Investigations To-Do List

Regarding my previous post, I want J6 investigations to determine the numbers that engaged in the following:

  1. Attacked the defensive perimeter between the Capitol grounds and the area of the permitted Capitol protest
  2. Of those cited above, those who did and did not enter the Capitol grounds, and those who did and did not enter the Capitol building
  3. Engaged in assault to gain access to the Capitol building itself, or to areas within
  4. Other assaults by civilians
  5. Engaged in vandalism to gain access to the Capitol building or to areas within
  6. Other vandalism
  7. Entered the Capitol through unattended doorway (e.g. Chansley and his entourage)
  8. Entered the capitol through attended doorway with permission
  9. Accessed the Capitol grounds by climbing the west wall
  10. Of those cited above, those who did and did not enter the Capitol building (my own impression is that most were content to stay outside)
  11. Attempted to approach lawmakers while inside Capitol
  12. Did not attempt to approach lawmakers while inside Capitol
  13. All convictions of nonviolent persons who were never on Capitol grounds
  14. Capitol defenders lobbing tear gas canisters into the area of the permitted Capitol protest
  15. Capitol defenders lobbing tear gas elsewhere
  16. Assaults by non-civilians not involving tear gas

And now, on to other investigations the Trump administration or other parties should undertake.

Read more

Thoughts on J6 Pardons and Investigations

I am in favor of a pardon for J6 protesters, but not all of them. Which ones? Those who posed no threat. Those not convicted or charged with assault or other violent offenses (with one possible exception – see next paragraph), or for inciting violent behavior (like John Earle Sullivan). Ray Epps still hasn’t been thoroughly investigated, so he should not receive a pardon.

The case of Rachel Powell must be reviewed carefully. She claims she broke a window to flee a dangerous situation created by an attack by Capitol defenders that had protesters pressed in a confined area. If there is a strong case for her self-defense argument, pardon her.

The pardon decision must reflect zero tolerance of violence other than justifiable self-defense. The pardon announcement must call attention to prosecutorial abuse, excessively lengthy pretrial detention, and pretrial prison conditions.

Now, on to J6 investigations. Here’s my not-necessarily-comprehensive to-do list.

A highly detailed sequence of events. If military history buffs can put together detailed videos of major battles pinpointing the positions of individual units at specific times, the same can be accomplished here. I want a series of maps in print or video format that show time and location of every single violent incident, whether fomented by the public- or private-sector, and other incidents of note (e.g. pipe bomb discoveries, Senate recess, the moment Capitol security started allowing entry into the building, Trump’s “go home” tweet, Jacob Chansley announcing said tweet), and that also show the location of key persons of interest at those times. This exercise should be valuable to various investigations, and will give the public a better sense of when and where rioting and other violence occurred. I suspect that many people imagine four solid hours of rioting, far more violence than actually occurred. I’m also curious to know how many people who heard the end of Trump’s speech entered the building. Given the walking distance, they would not have arrived yet when windows were being bashed in.

A request for private citizens to submit videos that have not yet been submitted. There may still be some videos out there that haven’t been tuned in out of fear of being railroaded by Biden’s DoJ.

The pipe bombs. Who planted them, and were they subjected to forensic analysis after the Feds exploded the devices? Since they were fitted with one-hour kitchen timers and placed many hours prior to discovery, the bombs either had a different trigger mechanism that wasn’t visible, or no trigger mechanism at all. The latter alternative calls into question whether the bombs even had explosives. They could have been filled with Clairol for all we know.

The use of tear gas and its possible role in inciting violence. Some tear gas rounds were fired deep into the peaceable section of the crowd, as witnessed by J. Michael Waller and documented in this video (first round visible at 1:02).

The decision to allow entry into the building. Who authorized it? At which entrances was entry allowed? I am vaguely aware of a claim that the rioting was mostly on one side of the building and allowed entry was on the other. I’d like some confirmation on that.

The shooting death of Ashli Babbitt.

The death of Rosanne Boyland.

The origins of the hoax that Brian Sicknick was beaten to death with a fire extinguisher.

The gallows prop. Who built it, and who decided it should not be torn down once it was up? People need to be fired over this.

All other conduct of Capitol defenders.

Prison conditions for J6 protesters in pretrial detention. Inspection teams should be ready to descend on the prison(s) two seconds after Trump takes the oath of office.

Prosecution of J6 defendants. One special concern is the decision to charge about 250 J6 defendants under an evidence tampering provision under Sarbanes-Oxley. How was this decision made? Did anyone in the loop doubt that the statute was genuinely relevant to those cases? Those convictions have since been shot down by SCOTUS. One has to imagine how someone could get the idea that a law concerned with addressing accounting shenanigans could be applied to protesters.

The J6 committee and Jack Smith. Obligatory mention. One issue I’d like to see settled: since the full committee never met, did it have subpoena authority? If not, the cases of those convicted of defying subpoenas should be appealed, not pardoned.

What do American Indians Have to be Thankful For?

Much of the modern left views the migration of Europeans to the Americas as one of history’s greatest tragedies. This cynicism represents a failure to examine both sides of the balance sheet, to recognize both good and bad consequences of trans-Atlantic colonization, as well as the consequences of having no European colonization at all. The answer to the question posed in the title comes down to at least four items.

Access to advanced technology. Recall this quote from Life of Brian: “All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?” One can nitpick and identify a few things the Judeans already had (e.g. wine), but overall the Romans significantly improved infrastructure that increased quality of life. The technological gap between Renaissance Europeans and pre-Columbian Americans was vastly greater. The Europeans also brought a non-technological advance that benefited some tribes in the short term: the horse.

And end to the constant threat of warfare. Before Europeans displaced the American natives, the natives were displacing each other. Such is life in a continent where one can find little land that isn’t frontier. As nation-states emerged and maintained long-term power, warfare became a less frequent concern.

Rule of law and relative freedom under the law. These principles evolved in Northern Europe and especially in England. They were exported to the Anglosphere colonies where they were developed further. Latin America was settled by the most autocratic region of Western Europe; centuries of existential threat under Moorish rule is not the sort of environment that breeds high-cooperation societies. Democratic reforms eventually came to many parts of the region with varying degrees of success. 

The Chinese did not colonize the Americas. If Ming Dynasty maritime exploration had taken a different turn…

Happy Thanksgiving! 

Making Their Mark on the World

I’ve been mulling over the following question: how did each of the modern presidents from Nixon to present impact the world the most?

Richard Nixon: Opening relations with the People’s Republic of China.

Gerald Ford: The Helsinki Accords. The human rights plank encouraged the growing dissident movements in the Eastern Bloc. They took seriously what the Soviets were willing to put on paper in the albeit non-binding resolution.

Jimmy Carter: Enabling the Islamic totalitarian revolution in Iran.

Ronald Reagan: Fomenting the end of the Cold War. “Reagan bolstered the U.S. military might to ruin the Soviet economy, and he achieved his goal” – Gennady Gerasimov

George H. W. Bush: This may be a controversial choice, but I’m going with the “New World Order” speech, or rather what it represents – encouraging the United Nations to take a more active role in foreign relations. One of the legacies of the UN is the enshrinement of the ethic that wars must never be won, only fought to the point of ceasefire.

Bill Clinton: Granting the People’s Republic of China access to supercomputer technology vital to targeting manned, unmanned, and munitions-bearing rocketry. It’s the one great leap forward in China that actually worked.

George W. Bush: The Iraq War. Aside from altering the geopolitical landscape in the region, it convinced Muhammar Qaddafi to cooperate with the US to end Libya’s WMD program.

Barack Obama: Opening Iran to financial markets, thus magnifying its ability to conduct proxy wars.

Donald Trump (first term): It may be a bit early to gauge the legacy of the Abraham Accords, but opening the door to Israeli cooperation with some of its Arab neighbors is bound to have significant impact on Iran’s regional ascendency. It also breaks from the stupid tradition that any negotiations between Israel and any of its neighbors must include the Palestinians, as if Palestinian and non-Palestinian relations can’t be delt with separately.

Joe Biden: Opening Iran to financial markets, thus magnifying its ability to conduct proxy wars – assuming the Ukraine Missile Crisis does not top this. (Our own Trent Telenko is cited in the linked article.)

What’s the Matter with Wisconsin?

Curious about election result changes in one of the swing states, once Wikipedia had the final vote counts of the 2016 election (allowing a relatively simple copy to an Excel spreadsheet), I took a look at stats for Wisconsin’s two most recent presidential elections to see if I could spot signs of any trends. The exercise confirmed what I already knew about the divides in both parties – better than expected.

Read more