I think about the reports that Trump was excited by the invasion of the capitol because he thought it would derail the count, and it makes me think of a quote from the movie Boondock Saints: "Television. Television is the explanation for this. You see this in bad television."

In reality, there was zero chance that a violent assault on the capitol would have changed the outcome of the election, unless it was our own military doing it. An actual *physical* coup without military support? No.
And in fact, in reality, the more "successful" the assault was, the less likely it would be to affect the outcome. Had they succeeded in executing a congressperson on TikTok or whatever? They'd have killed their movement.
I believe that if they hadn't interrupted the process, the objections and debate would have been more successful in prolonging the process. But because of them, half the senators got cold feet and the remaining ones didn't even use their debate time.
Because they were attacked in their own chambers, because they were interrupted, it became a point of patriotic pride for Congress to finish the vote last night. Without that push, the objectors could have stretched it out, potentially for days.
If the invaders had managed to lynch someone in the halls of Congress? Then they'd be running smack up against "These colors don't run." and "We don't negotiate with terrorists." and everybody in power would be afraid to be seen as on their side.
But Donald Trump was excited and thought his salvation was at hand, and why? Because television. Because he views his life through the lens of a television show where he's the star, and he recognizes he's at the season finale and his show is on the bubble of cancelation.
I've actually had that line, "You see this in bad television." echoing in my head for years now, since around when Trump was elected, and couldn't remember what it was from until today, and I think it's because the scene in question involved an armed assault.
In reality the capitol invasion was a huge setback for Donald Trump, but on television -- in a bad TV show -- it would have represented a turning point for him. So he arranged it, he encouraged it, and he cheered it on.
I don't think he would recognize the difference. At a fundamental level. Possibly he thinks that television is more real than reality, because more people see it.

https://t.co/sFOH2wX99P

More from Alexandra Erin

More from Politics

This is partly what makes it impossible to have a constructive conversation nowadays. The stubborn refusal to accept that opposition to Trumpism and GOP nationalism is about more than simply holding different beliefs about things in and of itself. 👇


It's fine for people to hold different beliefs. But that doesn't mean all beliefs deserve equal treatment or tolerance and it doesn't mean intolerance of some beliefs makes a person intolerant of every belief which they don't share.

So if I said I don't think Trumpism deserves to be tolerated because it's just a fresh 21st century coat of cheap paint on a failed, dangerous 20th century ideology (fascism) that doesn't mean I'm intolerant of all beliefs with which I disagree. You'd think this would be obvious.

Another important facet. People who support fascist movements tend to give what they think are valid reasons for supporting them. That doesn't mean anyone is obliged to tolerate fascism or accept their proffered excuse.


Say you joined a neighborhood group that sets up community gardens and does roadside beautification projects. All good, right? Say one day you're having a meeting and you notice the President and exec board of this group are saying some bizarre things about certain neighbors.

You May Also Like

Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇

It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details):
https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha

I've read it so you needn't!

Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.

The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.

Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.