The state of Oregon has an issue with protesters or the damage they cause?

Is this an Onion piece?

Are there two Oregons?

Maybe one I wasn't aware of?

"This isn't Portland outside of that nice little hippie non reality land Oregon is a tough state comprised of lumberjacks Ranchers and people illegally growing weed all of which are fast with their guns."

It sounds like you're familiar with Oregon.

I grew up in Newberg. My sister and mother still live in Bend.

I also lived for a bit of time in North Powder, about half-way between Bend and LaGrande.

"I think the issue is that the MADBOMBER alias seems to have difficulty distinguishing between protesters rioting and destroying property, and insurrectionists who riot and destroy property, but have another goal of taking over and/or destroying government possibly by murdering elected officials."

No, I don't distinguish between the two.

Both should be crushed. The only distinction being that you crush the wolf that's closest to the sled first. In this case, the rioters who stormed the Capitol. But it doesn't mean you ignore all the other groups...you just prioritize them lower.

Think about the riots in Portland. They were incredibly violent relative to the number of people participating in the riot. Can you imagine the outcome if someone of sufficient influence encouraged them to storm a building or kill people?

Like I said. You use the McChrystal model and map out the networks. Hopefully they remain relatively peaceful, but if they get violent you're already spring-loaded to dismantle that network.

"I've noticed. And that was my point."

Is there some reason I should distinguish between the two?

I mean, I guess technically I did. I conducted some field threat prioritization based on my understanding of the operational environment.

Do you think I underprioritized in some way?

"Because people keep whatabouting the insurrection by bringing up riots nobody seems to have supported."

Yeah, so the people on the right who demanded that troops by deployed to Portland to defend federal property and crush antifa are now the same ones making excuses for the rioters who stormed the Capitol building.

On the other hand, you have people on the left who appear to want to crush those who stormed the Capitol, while STILL making excuses for the rioters in Portland.

Bottom line what you're arguing for is an uneven application of the law, based on your own internal biases. Compare that with someone like myself, who would like to see all entities that engage in violent behavior as a means of achieving a political end (which is the definition of terrorism, BTW) infiltrated and mapped, so that if they do cross a threshold, it's much easier to destroy, or at least disrupt them. And we have a lot of experience in doing that.

Years ago I read Sonny Gravano's autobiography.

At a point in the book he is recalling being a child, and seeing the local mafiosi running around. When he asked his father about them, he told Sonny that they were "bad" people. Sonny asked his father why they didn't do anything about them, to which his father responded, "because they're our bad people."

"As a matter of fact, one of your recent posts suggested thar there were Antifa dressed up like Proud Boys who stormed the Capitol."

I think you have me confused with someone else, sir.

I don't think there is a rational path by which one could come to that conclusion.

The conclusion being that the rioters in Washington were antifa.

And if they were, you fellers would be going on about how it was just a few bad apples, or maybe right wing protesters dressed as antifa, and that the vast majority of the attendees were merely expressing their support for freedom and justice.

Oh, and that cops shouldn't interfere because that just might inflame the situation.

Or at least this is what you fellers were saying IRT the riots in PDX. I don't know why you would have treated this any different.

"You're still whatabouting an attempted coup."

So, let's stop right here.

It wasn't a coup. It couldn't have been a coup.

It would have been a coup if the military or some other state entity had attempted to replace the existing government. In this case the military is solidly behind the constitutional government, as illustrated in the recent memo from the CJCS that was signed by each of the Service Secretaries, as well each of the Service Chiefs. Linked below in case you have not seen it.

"No one here is confused about you... you are transparent, really. Myths, whataboutisms, outright lies.... obviously all you have."

So...maybe I confused you.

What I expected to hear from the right is that it was Antifa dressed in MAGA kit that had attacked the Capitol. Turns out that Trump hisself tried to make this argument, even though there is no way a rational person could have ever thought that the masses who attacked the Capitol were antifa.

But this was to be expected, since many on the left were making a similar claim over the summer, that it was right-wing protesters dressed in Antifa kit that were causing trouble across the nation.

"A sitting POTUS attempting to remain in power via insurrection?"

You can try and make that stick as a legal argument...but I don't think you'll get anywhere.

What happened last week at the Capitol was irrelevant to whether or not Donald Trump stayed in office. The rioters could have killed every last congressperson in the building, and it would have done nothing to change the fact that at 1201pm on 20 January, he is no longer the president.

In fact, I would submit that a better example of a coup is his intent to pressure elected and appointed officials into fudging the numbers on the votes in order to hand him a win. Reference Georgia. That would be a better example. The best example would be that Trump orders the military to arrest members of the house and senate, and declares that the constitution has been dissolved. But there was zero chance of that happening here. In fact I think it would be more likely that the coup would be similar to what occurred in the Chile in 1973, when the military engaged in a coup to remove the sitting president, after the Supreme Court and the Chamber of Deputies called on them to do so. In this case, the president being removed would be Trump instead of Allende.

"It just wasn't a successful coup attempt."

It wasn't possible for it to be successful. There is nothing that I'm aware of that the rioters could have done that would have changed the fact that at 1201 next Wednesday, Trump is no longer president. Period. They could have killed everyone in the building and that would not have changed.

"Well, that may or not be true de facto. ------- could have declared martial law, Pence could have decided to not accept certain states' electoral votes, without an official count ------- would have argued that Biden couldn't be inaugurated, lots of uncharted territory there."

Certainly, but what's very certain is that there was no path for Trump to legally remain as president after 20 January. If there was a determination that a re-vote needed to occur, then Pelosi becomes the acting president at the conclusion of Trump's elected term.

Any other outcome would have been an actual coup.

"Also, their ability to be successful is irrelevant to their intent."

But it matters who they are.

Think of ISIS. I'm not trying to compare the rioters in DC to ISIS, but both seek/sought to overthrow existing or soon to exist governments. ISIS is an insurrection. Coup's occur internal to governments.

"Well the actual police made similar claims on that topic"

And it's totally within the realm of possibility. Likely even. But you can't make an honest argument that the vast majority of hammer and sickle wearing antifa rioters were actually right-wingers in disguise.

And at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. Right or left wing, you penetrate and map out those organizations. That will inevitably reveal who they are, as well as provide a mechanism for dismantling the network if need be.

At least one left-wing activist has been arrested and charged in the DC riots. Apparently it's the guy who recorded the girl getting shot.