[pwinnski]

Parler, at least, despite initially claiming to not censor anyone/anything, went out of its way to censor/block people in opposed groups.[0] Parler's CEO bragged about blocking trolls, which he identified as those attacking Christians or conservatives.[1]

Of course, the most politically-conservative Christians I know are not on Parler nor Gab, but they're also not Trump supporters, which seemed to be the real reason people went to Parler/Gab. That's an unsupported assertion on my part, but seems consistent with my observations.

She wasn't fired because she's a Christian and a conservative. She was fired because she was active on two sites tied to attempted insurrection. It's a bad look for the agency, but IMO a worse look for Oefelein.

0. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-pr...

1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/06/27/parlers-f...

[throwawaysea]

Are people still peddling the hyperbole/lie that this was an attempted coup? https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/why-this-wasnt-a-coup-c...

[dane-pgp]

I think it's worth pointing out what a "hot take" that article is. It was written on the day of storming itself, and published at 5:54 PM, before the announced curfew had even started (and before some details about the government response were revealed[0]).

The Naval War College professor being interviewed in the article basically argues that unless the military is involved, it isn't a "coup", by definition. That would make the phrase "military coup" redundant, and contradicts the Merriam-Webster definition[1] which characterizes it as:

> a “sudden decisive exercise of force in politics,” but particularly the “violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group.”

By the professor's logic, even if a president were to explicitly command his followers to storm the Capitol, eliminate his political opponents, and destroy the certifications of the electoral votes he had lost, allowing him to stay in power illegitimately, that still wouldn't be a coup (or a self-coup, presumably).

In any case, another article[2] on the same site makes the opposing case:

> It’s undeniable at this point. The United States is witnessing a coup attempt — a forceful effort to seize power against the legal framework.

Admittedly it was published even earlier than the other article, but it had been drafted in response to discussions which had begun before the protests had turned violent, vindicating the author's position.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_storming_of_the_United_St...

[1] https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/01/13/insurrection-coup-and...

[2] https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/coup-america-capitol-el...

[dragonwriter]

> Are people still peddling the hyperbole/lie that this was an attempted coup?

It's neither hyperbole nor a lie.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/coup-america-capitol-el...

[pwinnski]

I used the word "insurrection," not "coup," but yes, it definitely was an attempt at both. Bad articles notwithstanding, upcoming federal trials ought to make that clear to those who participated.

[mssundaram]

Yeah, very annoying though almost not surprising