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

Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 200 posts

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#171

Post by oneoff786 »

yucky wrote: post #156
lapsedacademic wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What leads you to call that probable? Because people with guns who said they wanted to kill her entered the capitol with their guns and started looking for her. E.g., from one charging document: "Thinking about heading over to Pelosi CUNT’s speech and putting a bullet in her noggin on Live TV [purple devil emoji]." Charges: Possession of Unregistered Firearms, Possession of Unregistered Ammunition, Possession of La…

>entered the capitol with their guns Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody entered the Capitol with guns. I'm aware that sounds like downplaying the incident, which is not my intention. I just think accuracy matters. The guy you're referring to (who was thankfully charged), did not enter the Capitol with a gun, according to the charging document. What gave you the idea that he entered the Capitol with a gun, the chargi…

How about Guy Reffitt, who has been charged with bringing an assault rifle to Washington, and a handgun onto capitol grounds, then later, charmingly, threatening to shoot his own children if they turned him in, which they did?

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#172

Post by cscurmudgeon »

oneoff786 wrote: post #169
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

That some things are subjective does not make them without merit.

> That some things are subjective does not make them without merit.

Nice to see 1984's birth in action. As someone who escaped a socialist autocracy, this is chilling to US descending into the same thing.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#173

Post by whimsicalism »

beerandt wrote: post #158
oneoff786 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rioters failed to find the senators. They were one door away, and a guard lured them in the wrong direction. I’m not sure how much of an armed guard presence was accompanying the senators at the time, though I believe it was not a large presence. Supposing they instead entered the room, it is probable to me that they would have been immediately shot. I doubt the rioters could have taken the room but who knows. In…

And yet Democratics encouraged and even participated in blocking the Supreme Court confirmation vote using... a march to the capital and overrunning capital security forces and successfuy occupying every space they attempted to reach. Why shouldn't any of them been shot? Both were confirmations to the highest level of office in their respective branch of government and both were staged by political opponents protesti…

This is such a distorted picture of what actually happened.

Your final reference (I'm assuming to the weathermen) is a much more apt comparison than the other protest you're discussing.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#174

Post by ModernMech »

yucky wrote: post #156
lapsedacademic wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What leads you to call that probable? Because people with guns who said they wanted to kill her entered the capitol with their guns and started looking for her. E.g., from one charging document: "Thinking about heading over to Pelosi CUNT’s speech and putting a bullet in her noggin on Live TV [purple devil emoji]." Charges: Possession of Unregistered Firearms, Possession of Unregistered Ammunition, Possession of La…

>entered the capitol with their guns Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody entered the Capitol with guns. I'm aware that sounds like downplaying the incident, which is not my intention. I just think accuracy matters. The guy you're referring to (who was thankfully charged), did not enter the Capitol with a gun, according to the charging document. What gave you the idea that he entered the Capitol with a gun, the chargi…

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody entered the Capitol with guns.

So there were really two groups of people who showed up on Jan 6. The first large group were Trump supporters there to protest. These people are being charged with misdemeanor trespassing; and if they attacked police, they are being charged with felony assault as well.

The second, smaller group were militia who came there equipped and with a plan. Lower-level members of this group have been charged with conspiracy to disrupt Congress, a felony. Higher-level members have just been charged with seditious conspiracy, which carries a 20 year max sentence.

This later group of individuals were mostly ex-military and law enforcement. They were aware that bringing guns on Jan 6 would have resulted in a commiserate response by Capitol Police, and they would have been outmatched. However, according to yesterday's indictment, they did bring plenty of equipment (including guns) and stashed them in hotels across the Potomac river, with plans to bring them across in a boat in case the need arose. We are still learning more about this plan.

> The effort was just to blame Trump's rhetoric for that guys actions. Which, Trump's rhetoric was less than helpful to say the least, but that was a poor excuse for trying to murder a bunch of congresspeople.

At this point the cause and effect is pretty well established.

- The only reason anyone was even near the Capitol on Jan 6 was because Trump summoned them there.

- Trump then told the assembled mob where to go and what to do: "we’re going to the Capitol" to "stop the steal".

- Trump directed the mob to the Capitol.

- The mob arrived at the capitol and violently disrupted the ongoing proceedings.

- Trump witnessed this on live TV and instead of doing anything for 3 hours, he mused himself by rewinding the live footage of people brutally attacking police.

- When arrested, the individual comprising the mob tell police they did what they did at the behest of the Trump.

I think we're way past the point of saying this was just one big misunderstanding. The individuals who invaded the Capitol did so because they thought Trump wanted them to, and he actually did want them to, because if he didn't, he would have attempted to stop it much sooner.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#175

Post by Bhilai »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #160
Bhilai wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tired of this dont piss the crowd who lost line of thinking. Well, the crowd who won in a fair election is also pissed because the side who lost doesn't want to accept their defeat and move on.

Hello Russiagate, Impeachments ... how long did those go on. Increasing trust in the outcome would go a long way. How about trying to make the election more verifiable. Put it some real biometric features into mail out ballots. Instead we get, no id required to vote. Doesn't really build trust.

There was simply no fraud at the scale of what you seem to be intending. Most claims of fraud were investigated multiple times (AZ, MI, WI ...) and no evidence has come up which would prove baseless claims of Trump et al. Most states where Trump et al are claiming fraud already have voting ID laws. Just because your guy did not win does not mean the process in not trust worthy.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#176

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

IgorPartola wrote: post #152
MiroF wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They subpoena you to get a better answer Sure except the subpoena in question was not actually about records of conversations that the rioters had, it was about efforts FB did/didn't take to discount election misinformation. Election misinformation is covered by free speech.

> Election misinformation is covered by free speech. In the same way as yelling “fire” in a theater.

So? Illegal the legal according to then overruled by SCOTUS, and widely misunderstood when it’s used as a reference?

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#177

Post by tonfreed »

umvi wrote: post #2

The implication from the committee is that these companies should have monitored and suppressed/censored their users harder? Is the committee looking for a scapegoat or something?

Amazing that you can burn down all the poor areas in cities all across the US and be declared heroes by these people, but by gosh if you raid the Congress candy drawer you're in deep trouble.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#178

Post by dukeofdoom »

Bhilai wrote: post #175
dukeofdoom wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello Russiagate, Impeachments ... how long did those go on. Increasing trust in the outcome would go a long way. How about trying to make the election more verifiable. Put it some real biometric features into mail out ballots. Instead we get, no id required to vote. Doesn't really build trust.

There was simply no fraud at the scale of what you seem to be intending. Most claims of fraud were investigated multiple times (AZ, MI, WI ...) and no evidence has come up which would prove baseless claims of Trump et al. Most states where Trump et al are claiming fraud already have voting ID laws. Just because your guy did not win does not mean the process in not trust worthy.

It absolutely is not trustworthy. Evidence by a third of democrats not trusting the results. There's no biometrics in the ballots to match them to a unique voter once it leaves the envelope. So you can't audit it back to a person, best you can do is recount the same result. Hence why I think mail in ballot results are suspect in any country.

I'm not American, so I'm not swayed by part allegiance. What I did see is 3 am mail in ballot reversals in multiple cities at ridiculous high skewed percentages.

A wildly popular president, the most popular in history, 81 million votes, that somehow is barely polling in the 30%s. Winning the fewest precincts in history yet breaking record for the most votes. More black people voting in record numbers much higher than for Obama in downtown Detroit for him.

It smells like a Putin election. Except Putin is actually popular in his country unlike Biden.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#179

Post by _-david-_ »

ben_w wrote: post #86
_-david-_ wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who planted the pipe bombs? Do you have proof that it was the rioters? If so please give the evidence to the FBI.

A trite response like that only makes sense if pipe bombs are so commonplace in the American Capitol that mere coincidence would not be surprising. I’m not American, so you tell me: are they?

Pipe bombs are not common. I'm sure you know that. The problem is we are in an extremely polarized time. Accusing people of an act like planting pipe bombs with no evidence is not going to lower the temperature.

Re: Jan 6 committee subpoenas Meta, Google, Reddit etc. after 'inadequate responses'

#180

Post by whimsicalism »

caleb-allen wrote: post #130
whimsicalism wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Youtube recommends videos you are likely to click on. It is unclear to me what else they are supposed to recommend. It is also unclear to me that the recommendations ought to be moderated by some embedded state entity to make sure the results align with what is in political vogue.

There is a difference between holding a view that isn't "in vogue" and inciting violence. To pretend otherwise is disingenuous and ignorant.

This is in the context of the commission saying that FB didn't do enough to block the spread of election fraud misinformation, not that they didn't do enough to block imminent lawless action.
Post reply on HN