1 a) Had the whole of congress been strung up, it would have merely been bringing them to vigilante justice.

b) There was never much chance of such a impromptu force being able to actually make it through congressional security forces.

c) The whole of January 6 stinks of Pelosi stage managing things.

d) The thing about the 'BLM' riots that is most disturbing is the clear evidence of official/Democrat involvement in the stage management.  Political organizations which do this stuff do not suddenly come to their senses and knock it off.

e)  Which is more likely?   That nominal conservatives got off their asses, and finally decided on and implemented fighting fire with fire?  Or that Bowser/Pelosi just did what so many Democrat mayors and governors have been doing for years, and especially most of last year?  Me?  I conclude Democrats, and that the other attribution is a frame job.

f) If those that oppose the Democrats are fighting fire with fire, we will not only see the one incident.  If this technique has been implemented outside of Democrat control, we will see it used again.  The Democrats hunkering down in their bunker with their dear leader in DC are far from the only Democrat targets.  Most of these Democrat targets remain quite unsecured.

g) I predict that fire will be fought with some other strategy.

h) Destroying the police, and denying recourse to courts will naturally increase vigilantism. 

i) I don't think QAnon was true, and do not think it was ever the center of gravity to opposition to the Democrats.  I did think that some of the early pushback was interesting, because it invoked the pedophile and the satanist theories to discredit Q. 

This looked really weird, because those elements, on their own, are credible.  i) Pedophilia is plausible if one has had any contact with a public school sex ed curriculum in the last 20-30 years.  ii) As for satanism, we can be sure that communism is a heresy of Christianity.  Much of the left are clearly religious communists in behavior.  If we define a satanism by defensible criteria, the charge of satanism is objectively true. 

The whole 'bureaucratic insider' framing is something people would want to believe, but which does not stand up to serious examination. So, the early anti QAnon stuff was an information operation.  I think the theory plausible that QAnon was an information operation done with the intention of being discredited.  The recent anti-QAnon stuff also sounds like an information operation, the new regime needing an Emmanuel Goldstein.

j) The regime will be brought down by its own insanity and illegitimacy.  It is premature to talk of it already being brought down.  In theory, it could stay in power if it was capable of restraining itself in its torment of Americans.  Xi's senile pedophile jiangshi is completely incapable of providing that restraint.  Policy now is set by a Gu jar of evil madness that will precipitate something, whether by in fighting or some other route.  Kam Harris will not fix the situation should she take over, because she has no ability to refrain from abusing someone under her power. 

k) Elections are pointless without first being able to i) control voter lists ii) avoid electronic voting machines iii) force the courts to decide disputes fairly. 

l) Nobody with a law degree can be trusted.  Paul Caron, taxprof dot typepad dot com, a law school dean, posted a letter dated january 12, 2021, bragging about being signatory to it.  It is signed by a number of law school deans, I understand over 150.  I have not learned of any of these recanting it, or being removed from their positions.  Note, Glenn Reynolds is at a school whose acting head signed the thing, and that person is still acting head. 

m) Before you can justly talk about fixing things with elections, you need to either restore the trustworthiness of the courts, or you need to have an alternate means of resolving disputes to the formal legal system, one that does not include people with law degrees.