Pelosi attack

[Steve]

And your sources for those fanciful accusations are just what?

Does it matter...? 

You simply dismiss out of hand (and refuse to watch/read) anything that contradicts the World view of your own preferred media...

Meister has made some very big allegations in that post.  Either he can back them with sources of provenance or he can't.  So I've asked a fair question to see if there is any real backing.

Cue another false post and thread locked?

[Steve]

Interesting https://www.reuters.com/world/us/elon-musk-deletes-tweet-with-unfounded-theory-about-pelosi-attack-2022-10-30/
 
'Twitter's new owner Elon Musk appeared to have deleted a tweet posted on Sunday referencing an unfounded theory regarding the attack on the husband of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at their San Francisco home.'

It was an article in the junk grade Santa Monica Observer that Alt Righters have lapped up. 

[Grumpmeister]

And your sources for those fanciful accusations are just what?

The well known right wing news broadcaster that is CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/biden-warns-trumps-extreme-maga-republicans-are-a-danger-to-us-democracy.html

Chuck Grassley's letters to Merrick Garland regarding the domestic terrorism issue.

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/judiciary-republicans-to-garland-are-concerned-parents-domestic-terrorists-or-not

Now I know that Steve is going to roll his eyes at me referencing the Daily Mail but they are Newsguard certified, as are most of the news sources I get information from.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10391397/Biden-education-secretary-solicited-National-School-Boards-letter-comparing-parents-terrorists.html

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/doj-talked-with-white-house-before-issuing-domestic-terrorism-school-protest-memo

Musk's tweet may have referenced an unfounded theory but the more I think about it there is something about this attack that just doesn't add up. As speaker of the house Pelosi is currently third in the line of succession for the Presidency so both she and her immediate family would have significant security measures in place, both private and through the secret service. Yet a mentally unbalanced man wearing nothing but their underwear was able to somehow able to waltz through an exclusive area of San Francisco, avoid the security details and cameras and break into the back door of her home in such a way that it appears in the photographs that the broken glass fell on the outside of the building? Lets not forget, the idiot who was all set to try and assassinate Brett Kavanaugh took one look at their security detail and gave himself up.

[Barman]

And your sources for those fanciful accusations are just what?

Does it matter...? 

You simply dismiss out of hand (and refuse to watch/read) anything that contradicts the World view of your own preferred media...

Meister has made some very big allegations in that post.  Either he can back them with sources of provenance or he can't.  So I've asked a fair question to see if there is any real backing.

Cue another false post and thread locked?

The point is he can back them up but you won't accept it... 

[Barman]

[Steve]

And your sources for those fanciful accusations are just what?

The well known right wing news broadcaster that is CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/biden-warns-trumps-extreme-maga-republicans-are-a-danger-to-us-democracy.html . . .

OK lets take the first of your allegations:

. . .And that's not even mentioning Biden's constant comments about 70 million voters being a direct threat to democracy because they chose to vote for Trump . .

That link of yours says Biden very much did not.  It says only that a niche subset of Republicans are with that "Trump’s extreme MAGA Republicans are ‘clear and present danger’ to U.S. democracy"

Not constant comments

Not 70 million voters, not even close
 
And with their attacks on the Capitol, their gerrymandering and restricting voting rights they are. 

[Steve]

And now the second one

Here's your original assertion:

. . .And that's not even mentioning Biden's  . . permitting actions such as the DOJ categorising parents who had genuine concerns about what their children were being taught in schools as domestic terrorists.  . . .

So you're saying this is based on

. . .
Chuck Grassley's letters to Merrick Garland regarding the domestic terrorism issue.

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/judiciary-republicans-to-garland-are-concerned-parents-domestic-terrorists-or-not

Now I know that Steve is going to roll his eyes at me referencing the Daily Mail but they are Newsguard certified, as are most of the news sources I get information from.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10391397/Biden-education-secretary-solicited-National-School-Boards-letter-comparing-parents-terrorists.html

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/doj-talked-with-white-house-before-issuing-domestic-terrorism-school-protest-memo
 . .

First of all the Daily Mail does mostly report the truth, just not enough and too often (as in this case) in articles under at best disingenuous headlines intended to misinform.

But to the point at hand

Here is the actual DoJ memo Biden allowed:  https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1438986/download

It does not mention terrorism, it does not even mention parents. 

Neither does the associated press release:  https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-addresses-violent-threats-against-school-officials-and-teachers

You mention Chuck Grassley.  He's a politician with no government post:  irrelevant to your claim.

So what we have is that the NSBA did send an internal to government memo to Biden that mentioned terrorism as a possibility and that Biden and/or the DoJ did not back that.

The claim is manifestly false.

[Steve]

I'd like the opportunity to show in the right thread that this claim is wrong.  I suspect I won't be allowed it.

[Steve]

The Court documents are pretty disturbing

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
 
'In a Mirandized and recorded interview of DEPAPE by San Francisco Police Department Officers, DEPAPE provided the following information:

a. DEPAPE stated that he was going to hold Nancy hostage and talk to her. If Nancy were to tell DEPAPE the “truth,” he would let her go, and if she “lied,” he was going to break “her kneecaps.” DEPAPE was certain that Nancy would not have told the “truth.” In the course of the interview, DEPAPE articulated he viewed Nancy as the “leader of the pack” of lies told by the Democratic Party. DEPAPE also later explained that by breaking Nancy’s kneecaps, she would then have to be wheeled into Congress, which would show other Members of Congress there were consequences to actions. '