The Capital incident was just what the left needed

[togor]

Pearl Harbor? 9/11?

Seems like the initial storylines held up just fine.

- - - Updated - - -

But of course accuracy improves with time. My guess is....the longer they dig, the more guilt they will find, not less.

In other words, as bad as it looked at the beginning, it is looking worse, not better, since.

See how it unfolds.

[lyman]

the point of the article apparently went over your head,

[togor]

the point of the article apparently went over your head,

Well I listed two biggies, way bigger then Benghazi or Steele, which contradict the basic argument of the piece, that first impressions of major attacks are deceiving.

My opinion is that the article itself is just deflection. Engineering is full of practical examples of answers getting better with time. Usually the big movement is at the beginning and then things settle down quickly to a stable state. More details will emerge on this one, but I am confident that it is not going to swing around. It is pretty much what it appears to be.

Then there's this, from the article:

This new evidence raises the first compelling question that remains unanswered. How could Trump incite an attack that had already been pre-planned and was in motion before his speech ended?

Trump held a pep rally! He also invited the MAGA gang to town well in advance of the 6th. A writer who cannot grasp those two obvious and undeniable points is someone who simply means to deceive those looking for alternative narratives.

My opinion, YMMV.

[lyman]

invite is not the same as incite,

[lyman]

oops,

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1349885882262761473