage stuff because I won't capitulate to such a myth doesn't get anywhere anymore, either.

Don't internalize so much, the "outrage stuff" isn't directed at you alone. You're a true believer, I couldn't change your mind even if I was inclined to put in the effort. Just putting my $0.02 out there to counter the gaslighting and toxic, damaging narratives that you and others are peddling and have widely been debunked.

 

And to be clear, the Democratic Party are no halo-wielding angels either. There are bad actors, bad policies, and people doing bad stuff to further agendas. But to say that Trump and his administration is just the continuation of previous norms (or worse, that he's somehow transcended those norms) is head-in-the-sand preposterous. As a conservative you should be outraged at this carpet-bagger who pretends to be a conservative but whose almost every action flies in the face of conservatism. Pretending otherwise just hurts your own interests.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

26 minutes ago, moxy said:

Don't internalize so much, the "outrage stuff" isn't directed at you alone. You're a true believer, I couldn't change your mind even if I was inclined to put in the effort. Just putting my $0.02 out there to counter the gaslighting and toxic, damaging narratives that you and others are peddling and have widely been debunked.

 

And to be clear, the Democratic Party are no halo-wielding angels either. There are bad actors, bad policies, and people doing bad stuff to further agendas. But to say that Trump and his administration is just the continuation of previous norms (or worse, that he's somehow transcended those norms) is head-in-the-sand preposterous. As a conservative you should be outraged at this carpet-bagger who pretends to be a conservative but whose almost every action flies in the face of conservatism. Pretending otherwise just hurts your own interests.

It seems you've misjudged me as a conservative, which is why you're using terms I don't use, such as "carpet-bagger", to appeal to me. I'm chuckling as you tell me about the interests you believe I have based on this. If you can't recognize the non-controversial basic facts of the Obama administration spying, running counterintel operations, etc. on Trump from the time of his campaign all the way through Mueller, it's weird to me that you'd be so exasperated that people aren't listening to you. There's no real starting point here.

Edited December 19, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[moxy 1,051]

8 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

It seems you've misjudged me as a conservative, which is why you're using terms I don't use, such as "carpet-bagger", to appeal to me. I'm chuckling as you tell me about the interests you believe I have based on this. If you can't recognize the non-controversial basic facts of the Obama administration spying, running counterintel operations, etc. on Trump from the time of his campaign all the way through Mueller, it's weird to me that you'd be so exasperated that people aren't listening to you.

I use "carpet-bagger" because it fits and I enjoy using colorful narrative. I'm not doing some psychological profile to try to get into your head. (Or am I? How deep does this go????) As I said, I have no interest in trying to move an ice-berg with a rowboat. You're a true believer, and I'm not going to try to change your mind. Truly, you're not as interesting to me as you think you are. Apologies if that's rude, but I wasn't the one who started hurling insults.

 

I've already noted that Democrats are not angels. But the narrative that you and others have spun is simple gaslighting. I use the term "gaslighting" because I am an exasperated muckspout and attempting to appeal to Victorian era fustilarians whom I feel aren't listening to me.

[Dashinka 24,950]

1 minute ago, moxy said:

I use "carpet-bagger" because it fits and I enjoy using colorful narrative. I'm not doing some psychological profile to try to get into your head. (Or am I? How deep does this go????) As I said, I have no interest in trying to move an ice-berg with a rowboat. You're a true believer, and I'm not going to try to change your mind. Truly, you're not as interesting to me as you think you are. Apologies if that's rude, but I wasn't the one who started hurling insults.

 

I've already noted that Democrats are not angels. But the narrative that you and others have spun is simple gaslighting. I use the term "gaslighting" because I am an exasperated muckspout and attempting to appeal to Victorian era fustilarians whom I feel aren't listening to me.

It is interesting that you use the term narrative and gaslighting to describe what actually happened by the Obama Oval Office meeting back on January 5th, 2017.  It is a regular tactic of the Dems to gaslight and accuse their enemies of being or doing exactly what they themselves are doing.

[moxy 1,051]

2 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

It is interesting that you use the term narrative and gaslighting to describe what actually happened by the Obama Oval Office meeting back on January 5th, 2017.  It is a regular tactic of the Dems to gaslight and accuse their enemies of being or doing exactly what they themselves are doing.

So much what-aboutism.

 

Try this: Whenever you see Trump (or anyone really) being criticized, try to frame that criticism without bringing in another outside element. If I say Trump is refusing to accept the election results, and your immediate impulse is to go to "but Obama spied" or whatever, then you're just dodging. Wouldn't you expect your guy to be better? If the Democrats are evil, why say "it's ok because the Democrats did it, or did worse?" If you truly believe the other guy is better, then hold him to the standards of the law, or morality, or civility, or whatever. Stop holding him to the standard of "but Obama/The Democrats did it."

[Dashinka 24,950]

10 minutes ago, moxy said:

So much what-aboutism.

 

Try this: Whenever you see Trump (or anyone really) being criticized, try to frame that criticism without bringing in another outside element. If I say Trump is refusing to accept the election results, and your immediate impulse is to go to "but Obama spied" or whatever, then you're just dodging. Wouldn't you expect your guy to be better? If the Democrats are evil, why say "it's ok because the Democrats did it, or did worse?" If you truly believe the other guy is better, then hold him to the standards of the law, or morality, or civility, or whatever. Stop holding him to the standard of "but Obama/The Democrats did it."

I am under no illusions about Trump, he is what he is, and I have criticized him myself many times.  I have already transitioned to criticizing Biden who deserves it even more than Trump given the evidence that exists as to his corruption, but of course there will be Biden acolytes willing to overlook all of that.  There is no requirement for Trump to accept the election results, he only needs to vacate the WH as of January 20th.  Much like Obama did after he left, I don’t see Trump fading away as what was the norm for past Presidents, I fully expect him to maintain a presence in the media holding Old Joe’s feet to the fire as we know the media certainly doesn’t appear to be doing it.
 

I am not aware of Trump spying on the Biden team (and let’s not forget Biden himself was part of the spying on the Trump transition), so your assertions are without merit.

 

Lastly, politics is all about what aboutisms.

Edited December 19, 2020 by Dashinka

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

21 minutes ago, moxy said:

I use "carpet-bagger" because it fits and I enjoy using colorful narrative.

1 hour ago, moxy said:

Narratives like this are so toxic and damaging.

😍

 

Quote

I've already noted that Democrats are not angels. But the narrative that you and others have spun is simple gaslighting.

Noting that people aren't angels is a bunch of nothing because the issue here isn't "are they angels". You seem to think incorrectly that Trump is the first to not peacefully transition, you cite public overtures in 2016 that in isolation have no substantive meaning, especially when behind the scenes where the actual transition is taking place they're doing what the Obama administration did to Trump's team to undermine a transition and set the incoming team up for a continuation of the abuse that they did before Trump took over. These facts are not in question. Anyone enduring what Trump did would not be expected to peacefully transition when the very people he's expected to transition to are those who went to such great lengths to undermine the transition to his Presidency and beyond. This is just the truth as plain as it can be told. Your acceptance of material facts isn't a requisite, I'm just pointing out the humor of all the other stuff that's bloating the conversation. I'm quite used to the prolonged efforts to bog things down, but as you can see these tactics suffer an awful lot of diminishing returns now.

Edited December 19, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[moxy 1,051]

8 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Lastly, politics is all about what aboutisms.

Only when you don't have a good argument. If your position is sound, it stands on its own.

[Dashinka 24,950]

Just now, moxy said:

Only when you don't have a good argument. If your position is sound, it stands on its own.

Yep, and the facts of the Obama treatment of the Trump transition are quite sound regardless of what Obama acolytes believe.

[moxy 1,051]

4 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Yep, and the facts of the Obama treatment of the Trump transition are quite sound regardless of what Obama acolytes believe.

LOL ok.

 

What-aboutisms within what-aboutisms. It's What-aboutism-Inception.

[Dashinka 24,950]

4 minutes ago, moxy said:

LOL ok.

 

What-aboutisms within what-aboutisms. It's What-aboutism-Inception.

Considering the arguments being made, seems appropriate.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Just now, Dashinka said:

Yep, and the facts of the Obama treatment of the Trump transition are quite sound regardless of what Obama acolytes believe.

The desire to get to the bottom of this abuse was notably absent throughout the intelligence bureaus, because it meant a severe butt kicking for themselves, but it wasn't until Devin Nunes teed up on his own document releases did it make impossible the protective courts continuing to stymie FOIA requests (especially with endless blackouts of relevant details in the few releases they did), and from there, the comical evolution of IG reports (no thanks to their clear lack of effort to "investigate" when all the actual info in their reports came from the efforts of others) finally recognizing not only the abuses themselves but the maliciousness behind it. What a useful "oversight" body. 😂 The only real problem from there is the utter lack of accountability and that, for me, is the troublesome thing about all this (and you can see why a swampy lack of hammers dropping being what contributes to mucking up the pipes), but with my first experience as a voting adult being the Bush admin, one quickly learned the ropes of how truly unaccountable these people at the top really are. If the slow machinations of Trump's Populism Inc (by systemic semi-automatic wrench launchers or Trump's own incompetence) upset the right people this much (and I don't mean the left, that's more for immediate humor, the real problem is far from funny), it looks like this is the right medicine and it needs a much higher dose, whether it right wing or left wing populism.

[Bettie Page 118]

2 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

It seems you've misjudged me as a conservative, which is why you're using terms I don't use, such as "carpet-bagger", to appeal to me. I'm chuckling as you tell me about the interests you believe I have based on this. If you can't recognize the non-controversial basic facts of the Obama administration spying, running counterintel operations, etc. on Trump from the time of his campaign all the way through Mueller, it's weird to me that you'd be so exasperated that people aren't listening to you. There's no real starting point here.

Bill Barr, who I now realize is socialist Antifa, has denied that ever happened

Edited December 19, 2020 by Bettie Page

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

14 minutes ago, Bettie Page said:

Bill Barr, who I now realize is socialist Antifa, has denied that ever happened

Neat.