BC LEGAL
Saved by @CodyyyGardner

I have seen so many people (including folks on #lawtwitter) comparing what happened at the Capitol yesterday with the violence and property damage that happened in some cities during protests last summer.

Let me explain what is wrong with that analogy . . . . .

 To clarify -- my disagreement is not with those who are pointing out that law enforcement didn't respond with the same level of force and arrests at the capitol as it did during BLM protests.

That comparison deserves to be drawn and it raises some very important questions.
My disagreement is with those who are saying that what happened at the Capitol yesterday is so similar to what happened during protests this summer, that people's reactions ought to be similar--a suggestion that those reacting more strongly now are hypocritical.
Here's one example of someone (a law professor) making the argument. But I've seen it plastered across the site all day, it keeps cropping up in my mentions, and so I want to respond. https://t.co/Cwc0hCXQ7u
There are a number of things that distinguish what happened at the Capitol from what happened during BLM protests. The most obvious is the reason that people protested---some protested about factually false claims about election fraud; others about real police shootings.
It should go without saying, but the reasons that people act are incredibly important in judging their actions. People who do bad things for bad reasons deserve more condemnation than people who do things for good reasons.

This is a pretty basic social and legal concept.
There is another, more important difference between the reasons for action.

The people at BLM protests were trying to get changes made to policing practices.

The people at the Capitol were trying to stop Congress from certifying an election.
Changing policing practices so that fewer civilians get shot is a totally legitimate aim. If we were to accomplish it through a court decision or legislation, I don't think people would object. In fact, most Americans would likely welcome it.
In contrast, stopping the certification of an election is not a legitimate aim. It would be a major problem if it were accomplished via a court decision. And it's even worse to try and do it via force or intimidation.
But the reasons for the actions we saw is not the only important difference.

There is also a huge difference in how those actions came about--specifically the role that public officials played in the turmoil and protests that led to the storming of the Capitol.
The anger towards and distrust of police in Black communities didn't come from public officials. It came from people in those communities. In fact, much of the anger was directed at the public officials in those cities. Folks blame Democratic mayors for police violence.
And while some officials in Democratic cities expressed solidarity with the protestors, the mayors were not encouraging people to take to the streets and protest. The opposite in fact. They wanted people to stay home.
Contrast that with how Pres Trump and many other members of the GOP have reacted to the 2020 election:

They have been leading the charge to challenge the result.

They have been engaging in rhetoric that talks about violence and unrest.

They fanned these flames.
The President himself held a rally in which he literally encouraged people to march to the Capitol. He told them that the Republicans in Congress were being weak, and they needed to show them to be bold.

He told them to march to the Capitol, and he repeated it multiple times.
Did Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, or any one of a similar stature tell people to take to the streets this summer?

Did they give the protestors a fist pump like Josh Hawley did, as he was heading in to try and overturn the election using frivolous legal arguments?
The answers to those questions is obviously "no"

Contributing to a bail fund or saying that you understand why people are angry--things that folks on the right criticized Dem officials for--is obviously not the same thing as encouraging people to take to the streets.
So were there protests this summer at which some people broke the law?

Yes.

But what we saw at the Capitol yesterday and what happened over the summer obviously aren't analogous.

And to pretend otherwise seems like it is minimizing yesterday's attack on democracy.

More from Legal

EFCC Nigeria
EFCC Nigeria
@officialEFCC
N10.9bn Fraud: Court Jails Ex-Finbank MD, Nwosu, Three Others


Justice Lateefa A. Okunnu of the Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikeja, on Tuesday, January 5, 2021, convicted and sentenced Okey Nwosu, a former Managing Director, Finbank Plc, to three years imprisonment for over 10m fraud.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, had arraigned Nwosu alongside Dayo Famuroti, Agnes Ebubedike and Danjuma Ocholi on a 26-count amended charge bordering on stealing and illegal conversion to the tune of N10,934,704,402.

The defendants, who perpetrated the fraud while they were directors of the bank, pleaded not guilty to the charge preferred against them, thereby leading to their full trial.

In the course of the trial, the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, called witnesses and also tendered several documents that were admitted in evidence against the defendants.
LEGAL
Zoe Tillman
Zoe Tillman
@ZoeTillman
A detention hearing is about to start in federal court in Arkansas in the case of Richard Barnett, the man photographed sitting in Nancy Pelosi's office (see: https://t.co/GAAENhkxf0). He's been in custody since his arrest

Prosecutors alleged Barnett was carrying a stun gun. He's charged with entering a restricted area w/ a weapon, violent entry/disorderly conduct, and theft. There isn't anything on the docket indicating what the govt/Barnett will be seeking as far as detention v. release


We're still waiting for the Richard Barnett detention hearing to start in Arkansas. Meanwhile, follow @o_ema for updates on initial appearances in DC federal court today for a few of the Capitol insurrection arrestees -->


Richard Barnett's detention hearing is underway in Arkansas — Judge Erin Wiedemann will decide if Barnett should stay behind bars. The first witness is FBI special agent Jonathan Willett, who was involved in the Capitol riot investigation

FBI agent walks the judge through surveillance videos that the agent says show Barnett walking in and out of Nancy Pelosi's office, with a "walking stick Taser" on his hip, as well as the widely disseminated photos of Barnett sitting in Pelosi's chair with his feet up
LEGAL
Advertisement
EFCC Nigeria
EFCC Nigeria
@officialEFCC
EFCC Arrests Two Brothers, Six Other Suspected Internet Fraudsters in Osogbo
…4 Internet Fraudsters Convicted In Lagos


The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Ibadan zonal office, on Thursday, January 28, 2021, arrested eight men suspected to be internet fraudsters in Osogbo, Osun State.

The suspects Akinrinmade Adepoju Sunday and his brother Akinrinmade Adeniyi were arrested in their room and parlor apartment, others are Dennis Oluwamuyiwa, Oni Oluwaseyi, Adeyemo Adeyinka, Aborisade Abayomi, Goodluck Olatayo, and Gbolahan Sodiq.

They were arrested at their hideout in Ayegbami area of the ancient town by operatives, working on actionable intelligence on their alleged criminal activities.

Items recovered from the suspects include two cars, laptops and mobile phones.

They will be charged to court as soon as investigations are concluded.

In a related development, the Lagos Zonal office of the Commission has secured the conviction of four internet fraudsters.
LEGAL
Absurdistwords
Absurdistwords
@absurdistwords
More severe police injuries and deaths on that one day of rampaging Trumpers than in five years of Anti-Police protests.


You can tell a lot about the stance of a angry crowd by whether they come with shields or pitchforks.

If people protesting police brutality for years had wanted to use their large numbers to attack, maim and kill police, they damn well could have.

But they came to resist police.

Which is completely different.

Why did the police suffer more at the hands of those who claimed to support them and waved their flags than at the hands of those who think they should be defunded or abolished?

Because one group is literally arguing for human dignity and the other glorifies violence.

The people who uncritically support police brutality are those who believe that instrumental violence should be a standard tool in response to those standing opposed to you.

Once you accept that... WHO is standing opposed to you doesn't matter much.
LEGAL
Dr. Alexander Hamilton | Alter Ego: AHAM
Dr. Alexander Hamilton...
@DrAlexHamilton
WHEN WAKANDA FALLS

I need U 2 get just how horrible this is. Incoming black DA in Wakanda, I meant Atlanta, just voluntarily turned over 2 a white Repub AG, the Rashard Brooks case, a black man who was gunned down by a white cop in a Wendy's drive thru.

She also turned over another case involving excessive force of 2 black college students to the white Republican AG as well. Her reasoning is that the previous black DA behaved unethically. Here's the thing. She actually prosecuted the white cop that killed Rashard Brooks years-

ago in an excessive case force 4 which she dropped the charges then. How in the fuck do Wakandans, I meant Atlantans, elect some1 with this history? Here's the bigger picture. Her predecessor was no better. He actually prosecuted black teachers in the ATL Public Schools cheating-

scandal. Wonderful right? If you a dumb mafucka that answered yes, unfollow me now & never utter my name again. For all others, here is a good lesson in politics & why I have no hope of black people ever moving the needle one inch against white supremacy.

Let's say for arguments sake the teachers were cheating. Let's say black Atlanta officials are corrupt. Lets say Atlanta Airport officials are corrupt. If you are Atlanta's DA, do you prosecute them? Before I answer that question, riddle me this, do you think white people would-
LEGAL

You May Also Like

Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
A thing which I unironically and enthusiastically believe which is unpopular among smart people of my acquaintance: financial engineering has in the recent past and present contributed substantially to human welfare. We should hope to see more of it.

Maybe more geeks need to meet someone who says “My job is teleporting value across time and space.”

Financial engineering is sort of a squishy term. I don’t primarily mean payments infrastructure or financial rails, although both of those involve substantial engineering.

I mean more “We took a thing and performed some alchemy, and now have a new thing.”

Except instead of alchemy it is generally quite a bit of math, a huge amount of contract law and due diligence, often an impressive amount of ops work, and a dusting of technology that web devs would recognize as such.
ALL
Noah Smith
Noah Smith
@Noahpinion
Remember: Just because an idea is old doesn't mean it's good.

Knowing whether old ideas are more likely to be good requires understanding whether conditions have changed in important ways.

Horse archery was an amazing method of warfare for over a thousand years...then people invented guns, and suddenly this great idea that had stood the test of time became obsolete.

Then again, when underlying conditions don't change much, tried-and-true approaches are probably better.

"Learning the lessons of history" usually just means assuming ergodicity and stationarity in an informal time-series model...

(end)
SOCIETY
Advertisement
Tej Dosa \U0001f602\U0001f9e0
Tej Dosa 😂🧠...
@ComedicBizman
(A THREAD)

18 Things I Would Do At 18:

I was a dumb 18-year-old. I thought I had the world figured out. I didn't.

I stayed up till the wee hours. Drank every liquor invented.

Partied non-stop. Woke up after noon.

Surfed the web aimlessly.

Read BS self-help.

Repeat.

If I could do it all over again, here's 18 things I would do...

PHASE ONE: GET MY MIND RIGHT

ACTION #1: Break the chains - I wish I made the decision earlier. I didn't. I was scared. Anxious. Nervous. I knew once I made the decision, there was no going back.

Don't be like me.

Make the decision at 18. The decision to pave your own path in life. To go against the herd. To choose your own adventure. To commit to whatever sets your heart on fire.

ACTION #2: Cut off every negative person in your life.

Scroll through the contacts in your phone...

Notice how the names make you feel.

Delete any and all names that fill you with doubt and negativity.

ACTION #3: Condition your mind to embrace the producer mindset instead of the consumer mindset.

Consume 20% of the time. Produce 80% of the time.

Case closed.

ACTION #4: Set an intention to make $10k a month and write it out every MORNING and NIGHT as if you already achieved it (in the past tense).

Visualize yourself already having the money as you write.

Cheesy?

Yes.

Does it work?

Yes.

PHASE TWO: EDUCATION
LIFE
Erik Torenberg
Erik Torenberg
@eriktorenberg
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
LIFE
Vedic Gyaan
Vedic Gyaan
@vedicgyaanindia
The chorus of this song uses the shlokas taken from Sundarkand of Ramayana.

It is a series of Sanskrit shlokas recited by Jambavant to Hanuman to remind Him of his true potential.

1. धीवर प्रसार शौर्य भरा: The brave persevering one, your bravery is taking you forward.


2. उतसारा स्थिरा घम्भीरा: The one who is leaping higher and higher, who is firm and stable and seriously determined.

3. ुग्रामा असामा शौर्या भावा: He is strong, and without an equal in the ability/mentality to fight

4. रौद्रमा नवा भीतिर्मा: His anger will cause new fears in his foes.

5.विजिटरीपुरु धीरधारा, कलोथरा शिखरा कठोरा: This is a complex expression seen only in Indic language poetry. The poet is stating that Shivudu is experiencing the intensity of climbing a tough peak, and likening

it to the feeling in a hard battle, when you see your enemy defeated, and blood flowing like a rivulet. This is classical Veera rasa.

6.कुलकु थारथिलीथा गम्भीरा, जाया विराट वीरा: His rough body itself is like a sharp weapon (because he is determined to win). Hail this complete

hero of the world.

7.विलयगागनथाला भिकारा, गरज्जद्धरा गारा: The hero is destructive in the air/sky as well (because he can leap at an enemy from a great height). He can defeat the enemy (simply) with his fearsome roar of war.
VEDICGYAN