Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

techtransparencyproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 969 posts

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#731

Post by nl »

jonnyone wrote: post #637
jiofih wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check your own biases. He was telling a huge crowd that the election was stolen, he would show proof the same day (we are still waiting), and they “will not stand down”. What else is needed to make that case? (non-US person here)

Like it or not, Trump is allowed to dispute the results of the election. He's also allowed to do so openly and to a crowd. Language like "will not stand down" is obviously in reference to the "fight" for his "case" and falls in line exactly with the language he had been using at previous rallies and on Twitter. Was he "inciting" a riot then? I hate that I even have to say this, because it seems childishly unnecessary…

If "by allowed" you mean legally then sure.

But the president should have a moral obligation to only talk about actual fraud, not things he wants to have been fraud.

He spent months before the election saying how the postal votes were fraudulent, had his allies set the rules on counting so they would be counted later than other votes (in critical states) and then used that pattern of lots of "late votes" "appearing" as evidence of fraud - when in fact it was the entirely predictable consequences of how it was setup up.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#732

Post by TeeMassive »

rat87 wrote: post #707
jlawson wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If "telling people that the election was a fraud" is equivalent to encouraging insurrection, you'd need to convict everyone who pushed the Trump/Russia narrative for years. So basically every leftist media entity and person and many of the politicians too. Hell, we can go back to 2000, butterfly ballots, Diebold voting machines, and so on and so forth. People are allowed to question election integrity.

except Trump did collude with Russia

"The investigation did not find evidence that the TrumpCampaign recovered any such Clinton emails, or that these contacts were part of a coordinated effort between Russia and the Trump Campaign."

"The investigation did not, however, yield evidence sufficient to sustain any charge that any individual affiliated withthe TrumpCampaign acted as an agentofa foreign principal within themeaning of FARA or, in terms of Section 951, subject to the direction or control of the governmentof Russia, or any official thereof. In particular, the Office did not find evidence likely to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Campaign officials such as Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Carter Page acted as agents of the Russian government—or atits direction,control, or request—during the relevant time period.1"

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#733

Post by triceratops »

Izkata wrote: post #656
alsetmusic wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you not mentioning any Republicans? That’s a good point. It’s not like Trump’s holdings weren’t fed a line of patrons while he was in office. Seems odd to leave out the most prominent and recent example.

Trump didn't make money off of the presidency, if anything he spent (2016-2017) or lost (2020) wealth: https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/09/politics/forbes-400-donald-tr...

You mean other than charging the Secret Service for his weekly stays at his resort? Or how lobbyists in DC made sure to book at a Trump property?

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#734

Post by seisvelas »

hetspookjee wrote: post #104
bananabreakfast wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's chilling how quickly radical terrorist groups have coalesced around using social media to coordinate their hatred and their attacks. A scant few years ago, America actively fought terrorists instead of encouraging and facilitating them.

Off topic but I'm having increasingly more difficulty with the term Terrorist. How'd you call American intrusions in sovereign states? Just somewhat recently the drone strike of the General Soleimani on sovereign grounds were an act of terrorism if perceived through the eyes of most Iranians, and possibly Iraqis as the strike was on their ground. Terrorist is a term that is stretched and applied beyond meaning.

This reminded me of the song "Pirates & Emperors", which you might enjoy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQBWGo7pef8

Too long, didn't listen: If you rob with a little ship, you're a "pirate", but if you steal with a big fleet, thou art "emperor".

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#735

Post by triceratops »

nostromo wrote: post #421
whoknew1122 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Far-right terrorism in the US has never really been taken seriously. No one took them seriously. Until the Capitol was attacked. The Feds are starting to roll up high ranking militia members, so hopefully they learned their lesson this time.

The rush to call the storming of the capitol terrorism is really misplaced. By adopting words like "terrorism" you're paving the way for an overreaching response from lawmakers and law enforcement -- something that will likely end up being used against a cause you might support, like BLM. Firstly, nobody was terrorized. No, this wasn't "our 9/11." I doubt it'll even be a topic of conversation in a few years, just lik…

> I doubt it'll even be a topic of conversation in a few years, just like we don't talk about 1983 United States Senate bombing today at all.

We still talk about the Clinton impeachment today, and the acts that precipitated it. Students of history still study the Andrew Johnson impeachment. You're being naive if you think an unprecedented, record, second impeachment of a president will be forgotten that quickly.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#736

Post by austincheney »

Railsify wrote: post #540
asdfk-12 wrote: post #438

Half of a billion in lobbying dollars well spent by FAANG[1] - business as usual continues for facebook despite their decreasing popularity and repeated scandal and failure, from Cambridge Analytica to Libra. Those in my immediate circle have mothballed or closed their accounts, although Instagram seems to have more holding power. 1: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ajdellinger/2019/04/30/how-the-...

Members of Congress will use this event as a catalyst for fundraising, soon after the election they will draft legislation that threatens to control and/or regulate the tech giants. Shortly after that the lobbyists representing Big Tech get wind of this new legislation on the horizon and donations will flow like a river to the PACs and re-election campaigns, then the proposed legislation will be shelved.

> to control and/or regulate the tech giants

What is it exactly that qualifies Facebook to be a tech company? A database? A website? They display advertising.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#737

Post by triceratops »

abduhl wrote: post #597
selectodude wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are slow burns. The attack on the capital was a severe jolt to our national psyche. You may not want them to be different, but they are.

I disagree. The things that happened at the Capitol stick out in your mind because they are the most recent thing that happened. Every moment I posted was hailed as "the most important thing to happen in our lifetime" when it occurred. This is one of the big problems with our society now: sensationalism rules and our collective memories are short. It's just hard for me to believe that in fifty years I'll be saying "o…

> It's just hard for me to believe that in fifty years I'll be saying "oh boy you remember those dudes that broke into the Capitol?"

I betcha it's a Jeopardy clue in 50 years. "This president incited a riot that led to an invasion of the Capitol building for only the second time in its history".

Assuming we have Jeopardy in 50 years, of course.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#738

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

King-Aaron wrote: post #458
nostromo wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying something wasn't terrorism doesn't mean it wasn't unlawful or stupid or terrible. It just means it wasn't terrorism.

The definition - 'the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims' - seems to fit the event we're discussing.

I think missing from the definition is "indiscriminate"

That makes a significant difference.

On one side, the Right's movement against the capitol was specifically targeting politicians. This movement affected a priviledged political class and the people that they employ.

In the other extreme, the BLM movement against (x) targeted (y) . This movement affected seniors, students, women, owners , employees, blacks, latinos, indiscriminately.

This is the crux of the issue. X and Y are quite random and thus lend themselves far easier to the classic definition of terrorism

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#739

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

akiselev wrote: post #553
sojournerc wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This thread started with you saddened at folks downplaying the events at the Capitol. I'm much more concerned with the media being complicit in downplaying what we both agree is domestic terrorism elsewhere. I suppose that's a "what about", but I fear the current structures of power colluding to form narratives more than angry trumpers.

93% of the BLM protests were peaceful [1] despite protestors numbering in the millions, if not tens of millions - compared to the tens of thousands at the capitol. The most notable violence during the BLM protests was an incident where far right extremists, members of Bugaloo boys group involved in the capitol attack, used the protests as cover to murder cops [2]. To compare the two is disingenuous. [1] https://acled…

93% of meteors hitting earth are harmless.

This is not about the probability but the outcome at the tail

7% or 3% or 1% is still huge. The right number to use is 0%. Not 1% or 7% Zero. Those protests literally shut down critical stores for people in dire straits. For ex. The only pharmacy near low income seniors with limited motor ability, with the double whammy that public transport also shut down.

Cities on fire every week is not OK especially when the offenders are inmune from law enforcement.

To think that 7% is acceptable smacks of priviledge. Someone is clearly not living in the inner city, and does not know what it means to not own a car when the public transport system is halted and the only supermarket near is razed.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#740

Post by three_seagrass »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #713
rj_kidwin wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon has stated that it warned Parler for months without redress, but to offer another perspective, the CEO of Parler stated in an interview that they were notified the day before they got the plug pulled, sought to work with AWS on solving the issue, then were "deplatformed" the following day. He said she said, but obviously both sides are incentivized to make themselves look clean

Though I doubt that Parler has many employees, it seems unlikely the emails from your hosting company would be read by the CEO. It's entirely possible both people are telling the truth.

Your CTO of your social media startup would definitely surface threats of deplatforming from your cloud provider to the CEO.
Post reply on HN