Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Trump Presidency...

I'll tell my colleague not to go rioting if she feels the urge.

Thanks for the tip.

What medication would you normally be taking at this time of day?
 
That was me and the point was not that it was not serious, the five people who died would disagree with that for a start, but that it was not an existential threat. There is a considerable difference between a mob doing random violence and a trained and co-ordinated group trying to inflict maximum mayhem - as multiple mass casualty attacks have repeatedly demonstrated.

Imagine what those scenes would look like if it had been a Mumbai or Bataclan-style incident. The attackers wouldn't have milled around chatting to security and they would have probably had some idea of the layout of the target. Further, most of your eye witnesses would be in the morgue along with the news crews.
Thanks for that. I would say that the novel term "existential threat" is much over-used, but it surely means more than simply "high death toll". Bataclan for example shook France to its core (rightly) but it wasn't an existential threat to the continuation of the French Republic. It is arguable that the violent invasion of Congress was on a different scale as an "existential threat" to the US Republic. If it had succeeded in its admitted aim (an aim shared even by the uncoordinated majority in that mob) and Trump was now deemed to have won the election, much more violence could be foreseen across America by the summer.
 
The attackers wouldn't have milled around chatting to security and they would have probably had some idea of the layout of the target.

Seems that they may not have needed to, having apparently had guided tours of the Capitol the day before.
 
Last edited:
Oh, boo hoo. Perhaps you should have thought that actions have consequences before you left home, and that you have to pay for your advertising.:p:p:p

'Jenna Ryan, a Texas real estate broker who took a private jet to Washington to join the attack on the US Capitol, has pleaded with Donald Trump to pardon her after she was arrested by federal authorities.

'After surrendering to the FBI on Friday, Ryan said: “We all deserve a pardon. I’m facing a prison sentence,” she told CBS11 at her home. “I think I do not deserve that.” Turning to look into the camera, she said: “I would ask the president of the United States to give me a pardon.” Ryan said she had been “displaying my patriotism”, adding: “I listen to my president who told me to go to the Capitol.”

'Ryan left a trove of information online. Court papers show she posted a picture of herself taking a private jet to Washington DC the day before the riot, subsequently posing on the steps of the Capitol and beside a window smashed as the pro-Trump mob broke in. “We’re gonna go down and storm the Capitol,” Ryan said in a video posted to Facebook. “They’re down there right now and that’s why we came and so that’s what we are going to do. So wish me luck.” During a live Facebook video at the scene of the incursion, Ryan stated: “We are going to ******* go in here. Life or death, it doesn’t matter. Here we go.”

'She climbed the steps of the Capitol, then promoted her real estate business to camera: “Y’all know who to hire for your realtor. Jenna Ryan for your realtor.” Later, Ryan posted on Twitter: “We just stormed the Capital [sic]. It was one of the best days of my life.”


 
Steamboat and his FB buds must be spaffing in their MTP dungarees in anticipation.

'War-like imagery has begun spreading in Republican circles after the attack on the U.S. Capitol by a mob of President Donald Trump s supporters, with some elected officials and party leaders rejecting pleas to tone down rhetoric calling for a second civil war.

'In northwestern Wisconsin, the chairman of the St. Croix County Republican Party was forced to resign Friday after refusing for a week after the siege to remove an online post urging followers to “prepare for war.” The incoming chairwoman of the Michigan GOP and her husband, a state lawmaker, have joined a conservative social media site created after the Capitol riot where the possibility of civil war is a topic.

'Phil Reynolds, a member of the GOP central committee in California’s Santa Clara County, appeared to urge on insurrectionists on social media during the Jan. 6 attack, declaring on Facebook: “The war has begun. Citizens take arms! Drumroll please….. Civil War or No Civil War?”

'The heightened rhetoric mimics language far-right extremists and white supremacists have used for years, and it follows a year of civil unrest over the killing of George Floyd, a Black man, by a white police officer and its links to systemic racism. Some leftists have used similar language, which Republicans have likened to advocating a new civil war.'


 

Mattb

LE
Worth noting that Steamboat is also not an existential threat to the USA, no matter how much he wants to be.
 
Arrogant little ****. This is not for you stupid.
Of course it was. It was about not going rioting if you live in Washington DC.

My colleague lives there, so I thought I would give her a ring - on her mobile phone - and tell her not to bother. I know she was debating whether to do some online shoe shopping or go for a little riot, so I thought I would tell her so she can look for some nice heels instead.

After all she doesn't need to be pouring the petrol into the bottles if they aren't going to be used does she? Bit of a safety hazard.

You need to think these things through. Why don't you start by writing down a little plan for yourself? To help keep your thoughts in order kind of thing, that way you wouldn't keep getting surprised when people spot the flaws in your projects.
 
But this wasn't just random violence, it was an attempt to overthrow the very principles on which the United States was founded by right-wing extremists, led by that fat orange c*nt.

I see Sir has read "Quick Wins for Busy Analysts", excellent use of analytical terms there.
 
Saw this posting alleging the fence ha been build to ‘keep people in’. What do you think?

There is also a picture of another fence with the razor wire been fitted on the inside.

I think that's wishful thinking. It's just a temporary fence for one days use, no point in making it hard to take down.
 

ipso_facto

War Hero
Of course it was. It was about not going rioting if you live in Washington DC.

My colleague lives there, so I thought I would give her a ring - on her mobile phone - and tell her not to bother. I know she was debating whether to do some online shoe shopping or go for a little riot, so I thought I would tell her so she can look for some nice heels instead.

After all she doesn't need to be pouring the petrol into the bottles if they aren't going to be used does she? Bit of a safety hazard.

So, the message is getting through to the target audience. You'll get a spiritual star for doing your bit to help avoid violence.
 
There's a bunch of PhD's coming out of this situation.

And a book surely to rival "Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision" as a text of intelligence failure.

An issue is surely the problem of the sheer volume of data to collect against* versus the analytical effort to determine significance in a wilderness of hyperbolic rhetoric.

*At least in terms of open source, we'll probably never know (or should never know) about human or intercept intelligence that was part of the overall effort to understand what was going to happen.

If this is truly a conclusion

The memo concluded that Jan. 6 was shaping up to potentially be a perfect storm of danger, because of the size of the expected crowds, the urgency of the group’s mission, the call for demonstrators to bring lethal weapons, the location of the two largest protests in close proximity to the Capitol grounds and the fact that “both have been promoted by President Trump himself.”

Then some questions have to be asked about protective security arrangements, as regards what was in place on the day; versus the tiresome shows of force we grew used to all summer.

However, you have to sympathise with the FBI analysts -

FBI officials have said it is difficult to distinguish cheap talk from actual threats online, where the volume of incendiary posts is astronomical.

Apparently the article behind the paywall at the WaPo.
"Three days before thousands of rioters converged on the U.S. Capitol, an internal Capitol Police intelligence report warned of a violent scenario in which “Congress itself” could be the target of angry supporters of President Trump on Jan. 6, laying out a stark alert that deepens questions about the security failures that day.

In a 12-page report on Jan. 3, the intelligence unit for the congressional police force described how thousands of enraged protesters, egged on by Trump and flanked by white supremacists and extreme militia groups, were likely to stream into Washington armed for battle.

This time, the focus of their ire was members of Congress, the report said.

“Supporters of the current president see January 6, 2021, as the last opportunity to overturn the results of the presidential election,” according to the memo, portions of which were obtained by The Washington Post. “This sense of desperation and disappointment may lead to more of an incentive to become violent. Unlike previous post-election protests, the targets of the pro-Trump supporters are not necessarily the counter-protesters as they were previously, but rather Congress itself is the target on the 6th.”

The internal report — which does not appear to have been shared widely with other law enforcement agencies, including the FBI — was among a number of flags that security experts say should have alerted officials to the high security risks on Jan. 6.

A day before the attack, an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit warning that some extremists were preparing to travel to Washington and threatening to commit violence and “war.” And dozens of people on a terrorist watch list were in Washington that day, including many suspected white supremacists, as The Post previously reported.

.... Two people familiar with the Capitol Police intelligence memo, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe security preparations, said the report was conveyed to all Capitol Police command staff by the intelligence unit’s director, Jack Donohue. Another law enforcement official said the report prompted the Capitol Police chief to seek the emergency activation of the National Guard and led the department to place its perimeter barricades farther from the Capitol than during past events.

.... Former Capitol Police chief Steven Sund...told The Post in an interview Sunday that in the days immediately preceding the attack, he grew concerned that additional security measures were needed. He asked top congressional security officials for permission to declare an emergency and activate the National Guard, a request he said they rebuffed.

“We looked at the intelligence,” he said. “We knew we would have large crowds, the potential for some violent altercations. I had nothing indicating we would have a large mob seize the Capitol.”

Nevertheless, the Jan. 3 intelligence report produced by his agency includes chilling descriptions of the ferocity of the combat that activists appeared to be planning on forums where white supremacists and the alt-right movement gather — presaging the mayhem days later.

The report said organizers were urging Trump supporters to come armed with guns and to bring specialized combat gear — including gas masks and military-style bulletproof vests called “plate carriers” — to Washington on Jan. 6.

The memo concluded that Jan. 6 was shaping up to potentially be a perfect storm of danger, because of the size of the expected crowds, the urgency of the group’s mission, the call for demonstrators to bring lethal weapons, the location of the two largest protests in close proximity to the Capitol grounds and the fact that “both have been promoted by President Trump himself.”

“The Stop the Steal protest in particular does not have a permit, but several high profile speakers, including Members of Congress are expected to speak at the event,” the document stated**. “This combined with Stop the Steal’s propensity to attract white supremacists, militia members and others who actively promote violence, may lead to a significantly dangerous situation for law enforcement and the general public alike.”**

Two people familiar with the report said it was not shared widely outside the police force.

....On Jan. 4, the day after the intelligence unit shared its warning and conclusions with more than a dozen Capitol Police command staff members, Sund said he asked the Senate and House sergeants at arms for permission to put the National Guard on emergency standby.

Sund said House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving and Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael Stenger rejected that idea and suggested that he instead informally seek out his Guard contacts, asking them to “lean forward” and be on alert in case Capitol Police needed their help.

.... On the day of the attack, Sund said he urgently renewed the request for emergency National Guard support after a mob broke through the Capitol barricades around 1 p.m. The minutes ticked by as the sergeants at arms sought approval from congressional leadership.

The initial wave of the military reinforcements would not arrive for more than four hours — at 5:40 p.m.

The Capitol Police intelligence report was a collaborative product of its intelligence division, led by Donohue, a national expert on the rise of radicalization and violence among extremist groups and domestic terrorists who was recently hired by the department.

.... In July 2020, Donohue testified before the House Homeland Security subcommittee on intelligence and counterterrorism about how social media was being used to radicalize and foment violence in right-wing and left-wing extremist groups. He warned about the increasingly incendiary nature of events billed as free-speech protests and extremists’ attempts to harm government officials and police in their calls for insurrection.

When “protesters arrive intent on violence or occupation and are carrying semiautomatic weapons, the stakes grow exponentially,” Donohue told the committee, adding, “Law enforcement must remain vigilant in identifying before they act, but the time frame may be remarkably short.”

Mary McCord, former acting assistant attorney general for national security, said the lack of more robust security around the Capitol on Jan. 6 has been “a complete mystery to me,” but she said the Capitol Police’s handling of its own intelligence was even more disturbing.

“It needs to be investigated,” said McCord, who is a fellow in a George Washington University program on extremism and a leader of Georgetown’s center on constitutional law. “It could be those who received the report were under pressure to handle this a certain way. It could mean that there were inherent biases, where people discounted this, and just didn’t think a large group of White conservatives who generally ally with the police and the GOP lawmakers, who were also present there that day, would be violent.”

.... Officials said FBI Director Christopher A. Wray and acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen were not briefed on the document in particular because it was considered a raw intelligence product, and investigators had not identified those responsible for the posts. But, the officials said, Wray was briefed in advance more broadly regarding online chatter about violence, as well as information that the FBI’s sources were relaying about possible extremists intending to travel to the Capitol.

Officials have said FBI agents visited some of those extremists to discourage them from traveling. But the bureau did not take other steps — such as issuing a formal threat assessment to law enforcement — that might have raised the level of alarm.

FBI officials have said it is difficult to distinguish cheap talk from actual threats online, where the volume of incendiary posts is astronomical.

 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Thanks for that. I would say that the novel term "existential threat" is much over-used, but it surely means more than simply "high death toll". Bataclan for example shook France to its core (rightly) but it wasn't an existential threat to the continuation of the French Republic. It is arguable that the violent invasion of Congress was on a different scale as an "existential threat" to the US Republic. If it had succeeded in its admitted aim (an aim shared even by the uncoordinated majority in that mob) and Trump was now deemed to have won the election, much more violence could be foreseen across America by the summer.

If something's not assessed accurately, the chances are that the response to it will be wrong too. Over-reacting can cause as much damage as complacency. What we saw was a violent mob in the Capitol building but it was not revolutionary, it was completely chaotic and there was never any chance of them succeeding in overturning the election result - the violence was significant but incidental; if they'd come for a fight it would have looked very different.

Also, this event is a crisis mechanism and any exaggeration will be used to drive more extreme agendas on both sides - it also risks making heroes of the protestors. The response to this needs to be effective and, to be effective, it needs to be proportionate in order to command and retain majority support. Failure is a response which creates the conditions for "Yes but.." or allows the incident to generate some sort of unwarranted heroic mystique like the Eureka Stockade.

Personally I'd be more concerned about the Inauguration because, if there is some sort of civil disturbance, I suspect it will be far better organised and involve individuals who actually know what they're trying to do.
 
So, the message is getting through to the target audience. You'll get a spiritual star for doing your bit to help avoid violence.
Oh thank you.

Now, forgive me because I am not sure I can follow your "thinking", but would it make any difference that she is a registered Democrat?

You are a very interesting person because most people use the left or right hemisphere of the brain for thinking. You predominantly seem to use the stem.

The late professor Stephen Hawking would have been fascinated with you. He was an expert in space and time and you are a waste of both. Well done sir, well done indeed!
 
So, the message is getting through to the target audience. You'll get a spiritual star for doing your bit to help avoid violence.
What about your claim that DC was locked down with no mobile signal? You were talking bóllocks there, weren't you?
 
It applies a discount to the fake normal price
They give you a clue by stating the discount price next to the fake price

You have the option of paying over the odds or finding a code



It applies a discount to the fake normal price
They give you a clue by stating the discount price next to the fake price

You have the option of paying over the odds or finding a code

I don’t think you understand. I am saying that the code for the fake discount is ‘Qanon’

Typing typing something else, it does not apply the discount.

Why is Qanon the ‘fake’ discount code on the website of the man who is heavily involved with Trump, with all the speculation & conspiracies.

I’m not making assumptions, I’m asking you why?
 
If something's not assessed accurately, the chances are that the response to it will be wrong too. Over-reacting can cause as much damage as complacency. What we saw was a violent mob in the Capitol building but it was not revolutionary, it was completely chaotic and there was never any chance of them succeeding in overturning the election result - the violence was significant but incidental; if they'd come for a fight it would have looked very different.

Also, this event is a crisis mechanism and any exaggeration will be used to drive more extreme agendas on both sides - it also risks making heroes of the protestors. The response to this needs to be effective and, to be effective, it needs to be proportionate in order to command and retain majority support. Failure is a response which creates the conditions for "Yes but.." or allows the incident to generate some sort of unwarranted heroic mystique like the Eureka Stockade.

Personally I'd be more concerned about the Inauguration because, if there is some sort of civil disturbance, I suspect it will be far better organised and involve individuals who actually know what they're trying to do.
You say the violent mob was never revolutionary, yet some of them used the actual word “revolution” for what they wanted. History shows that incompetence doesn’t always prevent dire consequences. Where I strongly agree with you is that the response must be proportionate. The law should take its course, that’s what it’s there for, and I have zero sympathy for those who knowingly committed criminal acts and are now crying for their organic tofu or a pardon.
 
Top