Also, "then" was three days before "now."
My personal theory about all these non-exploding bombs is that they are the work of a civic-minded individual trying to illuminate to the recently pro-mob crowd just why they really don't want to go down that road. If so, it's working.
UPDATE: On reflection, Democratic leaders decide to reject the call for sensible behavior.
UPDATE: Andy McCarthy on the subject.
10 comments:
Or it's a Leftist person trying to frame the Republicans right before the elections, a swamp creature-ish October surprise.
More seriously, it's...unlikely...that our various police and other protective services were able to intercept all of the "bombs." They're good, but they're not perfect. It's also...unlikely...that all of the bombs would fail to go off. The bomber or bombers may well be incompetent, but they're unlikely to be that bad--were they so, we'd need to be looking for their outpatient nurse or nurses, also.
No, the bombs plainly were intended to be detected, and they were not intended to detonate.
Motive is TBD, although much of the game may have been exposed by Pelosi and Schumer: Time and time again, the President has condoned physical violence and divided Americans with his words and his actions…, a statement they issued in decrial of Trump's statement decrying the bombing "attempts."
And while the Left and their Progressive-Democratic Party have been vociferous in denouncing Trump (while ignoring years of Leftist calls to violence and the Left's current violence), none of them have denounced the bomb mailings.
Eric Hines
The available facts fit at least three possibilities:
1) Bombs real but incompetently made, right wing crazy.
2) “Bombs” made to provide verisimilitude of a hateful right wing attack on left, left wing operative(s).
3) “Bombs” provide verisimilitude only, right winger sending a message but not a genuine threat. (Civic minded theory).
You can add to the possibilities by substituting in Left wing crazy in 1) and 3).
It's also necessary to keep in mind that violence against those who disagree with them is a long-standing policy of Democrats and Progressive-Democrats from Democrat Congressman Brooks' attempt to murder Republican Senator Sumner on the floor of the Senate for the heinous crime of insisting that blacks should be free rather than slaves to FDR's racist minimum wage laws to SEIU's trespassing and terrorizing a child in his Maryland home pursuant to a "protest" to Holder's call for violence against Republicans to Clinton's demand that the only civil behavior that could occur is when Progressive-Democrats are in power to Waters and Spartacus calls for constant and physical confrontations with Republicans wherever they can be found to the Left's Antifa and BLM campaigns of overt violence against anyone not Leftist enough.
Context and which party has what policies matter in this pseudo-bomb affair, too.
Eric Hines
The powder sent was an "inert substance, designed only to instill fear." So the so-called bombs might have followed that model too.
I think the problem with the "Civic minded" theory is that it's still clearly a federal crime, and you're risking a great deal in doing something like that- not something I'd expect of someone thinking in civic minded terms.
Yes, it’s potentially an expensive hoax. It’d help if you thought the police were in on it, as with the Steele dossier, but it’s not likely that’s true this time.
Looks like today’s data narrows the possibilities to 1 and 3.
not something I'd expect of someone thinking in civic minded terms.
But, but--civil disobedience. And in today's lexicon, that means he walks.
I don't see "left wing operatives" being ruled out on the basis of what I've seen reported. Just a white guy in his mid-50s, transplanted from New York to Florida. That's consistent with most of his targets being in New York or nearby and the return address he used on his stuff being Wasserman Schultz'.
The police aren't saying much more than that. He easily could be a loon or operative hired by someone on the Left. Or just a loon.
Eric Hines
It would be sensible to hire a loon with minimal understanding to serve as a cut-out in a major operation. The police would find him, but he might not himself understand what happened well enough to confess your involvement.
Still, Occam's Razor suggests a loon acting alone is more probable than a loon with a conspiracy behind him.
[Putting on my Modern Liberal hat]: I want it to be a Progressive-Democrat-hired loon. Therefore, it is precisely that.
QEFD
Eric Hines
Post a Comment