[_-david-_]

> because of — you name it — political propaganda I would pause for a moment and revaluate whether I am still who I think I was.

We don't know why Pelosi's husband was attacked. The guy who attacked him appears to be left wing (nudist activist, pro lgbt, he made hemp jewelry, and was a member of the green party). Pelosi appears to have said the attacker was his friend on the police call.

We just don't know enough to say it is political.

[atoav]

> We just don't know enough to say it is political.

If you read my comment again you will realize that I did not say whether the attack was political or not.

I said the defense of the attack certainly is exactly that: political.

So it does not matter anymore whether the attack itself was political at this point.

The question now is: Why would anybody defend an supposed "non-political" attack like this one? This is literal "supporting-horror-movie-villain"-territory. Or as I said: If they made me defend that, I would definitely reconsider why I let them manipulate me into this. I am not sure what I would gain from letting them do this to me, other than offsetting the realization that they duped me for yet another day.

On a side note: given what we know this attack was indeed political. If you are consume actual news outlets you might know that the attacker is quoted to have said to the police he wanted to wait for the speaker and "break her kneecaps” to show other members of Congress there were “consequences to actions".

Attacking a public representative for their political actions is as political as it gets. If you don't like what your representatives do in a democracy, you vote them out. What you don't do is this psycho killer bullshit.

[_-david-_]

>say whether the attack was political or not.

>I said the defense of the attack certainly is exactly that: political.

>So it does not matter anymore whether the attack itself was political at this point.

I misread what you wrote.

>The question now is: Why would anybody defend an supposed "non-political" attack like this one? This is literal "supporting-horror-movie-villain"-territory. Or as I said: If they made me defend that, I would definitely reconsider why I let them manipulate me into this. I am not sure what I would gain from letting them do this to me, other than offsetting the realization that they duped me for yet another day.

I don't think any mainstream person is defending this. There have been comparisons to Rand Paul's attack since various people who were supportive of the attack on Rand (including the Pelosi's daughter) are opposed to this one.

There has also been some lack of sympathy, which is unfortunate.

>On a side note: given what we know this attack was indeed political. If you are consume actual news outlets you might know that the attacker is quoted to have said to the police he wanted to wait for the speaker and "break her kneecaps” to show other members of Congress there were “consequences to actions".

I haven't seen anybody provide evidence to that. I have seen some claims, but nobody involved is quoted as hearing it (as far as I have seen).

Seeing how the media has been lying from the very beginning of this case I will wait until somebody reputable provides evidence to that statement.

The defense lawyer said there has been a lot of misinformation regarding this case, so I think trusting the people spreading the misinformation isn't a wise decision.

>Attacking a public representative for their political actions is as political as it gets.

>If you don't like what your representatives do in a democracy, you vote them out. What you don't do is this psycho killer bullshit.

I agree you shouldn't attack people over politics, but you are assuming this was an attack over political actions...

He appears to be similar politically to the Pelosis.