This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
January 6th agitator Ray Epps has pled guilty to one charge of disorderly conduct. The NYT story contains this sentence:
I'm not so sure about that. For those who haven't paid attention (a group that included myself until a discussion here a while back), Epps is on video repeatedly urging other members of the crowd to go into the Capitol. Many people have speculated that he was in fact some form of federal agent or informant. The fact that this is the legal outcome for him heightens, rather than lessens, my personal suspicion that he was working for the feds.
It is a very minor charge. Now granted, Epps did not enter the Capitol himself - but his open agitation of the attack nonetheless seems to me like it should constitute a significantly more serious offence, such as incitement to riot.
Speaking of which, it's very odd that he did not go into the Capitol himself, given that he loudly and repeatedly urged others to.
The fact that this minor charge plea deal has taken so long is very eyebrow raising as well. We typically saw the less serious cases dealt with quite quickly, while the big trials with serious jail time on the line took much longer - and even they got dealt with more quickly than Epps!
It's also extremely curious to me that they arranged a plea deal with Epps before he was ever charged with anything. That's not the normal way things go, as far as I'm aware - usually they throw everything they can at you, and then agree to drop some charges in exchange for guilty pleas for the others.
Now, it may be that there are matters of fact or law that I'm not aware of that makes all of this very normal and reasonable, and if so I would be delighted to be informed of them. But as it stands I am at a loss to explain how this guy is getting this treatment if he is not some kind of undercover operative.
EDIT: Thanks to @huadpe and @Gillitrut who have convinced me that the elements of more serious charges against Epps could probably not be satisfied.
he's on video talking into Samsel's? ear who then immediately starts removing barriers to open up a pathway to the Capitol
he's on video talking to maroon crowd-boy making the statement, "when we go in, leave this here, you don't want to get shot" and that individual did indeed go into the Capitol being one of the most active participants in the event (strangely, he has not been identified or found)
he sent a text to his son claiming responsibility for orchestrating at least part of the demonstration going into the capitol after the event
he's on video in a crowd holding a trump sign which shortly afterwards surged forward pushing police aside; conduct which has been used by the DOJ as evidence of "force" in other Jan6 defendant cases
he's on video holding a trump sign when shortly afterwards there is video from another angle of, at the very least, a closely resembling sign being used to poke cops who were attacking the crowd
there is more publicly available evidence found by independent media to support felony charges against Epps than almost any other defendant who have been charged and convicted with some already serving(ed) their sentence
it's a "weird case" because of the sheer amount of publicly available evidence against Ray Epps who may as well be The Poster Boy of what the government and their mouthpieces in the media concocted as the narrative for the Jan6 debacle (a Oath Keeper militia member on video making states which could easily be sold as provoking "force" if not violence), and despite that , the FBI removed him from publicity when identified by independent media, no arrest or seizure of electronic devices or seemingly anything at all which was the typical treatment of other Jan6 defendants, even ones who were knowingly represented, the government did their best to pretend Epps didn't exist afterwards, and then the Narrative pushers did their best to defend them, and then mouthpieces in the media tried to whitewash it
and each time the DOJ and the government hoped it would be enough and enough people would be satisfied so they could drop it
so 2.5 years after the event with enough people refusing to drop it, Epps gets a misdemeanor charge by information with a plea deal hearing already on the calendar, and a ready NYT article proclaiming he's being held accountable and this like totally proves he's not connected to the government, and I guess we're supposed to be satisfied now at step 8 of the "do something, lean on our authority and institution lovers to pass this off as normal and fine, hope people drop it"
this is comical
I've seen some high-effort posts on this topic but I haven't seen a single person take all the actual evidence against Epps seriously, thank you for making this explicit.
This isn't to say other exonerating evidence or evidence which makes Epps look better doesn't exist or that a successful defense on the merits isn't possible (if we're going to entertain the fiction that the DC court system isn't laughably biased and incapable of giving Jan6 defendants a fair trial) , but it also existed for a thousand+ other people who are Jan6 defendants (more being added regularly) and yet that exonerating evidence is actively hidden by the state. There are people who have served their entire sentences only to find out when they're released from the pen that dozens of minutes of exonerating evidence was never given to them for their cases.
But not with Epps! The government didn't stop to collect all the evidence with everyone else (seriously, they claim this as the excuse for why they didn't hand over exonerating evidence to charged defendants attempting to appeal their cases) , but when it comes to Epps, geez, they have to work slowly and deliberatively and give him every benefit of the doubt. As far as I know, Epps is the only person who was interviewed by the DOJ before he was charged and the only person whose side of the story that day is even used in the pushed narrative at the time or even now.
When it comes to Epps, well by golly gosh, the government is ready to rush to his defense! The corporate media is ready to rush to his defense! The laughable joke that was the Jan 6 committee was ready to rush to his defense to engage in a performance of obviously scripted exchanges with parts somehow finding a way to corporate press so there could be ready articles in the NYT and other places proclaiming everything is just fine, this is all normal, please let go of this Epps thing.
He gets 2.5 years of time, soft-ball interviews with mass corporate media, obviously leaked information in "closed door" meetings to media mouthpieces, a former Perkins Couie lawyer to defend him, and a misdemeanor charge by information with a ready set plea deal hearing a couple days later, another ready NYT article proclaiming he is being held accountable and definitely not a fed and please let this go or you're a bad conspiracy theorist person, and this all happens a month before Ryan Samsel (the guy he talked into his ear) and another guy related but I forget his name are put on trial ?
As far as I can tell, there is one other person who was charged by information with a basic 1752(a)(2) misdemeanor charge and that person is Isaiah Giddings, a member of the Proud Boys who is also widely suspected of being connected to the government. Evidence against Giddings is tiny in comparison to Epps.
Few, if any, other Jan6 defendants were given this treatment. We're all just left to speculate why and told to ignore our lying eyes because this is all so normal, totally legal, and part of the process.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link