TheGaggle
Politics • Culture • News
Our community is made up of those who value the freedom of speech, the right to debate and the promise of open, honest conversations.

We don't agree on everything but we never silence our followers and value every opinion on our channel.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
Bizarre Article Even By "New York Times"'s Bizarre Standards

It's hard to know what's more bizarre: A police officer demanding to see the House minority leader in order to urge him to stop permitting members of his caucus from putting out accounts of the events of Jan. 6 that this officer doesn't like? Or the "New York Times"'s taking these arrogant requests from a police officer seriously?

Apparently, the police officer featured in the "Times" article is under the impression that the leader of a legislative caucus has powers to command his members what to do and what not to do. He can order them to say what he wants them to say and he can stop them from saying what he doesn't want them to say. The police officer and, apparently, the "Times" is unaware that a caucus leader has powers to whip votes, but he has no power to stop elected legislators from expressing their views.

According to the "New York Times"'s solemn report, Officer Fanone

had a clear request at the ready: for the minority leader to publicly denounce the lies Republican lawmakers have been telling about the deadly attack. He wanted Mr. McCarthy to push them to stop downplaying the storming of the building, blaming left-wing extremists for an assault carried out by former President Donald J. Trump’s right-wing supporters and spreading the baseless conspiracy theory that the F.B.I. secretly planned it.

Leave aside the "Times"'s tendentious "reporting"--"lies," "deadly attack," "storming of the building," "assault," "right-wing supporters," "baseless conspiracy theory"--the request is ridiculous on its face. How is Leader Kevin McCarthy responsible for the views of the members of his caucus? And why would the "New York Times," and presumably Officer Fanone, think that McCarthy--whatever his own personal view of Trump or of the events of Jan. 6--would accept the "Times" and Officer Fantone's rendering of what happened on Jan. 6 as remotely accurate?

Imagine how the "New York Times" would cover an NYPD police officer's relentless pursuit of Speaker Nancy Pelosi in order to get her to denounce the members of her caucus who were urging the defunding of the police! Chances are that the FBI would soon be paying the NYPD officer a "visit"--and the "Times" would doubtless be purring with approval, while denouncing the officer as mentally unstable and as a "stalker."

The "Times" goes on in its inimitable way:

Officer Fanone’s effort comes as some far-right House Republicans have spread misinformation about the riot, sought to portray it as a mostly peaceful event and voted against honoring police officers who responded.

One House Republican accused a U.S. Capitol Police officer of “lying in wait” to carry out an “execution” of a rioter. And 21 House Republicans voted last week against a bill to award Congressional Gold Medals to the officers who defended the Capitol Jan. 6.

“I asked him to denounce the 21 House Republicans that voted against the Gold Medal bill, recognizing my co-workers and colleagues that fought to secure the Capitol on Jan. 6,” Officer Fanone said.

A number of obvious questions arise. First, from what we know about the events of Jan. 6, the police scarcely acquitted themselves in glory. It was one of the biggest policing fiascoes in modern times. There should be no medal awards whatsoever. To the contrary: wide-scale dismissals were clearly in order.

Second, given the manifest police incompetence on display on Jan. 6, this police officer would probably be more usefully employed in training and in improving his policing skills than in worrying about how a party leader was handling his caucus.

Third, the police officer makes no mention of the killing of Ashi Babbitt. The "Times" also makes no mention of her other than the sneering reference to a Republican congressman's talking about the "execution" of a "rioter." This is par for the course for much of the "liberal" media: Ashli Babbitt was a "rioter" who got her just desserts. However, the police officer should be worried about the performance of his fellow-police officers that day. Officer Fanone should be making the effort to address the serious questions that have been raised about the killing of Ashli Babbitt.

Who killed Ashli Babbitt? Why is that officer's name being withheld? Why did he kill her? He did not appear to be in any immediate danger from a petite, unarmed woman. Various Internet sites, as well as the lawyer representing the Babbitt family, have identified the alleged perpetrator as someone who a few years ago had left a loaded handgun in a public restroom in the Capitol. Is that the reason why his name is being withheld? Because the Capitol police would be on the hook for a wrongful-death suit, given that it had manifestly failed in its duty to dismiss an employee who had committed a transgression of this magnitude?

Clearly, these are the sorts of issues that Officer Fanone, still an active-duty cop, should be more appropriately concerned with, not what goes on in Kevin McCarthy's caucus. But then of course Fanone would then not get slobbering coverage in the "New York Times."

The article ends with a flourish stunning for its lack of self-awareness. According to the "Times," Fanone was troubled that the

Republican strategy appeared to be to try to make the public forget about the attack as the party looked to retake the House in next year’s midterm elections.

“When you’re that obsessed with gaining power that you’re wiling to trample over a bunch of police officers, that’s sickening,” he said in an interview.

Perish the thought that the Democrats and their unofficial spokesman," the "New York Times," might be using the events of Jan. 6 to win elections and hold onto power! Of course not. They talk all day and every day about Jan. 6 only because they want to get to the bottom of what happened that day even as they make sure never to ask any key questions such as: What did the FBI know and when did they know it? How deeply was the FBI involved in any of the plans for instigating violence? And, of course, who killed Ashli Babbitt, and why?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/us/kevin-mccarthy-capitol-riot-officer.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
Monday Night At The Movies: "Les Diaboliques" (1955)

Join Gagglers for "Les Diaboliques"!
The screening starts at 3 p.m. ET sharp.
Share all of your thoughts, comments and criticisms on the Live Chat.

01:57:11
The Gaggle Music Club: Maurice Ravel’s Le Tombeau de Couperin

This week's selection for The Gaggle Music Club is Maurice Ravel’s Le Tombeau de Couperin. Composed between 1914 and 1917, the piece is one of Ravel's most poignant works. It is both a personal elegy and a musical homage. Ravel wrote it originally for the piano, but he later orchestrated four of its six movements.

Ravel began composing the piece before the First World War, but its final shape was affected by the war. The word tombeau in French Baroque music denotes a musical memorial. The piece however is not solely a tribute to François Couperin, the great French Baroque composer. It’s a broader homage to the French clavecinist tradition of the 18th century — including Jean-Henri D’Anglebert and Jean-Philippe Rameau.

More personally, each movement is dedicated to a friend of Ravel's who had died in the war. Ravel served in the war as a truck driver and lost many friends. He said of the suite: “The dead are sad enough, in their eternal silence.”

The work is neo-classical, ...

00:18:41
TG 1928: Tulsi Gabbard Discloses RussiaGate Receipts: Will It Make A Difference?

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle discuss Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's presentation of the case that the RussiaGate hoax was from the start a treasonous plot masterminded by President Barack Obama himself. Will the disclosure however make a difference?

00:43:35
13 hours ago
12 hours ago
post photo preview
17 hours ago

"We're cooked, chat"

Up to 2018 the peer-reviewed literature on geomagnetic excursions (magnetic pole shifts) was about 60/40 in favor of "these cause extinctions" vs "these do not cause extinctions".

Since 2019, it has been 95/5 in favor of biosphere devastation. We are less than 25 years from the next one; here are the best 5 papers in that time confirming just how f***ed we are:

Channell, J. E. T., & Vigliotti, L. (2019). The role of geomagnetic field intensity in late Quaternary evolution of humans and large mammals. Reviews of Geophysics, 57(3), 709–738. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018RG000629

Cooper, A., Turney, C. S. M., et al. (2021). A global environmental crisis 42,000 years ago. Science, 371(6531), 811–818. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb8677

Arsenović, P., Rozanov, E., et al. (2024). Global impacts of an extreme solar particle event under different geomagnetic field strengths. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(28), e2321770121. ...

January 21, 2023
More Leftie Than Thou
"Jacobin" Magazine Celebrates A Strike Against Ol' Blue Eyes

Here at "The Gaggle" we have very little time for the "more Leftie than thou" school of thought--that's the approach to life according to which the only thing that matters is whether you take the right position on every issue under the sun from Abortion to Zelensky. No one in the world meets the exacting standards of this school of thought; any Leftie leader anywhere is always selling out to the bankers and the capitalists. The perfect exemplar of this is the unreadable Jacobin magazine. 

The other day I came across this article from 2021. It's a celebration of trade union power. And not simply trade union power, but the use of trade union power to secure political goals. Of course (and this is always the case with the "more Leftie than thou" crowd), this glorious, never-to-be-forgotten moment on the history of organized labor took place many years ago--in the summer of 1974 to be exact. Yes, almost half a century has gone by since that thrilling moment when the working-class movement of Australia mobilized and prepared to seize the means of production, distribution and exchange. 

Well, not quite. Organized labor went into action against...Ol' Blue Eyes, the Chairman of the Board, the Voice; yes, Frank Sinatra. Why? What had Sinatra done? Sinatra was certainly very rich, and he owned a variety of properties and businesses. But if the Australian trade union movement were, understandably, searching for the bright, incandescent spark that would finally awaken the working class from its slumber there were surely richer, greedier, more dishonest, more decadent, above all more Australian individuals it could have discovered. Australia was never short of them. Rupert Murdoch immediately springs to mind. Why Sinatra?

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals