Extreme Left Threats against Supreme Court (2 Viewers)

[knowledge dropper]

Home addresses of justices were posted and now we have a Justice having to cancel public appearances for safety reasons.  Hopefully, the PSF can agree this is egregious behavior?

Alito cancels public appearance

 

[sho nuff]

I think most will agree that there is no place for such threats in our society.

 

[squistion]

One obscure fringe group called “Ruth Sent Us” that no one had heard of before yesterday. 

 

[HellToupee]

One obscure fringe group called “Ruth Sent Us” that no one had heard of before yesterday. 

Nice take

 

[Dickies]

Not cool.

 

[Joe Bryant]

One obscure fringe group called “Ruth Sent Us” that no one had heard of before yesterday. 

People have heard of Vox Senior Correspondent Ian Millhiser and his 113K Followers when he posted:

Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said “#### it! Let’s burn this place down.”

With 31,000+ likes.

 

[FairWarning]

I think most will agree that there is no place for such threats in our society.

That’s the problem - most isn’t all.

 

[Stealthycat]

totally expected by everyone

 

[sho nuff]

That’s the problem - most isn’t all.

Not sure anyone here who will support such threats.  And if anything came from them…Id also guess all would not be in favor of any violence towards the justices.  At least I would hope not.

 

[PhillipPhoto]

One obscure fringe group called “Ruth Sent Us” that no one had heard of before yesterday. 

They are the ones that dress up in red cloaks like in the Handmaid's Tale.  You don't remember that from the Kavanaugh trial?

 

[Dickies]

People have heard of Vox Senior Correspondent Ian Millhiser and his 113K Followers when he posted:

With 31,000+ likes.

This is not a call to violence against the justices, as the pjmedia article wrongly alleges.  

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

On certain occasions, especially during the springtime, I think people should abstain from making violent threats. This is one such occasion.

 

[PhillipPhoto]

This is not a call to violence against the justices, as the pjmedia article wrongly alleges.  

What's your interpretation of "burn the place down"?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Nobody on this forum will endorse this sort of stuff.

Unfortunately, there are a bunch of people out there who legitimately wish to inflict violence on people on the other side.  We saw some of that on 1/6, and you're kidding yourself if that that sentiment all lives on one side of the aisle.  It's a big country, there are seriously psychotic people living among us, and social media makes it easy for them to find each other.

 

[Rich Conway]

Nobody on this forum will endorse this sort of stuff.

Unfortunately, there are a bunch of people out there who legitimately wish to inflict violence on people on the other side.  We saw some of that on 1/6, and you're kidding yourself if that that sentiment all lives on one side of the aisle.  It's a big country, there are seriously psychotic people living among us, and social media makes it easy for them to find each other.

All of this.  300+ million people.  There are a lot of nuts out there.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

What's your interpretation of "burn the place down"?

Quite obviously non-literal. He's endorsing the leaker's attempt to weaken trust in the institution.

 

[Dickies]

What's your interpretation of "burn the place down"?

He is saying that whoever leaked the draft is eroding all confidence in the the Supreme Court.  Not sure I agree with his take.

 

[John123]

Nobody on this forum will endorse this sort of stuff.

Unfortunately, there are a bunch of people out there who legitimately wish to inflict violence on people on the other side.  We saw some of that on 1/6, and you're kidding yourself if that that sentiment all lives on one side of the aisle.  It's a big country, there are seriously psychotic people living among us, and social media makes it easy for them to find each other.

I saw this long before January 6th, as I watched cities burning for two years and no one stopping it.  This was foreseeable.  Just like all the looting happening daily in SF because the city chooses not to prosecute theft, if you don't enforce laws the people violating them become more emboldened. 

 

[dkp993]

Home addresses of justices were posted and now we have a Justice having to cancel public appearances for safety reasons.  Hopefully, the PSF can agree this is egregious behavior?

Alito cancels public appearance

Disgusting behavior if true.  

 

[Dickies]

The article says "Alito was set to appear at a judicial conference on Thursday, but the radical left has been protesting and calling for violence against the justices who voted to overturn Roe, and he has canceled."

In the linked Reuters article it says "The spokesperson gave no reason for why Alito, who is the justice assigned to hear emergency appeals from the 5th Circuit, was not going."

 

[PhillipPhoto]

Nobody on this forum will endorse this sort of stuff.

No, but they try to minimize it because of sides:

One obscure fringe group called “Ruth Sent Us” that no one had heard of before yesterday. 

How much terror can one unheard of person or group cause I wonder.  Does history tell us anything?  

 

[Dickies]

No, but they try to minimize it because of sides: 

You must be new here.

 

[squistion]

This is not a call to violence against the justices, as the pjmedia article wrongly alleges.  

That is how I interpret it. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

This is not a call to violence against the justices, as the pjmedia article wrongly alleges.  

I'm not talking about the PJ media article.

The poster acted as if extreme opposition was some sort of fringe that nobody had ever heard of.

I'm talking about the senior correspondent for VOX posting, 

Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said “#### it! Let’s burn this place down.”

In light of January 6, you'd think a senior correspondent would be able to express that point better. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

No, but they try to minimize it because of sides:

Yeah, but that's just normal internet behavior -- people want to pretend like their side never does anything wrong.  That's not the same as actually endorsing violence.

 

[PhillipPhoto]

You must be new here.

Learning fast.  To your other post:

Far left media guy thinks it's heroic when a ruling he doesn't agree with gets leaked?  And "burn it down" means "eroding confidence"?

I guess.  He thinks the institution is failing him so he'd rather the whole thing fall apart if he doesn't get his way.  At least we don't have to guess which side leaked it anymore.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Nobody on this forum will endorse this sort of stuff.

Unfortunately, there are a bunch of people out there who legitimately wish to inflict violence on people on the other side.  We saw some of that on 1/6, and you're kidding yourself if that that sentiment all lives on one side of the aisle.  It's a big country, there are seriously psychotic people living among us, and social media makes it easy for them to find each other.

Agreed. 

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I'm not talking about the PJ media article.

The poster acted as if extreme opposition was some sort of fringe that nobody had ever heard of.

I'm talking about the senior correspondent for VOX posting, 

In light of January 6, you'd think a senior correspondent would be able to express that point better. 

I didn’t have any trouble understanding his point.

 

[squistion]

I'm not talking about the PJ media article.

The poster acted as if extreme opposition was some sort of fringe that nobody had ever heard of.

I'm talking about the senior correspondent for VOX posting, 

In the light of January 6, you'd think a senior correspondent would be able to express that point better. 

There is a lunatic fringe on both sides and this is an example of it from the left. I can't get excited about a previously obscure handful of folks trying to get media attention. 

And I don't have a problem with the VOX correspondent quote, he was speaking figuratively of the mindset of the leaker. 

 

[Godsbrother]

It is disgusting but unfortunately there are lots of idiots out there.

 

[Dickies]

I'm not talking about the PJ media article.

The poster acted as if extreme opposition was some sort of fringe that nobody had ever heard of.

I'm talking about the senior correspondent for VOX posting, 

In light of January 6, you'd think a senior correspondent would be able to express that point better. 

I guess I don't understand your point.  You brought up the tweet in the article that alleged threats of violence to the justices.

He didn't say nobody had heard of extreme opposition.  He said that nobody had heard of "Ruth Sent Us".  There is nothing here indicating that the Vox correspondent is a member of that group.

Edit to add: squis is obviously wrong in his assertion.  Somebody has heard of Ruth Sent Us.

 

[squistion]

I guess I don't understand your point.  You brought up the tweet in the article that alleged threats of violence to the justices.

He didn't say nobody had heard of extreme opposition.  He said that nobody had heard of "Ruth Sent Us".  There is nothing here indicating that the Vox correspondent is a member of that group.

Edit to add: squis is obviously wrong in his assertion.  Somebody has heard of Ruth Sent Us.

I meant that no one had ever heard of them before they advocated this protest (or at least I don't recall seeing anything about them).

 

[PhillipPhoto]

I meant that no one had ever heard of them before they advocated this protest (or at least I don't recall seeing anything about them).

They are the ones that dress up in red cloaks like in the Handmaid's Tale.  You don't remember that from the Kavanaugh trial?

Or the Coney Barrett confirmation.  Why would you assume and make the statement that nobody else has heard of them just because you haven't?  

 

[Joe Bryant]

I guess I don't understand your point.  You brought up the tweet in the article that alleged threats of violence to the justices.

He didn't say nobody had heard of extreme opposition.  He said that nobody had heard of "Ruth Sent Us".  There is nothing here indicating that the Vox correspondent is a member of that group.

Edit to add: squis is obviously wrong in his assertion.  Somebody has heard of Ruth Sent Us.

My point is extreme opposition to this is being egged on from sites like Vox by people with lots of followers. We're not that far from Jan 6 and we have senior correspondents with 100k followers posting "Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said “#### it! Let’s burn this place down.” " and it gets 30,000+ likes. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

And I don't have a problem with the VOX correspondent quote, he was speaking figuratively of the mindset of the leaker. 

Thanks for being honest. Given what we saw in January, I'll differ with you and I do have a problem with a Vox senior correspondent posting '"Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said “#### it! Let’s burn this place down.”

The exact same way I have a problem with anyone who said that kind of thing in January. 

 

[kface]

This country is off the deep end.  Nothing but the long slide into the abyss at this point

 

[Joe Bryant]

This country is off the deep end.  Nothing but the long slide into the abyss at this point

Don't give up GB. 

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Terrible. 

While I don't agree that Roe should be overturned (and we still don't know that it will be -- and of course later challenges to the state laws could reinstate certain abortion rights), the leak of the opinion and the politicizing and erosion of faith in the most prestigious institution is terribly damaging.  Any threat of violence towards judges trying to interpret the law is abhorrent.  I weep for the future of the country, or what is left of it.

 

[squistion]

Thanks for being honest. Given what we saw in January, I'll differ with you and I do have a problem with a Vox senior correspondent posting '"Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said “#### it! Let’s burn this place down.”

The exact same way I have a problem with anyone who said that kind of thing in January. 

I see this as no different than if the Vox guy said "A shout out to that the hero within SCOTUS who said "#### it. Let's blow it up" which I wouldn't interpret as being a literal call to bomb the place either. 

 

[rcam]

Don't condone any violence. Don't have an issue with the doxxing as long as it's a peaceful assembly and all that. I mean, that is one of the Rights right? 

 

[Dickies]

My point is extreme opposition to this is being egged on from sites like Vox by people with lots of followers. We're not that far from Jan 6 and we have senior correspondents with 100k followers posting "Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said “#### it! Let’s burn this place down.” " and it gets 30,000+ likes. 

“Extreme opposition” is a pretty vague term. I’m extremely opposed to a number of things, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to commit violent acts to get my way.

I see no issue with what the Vox guy posted, but here we are talking about violent threats to Supreme Court justices based on a wildly misleading article in the OP. 

 

[LawFitz]

Curious how plenty of reading between lines was done related to anything even remotely instigating Jan 6. But when a Leftist Vox guy cheers on 'burning' down the SCOTUS, he's very clearly being figurative.

 

[Bogart]

Nobody on this forum will endorse this sort of stuff.

Someone will have their version of "it's just patriots taking selfies in the Capitol" comment. This group can't agree on anything 100%.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I see this as no different than if the Vox guy said "A shout out to that the hero within SCOTUS who said "#### it. Let's blow it up" which I wouldn't interpret as being a literal call to bomb the place either. 

Figuratively burning down (or blowing up) the Supreme Court is arguably bad too, though.

 

[whoknew]

People suck. 

 

[SoBeDad]

There was actual gun violence which targeted the author of the 1973 Roe majority opinion. And Operation Rescue just harassed the supposed leaker, and they've been implicated in violence against abortion clinics and their staff.

I expect Biden and democrats to condemn violence as a means. It doesn't much matter if I condemn violence as a means, which I do.

>>In 1985, Clarkson pointed out, someone shot out a window in the home of Justice Harry Blackmun, author of the 1973 majority opinion in Roe v. Wade. Before the attack, Blackmun had received numerous violent and graphic threats from anti-abortion activists, and over the previous year, seven abortion clinics and related facilities in and around Washington, D.C., had been bombed.<<

Anti-abortion zealots target Sotomayor aide as source of leak: Their threats are no joke Evidence is thin for Operation Rescue's claim — and the group's harassment has repeatedly gotten people killed

 

[sho nuff]

Don't condone any violence. Don't have an issue with the doxxing as long as it's a peaceful assembly and all that. I mean, that is one of the Rights right? 

I disagree…protest in DC near the courts.  I cannot support protests at ny official’s homes.

 

[Witz]

One obscure fringe group called “Ruth Sent Us” that no one had heard of before yesterday. 

Who cares - the response should be that it is unacceptable. Period. 

 

[squistion]

Figuratively burning down (or blowing up) the Supreme Court is arguably bad too, though.

Meh. In any event, people should know he was speaking figuratively not literally and not advocating actual violence.

 

[squistion]

Who cares - the response should be that it is unacceptable. Period. 

I said that it was unacceptable in another thread. Period.