A House Ignited: Chancellor Biden’s pre-Enabling Act Speech

 

I just watched this appalling speech (via C-SPAN’s YouTube) from Biden. There’s the blood-red, the Marines at parade rest, the only crowd he’s ever drawn who weren’t required to be there by the Constitution itself…

It’s chock full of divisive, angry, focused rhetoric that should be sufficient to get the next Civil War underway, but there’s plenty of a different whiff about it. This awful speech is long on Hitler Enabling Act resonance, and justification of future actions.  This speech doesn’t do anything on its own, of course — instead, it prepares the battlefield for what is to come.  Along the way,  he (I mean they) provide reassurance to their tech-fascist partners that continued persecution of political opposition will still be green-lit.

People ask what the purpose and the method is for this speech.  I think it’s to provide a whole raft of language to the administration’s agents throughout industry, media, and in their terror wings as well (Antifa, BLM, whatever’s left of Occupy, and the school boards’ enforcers).  The speech in itself does nothing.  It’s not actually an Enabling Act speech, but can be a precursor.  What it absolutely does is enable others to exercise special “emergency” powers, but without formal justification.

The focus on elections in the speech is further instruction to the administration’s fascist partners as to the goal they must support using their powers.  They are being instructed to use the phrasing in the speech to suppress any discussion about election integrity which does not parrot the Party Line — Orange Goldstein bad.

This is a surprisingly subtle speech.  The read meat is bizarre.  The real protein is in the subtext.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 124 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Certainly, there are multiple stunning phrases deployed.  No President should speak to Americans like this — nor about Americans.  But the real machinery being put in motion here is downstream.  Watch for big tech and big media to rely on phrases from this speech in their re-tooled censorship campaigns.

    • #1
  2. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    The contradictions are stunning. 

    1. He says that supporting insurrection and supporting America are incompatible.  He repeated it for emphasis.  Standing in front of Independence Hall.

    2. He condemned political violence repeatedly, in several different formulations.  Yet the only political violence these people notice is a bunch of miffed tourists who bumbled through some red ropes at the Capitol.  Nothing on CHAZ/CHOP, Portlandistan, sustained BLM riots in multiple cities and the rest of the “mostly peaceful” 2020 “summer of flaming love”.  He criticized “MAGA Republicans” for inciting insurrection (which has never been seen), but is silent on people like Nancy Pelosi and Mad Maxine Waters who actually, factually, on video, literally called for riots.  Nothing about Democrats flaming, smashing riots in DC after the election of Trump.

    I’m thinking that a handy rubric for the following week is to see which conservative vs “conservative” voices will point this out.  In particular, look for those who will make the first point (above) but not the second.

    The power of propaganda is the power to say patently absurd, provocative things without being challenged.  See who’s falling to propaganda.

    • #2
  3. Douglas Pratt Coolidge
    Douglas Pratt
    @DouglasPratt

    I was trying to organize my thoughts about this event, and Geraghty beat me to it this morning. Who in the hell thought it was a great idea to make the setting of the speech look like a Star Wars bad guy’s throne room? That right there is an insult to America.

    • #3
  4. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    I’ve moved from alarm, to outrage and almost a kind of numbness; my mixed reactions are probably connected to my thinking that this can’t be happening in America. Clearly, I am wrong, and will need to find a way to work with that ugly reality. I guess I’m moving into sadness now . . . 

    • #4
  5. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    I am not gonna watch it because the image is all I need to know. 

    • #5
  6. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    They should have waited for the Reichstag to burn down.

    • #6
  7. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Douglas Pratt (View Comment):

    I was trying to organize my thoughts about this event, and Geraghty beat me to it this morning. Who in the hell thought it was a great idea to make the setting of the speech look like a Star Wars bad guy’s throne room? That right there is an insult to America.

    They don’t care. They don’t have too. Because they have won. 

    We have lost. 

    We are going to be dragged from our homes and murdered. 

    • #7
  8. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Percival (View Comment):

    They should have waited for the Reichstag to burn down.

    Ding!  This is why they can’t shut up about #TouristKrieg. 

    We are all van der Lubbe now.

    • #8
  9. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Technically, he did not call us a “Clear and Present” danger, threat, whatever.  He quoted a handy Republican judge.

    • #9
  10. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    BDB (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    They should have waited for the Reichstag to burn down.

    Ding! This is why they can’t shut up about #TouristKrieg.

    We are all van der Lubbe now.

    The problem they have is that Trump has to be van der Lubbe.

    • #10
  11. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    BDB: People ask what the purpose and the method is for this speech.  I think it’s to provide a whole raft of language to the administration’s agents throughout industry, media, and in their terror wings as well (Antifa, BLM, whatever’s left of Occupy, and the school boards’ enforcers).  The speech in itself does nothing.  It’s not actually an Enabling Act speech, but can be a precursor.  What it absolutely does is enable *others* to exercise special “emergency” powers, but without formal justification.

    I said it on ExJon’s post, and I’ll say it again: They’re trying to goad some unstable, fringe actors into committing acts of violence, which the Fascists in control of our institutions will use to justify a wide crackdown on all Republicans and those who dissent. And I’m pretty sure they found their patsies and have already urged and prepped them to act. Think Governor Whitmer’s “kidnappers.”

    Slow Joe just exponentially increased the possibility of things going kinetic.

    • #11
  12. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    BDB (View Comment):

    The contradictions are stunning.

    1. He says that supporting insurrection and supporting America are incompatible. He repeated it for emphasis. Standing in front of Independence Hall.

    2. He condemned political violence repeatedly, in several different formulations. Yet the only political violence these people notice is a bunch of miffed tourists who bumbled through some red ropes at the Capitol. Nothing on CHAZ/CHOP, Portlandistan, sustained BLM riots in multiple cities and the rest of the “mostly peaceful” 2020 “summer of flaming love”. He criticized “MAGA Republicans” for inciting insurrection (which has never been seen), but is silent on people like Nancy Pelosi and Mad Maxine Waters who actually, factually, on video, literally called for riots. Nothing about Democrats flaming, smashing riots in DC after the election of Trump.

    I’m thinking that a handy rubric for the following week is to see which conservative vs “conservative” voices will point this out. In particular, look for those who will make the first point (above) but not the second.

    The power of propaganda is the power to say patently absurd, provocative things without being challenged. See who’s falling to propaganda.

    The highlighted part is not true, BDB.  There was actual rioting at the Capitol on January 6.  Here is a video of part of it:

    I am very troubled by this.  There seems to be an inability to face facts, on both left and right.  We saw rioting in the summer of 2020 after the death of George Floyd, and people on the political left called it “peaceful protest.”  That was false, and inexcusably so, in my view, as the facts were apparent.

    We saw the same thing on January 6, with rioting at the Capitol, and people on the political right seem to be claiming that it didn’t occur, as you did in this comment, BDB.  That is false, as the facts are apparent.  What is your excuse?

    I may or may not watch President Biden’s speech.  It appears that he engaged in some inflammatory political rhetoric.  It’s OK to criticize that, but what I’m seeing — here at Ricochet — are responses containing even more inflammatory rhetoric.

    Please, everybody, take a deep breath and calm down.

     

    • #12
  13. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    BDB (View Comment):

    Technically, he did not call us a “Clear and Present” danger, threat, whatever. He quoted a handy Republican judge.

    That’s even better.   A judge declares we are a clear and present danger.  That gives Carte  Blanche to a host of things that would otherwise be violation of civil liberties.

    And the scariest thing is that there is a large cadre of rank and file Dems who are ecstatic  at the speech   “This is the speech we’ve been waiting for from him.”

     

    • #13
  14. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I am very troubled by this.  There seems to be an inability to face facts, on both left and right.  We saw rioting in the summer of 2020 after the death of George Floyd, and people on the political left called it “peaceful protest.”  That was false, and inexcusably so, in my view, as the facts were apparent.

    We saw the same thing on January 6, with rioting at the Capitol, and people on the political right seem to be claiming that it didn’t occur, as you did in this comment, BDB.  That is false, as the facts are apparent.  What is your excuse?

    You’re always very troubled.

    You will accuse me of special pleading.  I admit I’m open to the charge.  Here’s the thing.  With hundreds of thousands of people on the Mall, on J6 there were a handful of incidents like the one you show.  Yet there was a pointed absence of large-scale violence.  We know that there were leftists agents provocateur in the crowd.  Where do you think they were?

    I have not heard any claims that leftist riots throughout Trump’s administration featured “rightist agents”.

    I have participated in several assemblies on the Mall and environs, beginning in 2013.  You can always tell the leftist agitators, the professional instigators.  increasingly these are the “Ray Epps” type, straight out of federal casting.  Remember all the people around Epps chanting “Fed! Fed!”  We know these people infiltrate us every time.  And despite my own eyewitness experience at events, the media coverage makes any conservative assembly look like the apocalypse.  While literally burning city blocks and ridiculous but violent attempts at secession are called “mostly peaceful” and “expressions of love.”

    I was not there on Jan 6.  I was in Japan, or I *would have been there*.  I wish I had firmer details.  I’ve first-hand experience in the difference between the facts on the ground and the reporting of events.  So I’m not buying a couple of anecdotal film clips as evidence of some Republican Riot.  It’s bull-manure.  One clarifying point is the quiet from the right since then.  We don’t go to DC anymore for the most part.  I view this as the active right in general trying to figure out the agitator problem.  Did any of this stop leftist violence?  Not a chance.  I view this as one more indicator that the “Republican Riot” story just doesn’t hold up.

    I have tried to bolster my special pleading with a circumstantial case. 

    You asked.

     

    • #14
  15. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I am very troubled by this.  There seems to be an inability to face facts, on both left and right.  We saw rioting in the summer of 2020 after the death of George Floyd, and people on the political left called it “peaceful protest.”  That was false, and inexcusably so, in my view, as the facts were apparent.

    We saw the same thing on January 6, with rioting at the Capitol, and people on the political right seem to be claiming that it didn’t occur, as you did in this comment, BDB.  That is false, as the facts are apparent.  What is your excuse?

    I may or may not watch President Biden’s speech.  It appears that he engaged in some inflammatory political rhetoric.  It’s OK to criticize that, but what I’m seeing — here at Ricochet — are responses containing even more inflammatory rhetoric.

    Please, everybody, take a deep breath and calm down.

    Last January:

    “How many FBI agents or confidential informants actively participated in the events of Jan. 6?” Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz asked the Executive Assistant Director for the FBI’s National Security Branch Jill Sanborn.

    “I can’t go into the specifics of sources and methods,” Sanborn said.

    “Did any FBI agents or confidential informants actively participate in the events of Jan. 6, yes or no?” Cruz pressed.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn said, despite The New York Times revealing in September the presence of federal agents within the crowd that stormed the Capitol. Earlier this month, Newsweek revealed in a blockbuster story the presence of secret commandos with “shoot-to-kill” authority.

    “Did any FBI agents or confidential informants commit crimes of violence on Jan. 6?” Cruz followed up.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn repeated.

    “Did any FBI agents or FBI informants actively encourage and incite crimes of violence on Jan. 6?” Cruz asked.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn said for a third time.

    It seems to me that “no, of course not” should be a pretty straightforward answer. Stow the crap about sources and methods. Your sources have been shown before to be “our imaginations” and your methods to be “lying our heads off.”

    I called out the Reichstag fire, and I’m sticking to it.

     

    • #15
  16. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Percival (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I am very troubled by this. There seems to be an inability to face facts, on both left and right. We saw rioting in the summer of 2020 after the death of George Floyd, and people on the political left called it “peaceful protest.” That was false, and inexcusably so, in my view, as the facts were apparent.

    We saw the same thing on January 6, with rioting at the Capitol, and people on the political right seem to be claiming that it didn’t occur, as you did in this comment, BDB. That is false, as the facts are apparent. What is your excuse?

    I may or may not watch President Biden’s speech. It appears that he engaged in some inflammatory political rhetoric. It’s OK to criticize that, but what I’m seeing — here at Ricochet — are responses containing even more inflammatory rhetoric.

    Please, everybody, take a deep breath and calm down.

    Last January:

    “How many FBI agents or confidential informants actively participated in the events of Jan. 6?” Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz asked the Executive Assistant Director for the FBI’s National Security Branch Jill Sanborn.

    “I can’t go into the specifics of sources and methods,” Sanborn said.

    “Did any FBI agents or confidential informants actively participate in the events of Jan. 6, yes or no?” Cruz pressed.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn said, despite The New York Times revealing in September the presence of federal agents within the crowd that stormed the Capitol. Earlier this month, Newsweek revealed in a blockbuster story the presence of secret commandos with “shoot-to-kill” authority.

    “Did any FBI agents or confidential informants commit crimes of violence on Jan. 6?” Cruz followed up.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn repeated.

    “Did any FBI agents or FBI informants actively encourage and incite crimes of violence on Jan. 6?” Cruz asked.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn said for a third time.

    It seems to me that “no, of course not” should be a pretty straightforward answer. Stow the crap about sources and methods. Your sources have been shown before to be “our imaginations” and your methods to be “lying our heads off.”

    I called out the Reichstag fire, and I’m sticking to it.

    One particular witness being unable to answer such questions does not demonstrate that everybody rioting on January 6 was a government agent or informer.  Not remotely.

    It is some evidence, but only a little.  If you want to prove that the rioters were engaging in a false-flag operation, you’ll need more much more evidence than this to convince me.

    It should also be noted that your response did not address my statement.  BDB implied that no rioting occurred on January 6.  That is false.  Your response seeks to shift the blame for the rioting that did occur.

    • #16
  17. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    BDB (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I am very troubled by this. There seems to be an inability to face facts, on both left and right. We saw rioting in the summer of 2020 after the death of George Floyd, and people on the political left called it “peaceful protest.” That was false, and inexcusably so, in my view, as the facts were apparent.

    We saw the same thing on January 6, with rioting at the Capitol, and people on the political right seem to be claiming that it didn’t occur, as you did in this comment, BDB. That is false, as the facts are apparent. What is your excuse?

    You’re always very troubled.

    You will accuse me of special pleading. I admit I’m open to the charge. Here’s the thing. With hundreds of thousands of people on the Mall, on J6 there were a handful of incidents like the one you show. Yet there was a pointed absence of large-scale violence. We know that there were leftists agents provocateur in the crowd. Where do you think they were?

    I have not heard any claims that leftist riots throughout Trump’s administration featured “rightist agents”.

    I have participated in several assemblies on the Mall and environs, beginning in 2013. You can always tell the leftist agitators, the professional instigators. increasingly these are the “Ray Epps” type, straight out of federal casting. Remember all the people around Epps chanting “Fed! Fed!” We know these people infiltrate us every time. And despite my own eyewitness experience at events, the media coverage makes any conservative assembly look like the apocalypse. While literally burning city blocks and ridiculous but violent attempts at secession are called “mostly peaceful” and “expressions of love.”

    I was not there on Jan 6. I was in Japan, or I *would have been there*. I wish I had firmer details. I’ve first-hand experience in the difference between the facts on the ground and the reporting of events. So I’m not buying a couple of anecdotal film clips as evidence of some Republican Riot. It’s bull-manure. One clarifying point is the quiet from the right since then. We don’t go to DC anymore for the most part. I view this as the active right in general trying to figure out the agitator problem. Did any of this stop leftist violence? Not a chance. I view this as one more indicator that the “Republican Riot” story just doesn’t hold up.

    I have tried to bolster my special pleading with a circumstantial case.

    You asked.

     

    I don’t even know if there were “agents provocateur” in the crowd.  Maybe there were.  If there were, I don’t know where they are, and I doubt that you know, either.  Even if there were such “agents provocateur,” that would not excuse the rioting by others.

    • #17
  18. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t even know if there were “agents provocateur” in the crowd. Maybe there were. If there were, I don’t know where they are, and I doubt that you know, either. Even if there were such “agents provocateur,” that would not excuse the rioting by others.

    Your ignorance on the one hand and fastidity on the other are telling.  We will not agree.  J6 is overblown, and the left’s Summer of Putsch is getting a pass.  I’m agin it.

    DO you take issue with Biden’s speech?  What do you think of the likely antecedents I have laid out?

    • #18
  19. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    I said it on ExJon’s post, and I’ll say it again: They’re trying to goad some unstable, fringe actors into committing acts of violence, which the Fascists in control of our institutions will use to justify a wide crackdown on all Republicans and those who dissent.

    It seems that way to me too. 

    • #19
  20. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    It is some evidence, but only a little.  If you want to prove that the rioters were engaging in a false-flag operation, you’ll need more much more evidence than this to convince me.

    Maybe my only goal is to prove to others how gullible some people can be.

    • #20
  21. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    We saw the same thing on January 6, with rioting at the Capitol, and people on the political right seem to be claiming that it didn’t occur

    I have never read a comment implying that.

    But, speaking of facts, there is no major city in this country that does not understand the potential for large assemblies of upset people to morph into a protest that is destructive. That’s why these police forces have things on hand like tear gas.

    This protest did not exceed the predictable boundaries of a protest gone bad. It happens.

    And it was none of the things that the Democrats subsequently have made it out to be.

    We know that because, speaking of facts, the FBI conducted a month-long investigation into the situation, and, as they reported to Congress, they found no weapons nor any evidence of any sinister anti-government plot.

    It was, and the facts bear this out, simply a protest that got out of hand.

    • #21
  22. 1787Libertarian Member
    1787Libertarian
    @

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Douglas Pratt (View Comment):

    I was trying to organize my thoughts about this event, and Geraghty beat me to it this morning. Who in the hell thought it was a great idea to make the setting of the speech look like a Star Wars bad guy’s throne room? That right there is an insult to America.

    They don’t care. They don’t have too. Because they have won.

    We have lost.

    We are going to be dragged from our homes and murdered.

    No I won’t be dragged from my home. I might be wheeled out, but I am not letting those bastards drag me out.

    • #22
  23. 1787Libertarian Member
    1787Libertarian
    @

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

     

    “How many FBI agents or confidential informants actively participated in the events of Jan. 6?” Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz asked the Executive Assistant Director for the FBI’s National Security Branch Jill Sanborn.

    “I can’t go into the specifics of sources and methods,” Sanborn said.

    “Did any FBI agents or confidential informants actively participate in the events of Jan. 6, yes or no?” Cruz pressed.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn said, despite The New York Times revealing in September the presence of federal agents within the crowd that stormed the Capitol. Earlier this month, Newsweek revealed in a blockbuster story the presence of secret commandos with “shoot-to-kill” authority.

    “Did any FBI agents or confidential informants commit crimes of violence on Jan. 6?” Cruz followed up.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn repeated.

    “Did any FBI agents or FBI informants actively encourage and incite crimes of violence on Jan. 6?” Cruz asked.

    “I can’t answer that,” Sanborn said for a third time.

    It seems to me that “no, of course not” should be a pretty straightforward answer. Stow the crap about sources and methods. Your sources have been shown before to be “our imaginations” and your methods to be “lying our heads off.”

    I called out the Reichstag fire, and I’m sticking to it.

    One particular witness being unable to answer such questions does not demonstrate that everybody rioting on January 6 was a government agent or informer. Not remotely.

    It is some evidence, but only a little. If you want to prove that the rioters were engaging in a false-flag operation, you’ll need more much more evidence than this to convince me.

    It should also be noted that your response did not address my statement. BDB implied that no rioting occurred on January 6. That is false. Your response seeks to shift the blame for the rioting that did occur.

    For Pete’s Sake, really? Is this what you are going with? Who is claiming EVERYBODY was an FBI stooge? Did Cruz in that Q&A with the government stooge? Come on!

    Furthermore we are not talking about some rando off the streets answering these questions–or rather not answering them. We are talking about the Executive Assistant Director for the FBI’s National Security Branch. This person is going to know. And that fact that this person absolutely refused to refute the premise of the questions tells me that there is something. 

    • #23
  24. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    NOTE: Edited title and opening a bit.

    • #24
  25. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    The contradictions are stunning.

    1. He says that supporting insurrection and supporting America are incompatible. He repeated it for emphasis. Standing in front of Independence Hall.

    2. He condemned political violence repeatedly, in several different formulations. Yet the only political violence these people notice is a bunch of miffed tourists who bumbled through some red ropes at the Capitol. Nothing on CHAZ/CHOP, Portlandistan, sustained BLM riots in multiple cities and the rest of the “mostly peaceful” 2020 “summer of flaming love”. He criticized “MAGA Republicans” for inciting insurrection (which has never been seen), but is silent on people like Nancy Pelosi and Mad Maxine Waters who actually, factually, on video, literally called for riots. Nothing about Democrats flaming, smashing riots in DC after the election of Trump.

    I’m thinking that a handy rubric for the following week is to see which conservative vs “conservative” voices will point this out. In particular, look for those who will make the first point (above) but not the second.

    The power of propaganda is the power to say patently absurd, provocative things without being challenged. See who’s falling to propaganda.

    The highlighted part is not true, BDB. There was actual rioting at the Capitol on January 6. Here is a video of part of it:

    I am very troubled by this. There seems to be an inability to face facts, on both left and right. We saw rioting in the summer of 2020 after the death of George Floyd, and people on the political left called it “peaceful protest.” That was false, and inexcusably so, in my view, as the facts were apparent.

    We saw the same thing on January 6, with rioting at the Capitol, and people on the political right seem to be claiming that it didn’t occur, as you did in this comment, BDB. That is false, as the facts are apparent. What is your excuse?

    I may or may not watch President Biden’s speech. It appears that he engaged in some inflammatory political rhetoric. It’s OK to criticize that, but what I’m seeing — here at Ricochet — are responses containing even more inflammatory rhetoric.

    Please, everybody, take a deep breath and calm down.

     

    Weren’t you leaving?

    • #25
  26. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    I don’t even know if there were “agents provocateur” in the crowd.  Maybe there were.

    The DOJ has already admitted to at least 20.

    • #26
  27. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Douglas Pratt (View Comment):

    I was trying to organize my thoughts about this event, and Geraghty beat me to it this morning. Who in the hell thought it was a great idea to make the setting of the speech look like a Star Wars bad guy’s throne room? That right there is an insult to America.

    It looked like a demon speaking in front of the flames of hell to me.

    And I think that’s not too far off from reality.

    Maybe giving the set a little more of that homey look.

    • #27
  28. Richard Easton Coolidge
    Richard Easton
    @RichardEaston

    BDB (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I don’t even know if there were “agents provocateur” in the crowd. Maybe there were. If there were, I don’t know where they are, and I doubt that you know, either. Even if there were such “agents provocateur,” that would not excuse the rioting by others.

    Your ignorance on the one hand and fastidity on the other are telling. We will not agree. J6 is overblown, and the left’s Summer of Putsch is getting a pass. I’m agin it.

    DO you take issue with Biden’s speech? What do you think of the likely antecedents I have laid out?

    Michael Yon saw Antifa groups at the Capitol on J6. He identified them by their dress.

    • #28
  29. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    I’ve moved from alarm, to outrage and almost a kind of numbness; my mixed reactions are probably connected to my thinking that this can’t be happening in America. Clearly, I am wrong, and will need to find a way to work with that ugly reality. I guess I’m moving into sadness now . . .

    Was it numbness or extraordinary confusion, things not making sense?  (I’ve spent the last nearly two years with increasing sadness.  But now at least the evil has shown itself and flexed its muscles at us.  And we can defy it openly for who and what is it.)

    • #29
  30. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I am not gonna watch it because the image is all I need to know.

    The words were all teleprompted.  When he speaks from a teleprompter, it’s all BS anyway.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.