January 6, 2021: Insurrection or “normal tourist” visitation?

[cradleandshoot]

You've seen the entire email chain?

No, & neither have you. That's my point. Yet you don't hesitate to site an email snippet in response to my request for evidence that the NG, or anyone in their chain of command, was somehow complicit in "the plan" & would protect the Proud Boys. I ask again. Protect them from who ?

yes, I certainly don't have the whole email chain...but you asked what "emerging evidence" there was on the topic, citation...I provided it.

Yeah, I don't think you write "protect Trump people" unless you mean "pro-Trump" in specific. If you said, "protect all protestors" or "protect all citizens" then that's quite different, and hey, maybe he did and we'll ultimately see that to be the case; come on Mark, testify!...but this is what is "emerging" right now and it's no surprise why McCarthy et al were so opposed to a full bi-partisan Senate and House Commission. Scared witless...

BTW, keep cutting my posts down just to a phrase...that's a heck of a tactic.

So you know precisely what I am addressing & don't rehash tangential diversions.

hmmm, and lose what I've said that puts such in context. Feels like cherry picking a phrase. The rest wasn't "tangential" to that one.

I do understand cutting long, multi-person discussions down, but not a short one like this.

IMO the shorter your points are the better for all of us on this forum. That is sparing many of us your FLP lifelong I'm a republican nonsense. In lacrosse it is the equivalent of the mercy rule. Show some compassion MD for some of your fellow posters.

[MDlaxfan76]

Previews of coming attractions :

yeah, these sorts of hearings are an ugly way to get at the truth. Primarily because of the time constraints, the questioner wants to get in their points rather than really getting the person in the hot seat to fully explain their views and actions.

That said, those two were far from the worst such examples. Sometimes the person being questioned can't say anything at all. Which is really a waste of time.

The questions and points were actually pretty reasonable, though I'd have wanted to hear Miller's full, thoughtful responses rather than his hand waving, and denials.

I'd prefer a single questioner, extended questioning, under oath, with plenty of opportunity for someone like Miller to fully explain, but also to be fully challenged.

On the substance, simply from those two clips, there was indeed an hour and a half spread between a direct request and a responsive action/order to that request, there was indeed a failure to call the President, instead claiming 'full authority', yet 'no authority' and it would have been 'extra-Constitutional' to have taken other action, a claim that had there been a request they would have acted, yet when there was a request, a delay...

Did anyone ask him whether they talked to anyone else from the White House? Meadows? Anyone else? Or did they really just sit there and say to themselves something to the effect of 'we don't have any authority to act, and only the President can give us that authority, but we're not going to reach out to see if there are new orders?...or "we already have the authority to act, but no 'request'?"...huh, really?

I think the one congressman was correct, 'at least have the humility to say that, in retrospect, it would have been better had we done 1, 2, and 3 actions at various points in time. 20:20 hindsight. Here's what I would recommend going forward...

BTW, 300 people have testified to the Jan 6 Committee, no show hearings. They may well be coming, but it'll only be after a heck of a lot of fact finding first.

[MDlaxfan76]

You've seen the entire email chain?

No, & neither have you. That's my point. Yet you don't hesitate to site an email snippet in response to my request for evidence that the NG, or anyone in their chain of command, was somehow complicit in "the plan" & would protect the Proud Boys. I ask again. Protect them from who ?

yes, I certainly don't have the whole email chain...but you asked what "emerging evidence" there was on the topic, citation...I provided it.

Yeah, I don't think you write "protect Trump people" unless you mean "pro-Trump" in specific. If you said, "protect all protestors" or "protect all citizens" then that's quite different, and hey, maybe he did and we'll ultimately see that to be the case; come on Mark, testify!...but this is what is "emerging" right now and it's no surprise why McCarthy et al were so opposed to a full bi-partisan Senate and House Commission. Scared witless...

BTW, keep cutting my posts down just to a phrase...that's a heck of a tactic.

So you know precisely what I am addressing & don't rehash tangential diversions.

hmmm, and lose what I've said that puts such in context. Feels like cherry picking a phrase. The rest wasn't "tangential" to that one.

I do understand cutting long, multi-person discussions down, but not a short one like this.

IMO the shorter your points are the better for all of us on this forum. That is sparing many of us your FLP lifelong I'm a republican nonsense. In lacrosse it is the equivalent of the mercy rule. Show some compassion MD for some of your fellow posters.

Absolutely...but this was a very short exchange.
It was a BS move to cut the context, and to ignore the response.

You can find it at Dec 15, 5:22PM above.

[MDlaxfan76]

A criminal referral from a partisan Congressional committee is just more political theater unless DoJ responds with an indictment.

With the leaks & selective disclosures, Liz & supporting cast are trying hard to capture or maintain interest in a Trump scandal-weary public.

Man, you are one really sad case, and getting sadder still by the day. The Committee isn't "partisan." It happens to be populated with people who aren't McCarthy's sheep. There's a difference.

I love how you try to diminish women by using their first names and giving them nifty -- fifty years ago -- nicknames. You couldn't carry a briefcase for her at this point.

My guess is DOJ acts pretty promptly on this one, given the seriousness of the potential evidence being withheld from Congress.

What evidence is being withheld from the DoJ in their investigation ?
They may move quickly on the contempt charges, but the witnesses under subpoena have lawyers too.

None of the minority leaders nominee's were included. Only 2 (R) members were deemed suitable by the Speaker..

Liz will need someone to carry her briefcase in 12 mos, unless someone's already carrying a briefcase full of cash from her recent visit to NH, of all places. I'll gladly vote for Liz if she somehow finds her way onto a (R) national ticket with Mitt, Kinzinger or Hogan. Did I use the correct pronouns ? Hope I didn't diminish Mitt.

Jordan is going to turn out to be a material witness before this is over. His texts are all over the evidence they already have and he will be on the list of 10 members whose identities will be made public soon. How could he ever be on a panel investigating himself?

Your lame attempts to be funny are tiresome especially because they aren't actually funny. Ditto for you trying to be a wisea** and not actually contribute to any discussion you're in.

Yup, Jordan's going to have his turn or turns in the hot seat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics ... index.html

[youthathletics]

A criminal referral from a partisan Congressional committee is just more political theater unless DoJ responds with an indictment.

With the leaks & selective disclosures, Liz & supporting cast are trying hard to capture or maintain interest in a Trump scandal-weary public.

Man, you are one really sad case, and getting sadder still by the day. The Committee isn't "partisan." It happens to be populated with people who aren't McCarthy's sheep. There's a difference.

I love how you try to diminish women by using their first names and giving them nifty -- fifty years ago -- nicknames. You couldn't carry a briefcase for her at this point.

My guess is DOJ acts pretty promptly on this one, given the seriousness of the potential evidence being withheld from Congress.

What evidence is being withheld from the DoJ in their investigation ?
They may move quickly on the contempt charges, but the witnesses under subpoena have lawyers too.

None of the minority leaders nominee's were included. Only 2 (R) members were deemed suitable by the Speaker..

Liz will need someone to carry her briefcase in 12 mos, unless someone's already carrying a briefcase full of cash from her recent visit to NH, of all places. I'll gladly vote for Liz if she somehow finds her way onto a (R) national ticket with Mitt, Kinzinger or Hogan. Did I use the correct pronouns ? Hope I didn't diminish Mitt.

Jordan is going to turn out to be a material witness before this is over. His texts are all over the evidence they already have and he will be on the list of 10 members whose identities will be made public soon. How could he ever be on a panel investigating himself?

Your lame attempts to be funny are tiresome especially because they aren't actually funny. Ditto for you trying to be a wisea** and not actually contribute to any discussion you're in.

Yup, Jordan's going to have his turn or turns in the hot seat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics ... index.html

Any predications on the final outcome MD or Kismet?

[dislaxxic]

Listening to all the Benghazi hearing supporting wingnuts around here is pretty amusing. Come on guys, you all taught us all we ever need to know about show trials! Adding elements of the conservative show trial playbook to this ACTUAL, bipartisan string of hearings make them all the more effective, dontcha think??

..

[Typical Lax Dad]

A criminal referral from a partisan Congressional committee is just more political theater unless DoJ responds with an indictment.

With the leaks & selective disclosures, Liz & supporting cast are trying hard to capture or maintain interest in a Trump scandal-weary public.

Man, you are one really sad case, and getting sadder still by the day. The Committee isn't "partisan." It happens to be populated with people who aren't McCarthy's sheep. There's a difference.

I love how you try to diminish women by using their first names and giving them nifty -- fifty years ago -- nicknames. You couldn't carry a briefcase for her at this point.

My guess is DOJ acts pretty promptly on this one, given the seriousness of the potential evidence being withheld from Congress.

What evidence is being withheld from the DoJ in their investigation ?
They may move quickly on the contempt charges, but the witnesses under subpoena have lawyers too.

None of the minority leaders nominee's were included. Only 2 (R) members were deemed suitable by the Speaker..

Liz will need someone to carry her briefcase in 12 mos, unless someone's already carrying a briefcase full of cash from her recent visit to NH, of all places. I'll gladly vote for Liz if she somehow finds her way onto a (R) national ticket with Mitt, Kinzinger or Hogan. Did I use the correct pronouns ? Hope I didn't diminish Mitt.

Jordan is going to turn out to be a material witness before this is over. His texts are all over the evidence they already have and he will be on the list of 10 members whose identities will be made public soon. How could he ever be on a panel investigating himself?

Your lame attempts to be funny are tiresome especially because they aren't actually funny. Ditto for you trying to be a wisea** and not actually contribute to any discussion you're in.

Yup, Jordan's going to have his turn or turns in the hot seat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics ... index.html

He should forgo rolling up his sleeves….just break out the short sleeves…

[MDlaxfan76]

A criminal referral from a partisan Congressional committee is just more political theater unless DoJ responds with an indictment.

With the leaks & selective disclosures, Liz & supporting cast are trying hard to capture or maintain interest in a Trump scandal-weary public.

Man, you are one really sad case, and getting sadder still by the day. The Committee isn't "partisan." It happens to be populated with people who aren't McCarthy's sheep. There's a difference.

I love how you try to diminish women by using their first names and giving them nifty -- fifty years ago -- nicknames. You couldn't carry a briefcase for her at this point.

My guess is DOJ acts pretty promptly on this one, given the seriousness of the potential evidence being withheld from Congress.

What evidence is being withheld from the DoJ in their investigation ?
They may move quickly on the contempt charges, but the witnesses under subpoena have lawyers too.

None of the minority leaders nominee's were included. Only 2 (R) members were deemed suitable by the Speaker..

Liz will need someone to carry her briefcase in 12 mos, unless someone's already carrying a briefcase full of cash from her recent visit to NH, of all places. I'll gladly vote for Liz if she somehow finds her way onto a (R) national ticket with Mitt, Kinzinger or Hogan. Did I use the correct pronouns ? Hope I didn't diminish Mitt.

Jordan is going to turn out to be a material witness before this is over. His texts are all over the evidence they already have and he will be on the list of 10 members whose identities will be made public soon. How could he ever be on a panel investigating himself?

Your lame attempts to be funny are tiresome especially because they aren't actually funny. Ditto for you trying to be a wisea** and not actually contribute to any discussion you're in.

Yup, Jordan's going to have his turn or turns in the hot seat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics ... index.html

Any predications on the final outcome MD or Kismet?

If you clarify your question, it would be helpful.

Do you mean as to Jim Jordan's role?
He's a POS and should be exposed as such, IMO should go to jail (though I'm highly doubtful on that one).....unfortunately it's also rather telling that he's the preferred next Speaker by many GOP Reps...

First step is Jan 6 Committee subpoena. All communications to any party regarding the Presidential election for a period of 6 months prior to the election and thereafter. And all communications of any kind, except for personal communications with family, doctor, etc deserving personal privacy, for the period of one month prior to the election through two months following Jan 6. No wiggle room. Come in to be put under oath (not on TV).

Or are you asking much more broadly?

[youthathletics]

A criminal referral from a partisan Congressional committee is just more political theater unless DoJ responds with an indictment.

With the leaks & selective disclosures, Liz & supporting cast are trying hard to capture or maintain interest in a Trump scandal-weary public.

Man, you are one really sad case, and getting sadder still by the day. The Committee isn't "partisan." It happens to be populated with people who aren't McCarthy's sheep. There's a difference.

I love how you try to diminish women by using their first names and giving them nifty -- fifty years ago -- nicknames. You couldn't carry a briefcase for her at this point.

My guess is DOJ acts pretty promptly on this one, given the seriousness of the potential evidence being withheld from Congress.

What evidence is being withheld from the DoJ in their investigation ?
They may move quickly on the contempt charges, but the witnesses under subpoena have lawyers too.

None of the minority leaders nominee's were included. Only 2 (R) members were deemed suitable by the Speaker..

Liz will need someone to carry her briefcase in 12 mos, unless someone's already carrying a briefcase full of cash from her recent visit to NH, of all places. I'll gladly vote for Liz if she somehow finds her way onto a (R) national ticket with Mitt, Kinzinger or Hogan. Did I use the correct pronouns ? Hope I didn't diminish Mitt.

Jordan is going to turn out to be a material witness before this is over. His texts are all over the evidence they already have and he will be on the list of 10 members whose identities will be made public soon. How could he ever be on a panel investigating himself?

Your lame attempts to be funny are tiresome especially because they aren't actually funny. Ditto for you trying to be a wisea** and not actually contribute to any discussion you're in.

Yup, Jordan's going to have his turn or turns in the hot seat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics ... index.html

Any predications on the final outcome MD or Kismet?

If you clarify your question, it would be helpful.

Do you mean as to Jim Jordan's role?
He's a POS and should be exposed as such, IMO should go to jail (though I'm highly doubtful on that one).....unfortunately it's also rather telling that he's the preferred next Speaker by many GOP Reps...

Or are you asking much more broadly?

Broadly...end of the day, what comes of all this?

[Kismet]

A criminal referral from a partisan Congressional committee is just more political theater unless DoJ responds with an indictment.

With the leaks & selective disclosures, Liz & supporting cast are trying hard to capture or maintain interest in a Trump scandal-weary public.

Man, you are one really sad case, and getting sadder still by the day. The Committee isn't "partisan." It happens to be populated with people who aren't McCarthy's sheep. There's a difference.

I love how you try to diminish women by using their first names and giving them nifty -- fifty years ago -- nicknames. You couldn't carry a briefcase for her at this point.

My guess is DOJ acts pretty promptly on this one, given the seriousness of the potential evidence being withheld from Congress.

What evidence is being withheld from the DoJ in their investigation ?
They may move quickly on the contempt charges, but the witnesses under subpoena have lawyers too.

None of the minority leaders nominee's were included. Only 2 (R) members were deemed suitable by the Speaker..

Liz will need someone to carry her briefcase in 12 mos, unless someone's already carrying a briefcase full of cash from her recent visit to NH, of all places. I'll gladly vote for Liz if she somehow finds her way onto a (R) national ticket with Mitt, Kinzinger or Hogan. Did I use the correct pronouns ? Hope I didn't diminish Mitt.

Jordan is going to turn out to be a material witness before this is over. His texts are all over the evidence they already have and he will be on the list of 10 members whose identities will be made public soon. How could he ever be on a panel investigating himself?

Your lame attempts to be funny are tiresome especially because they aren't actually funny. Ditto for you trying to be a wisea** and not actually contribute to any discussion you're in.

Yup, Jordan's going to have his turn or turns in the hot seat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics ... index.html

Any predications on the final outcome MD or Kismet?

Nope. Name is KISMET not CARNAC
Whatever happens should be interesting

[MDlaxfan76]

A criminal referral from a partisan Congressional committee is just more political theater unless DoJ responds with an indictment.

With the leaks & selective disclosures, Liz & supporting cast are trying hard to capture or maintain interest in a Trump scandal-weary public.

Man, you are one really sad case, and getting sadder still by the day. The Committee isn't "partisan." It happens to be populated with people who aren't McCarthy's sheep. There's a difference.

I love how you try to diminish women by using their first names and giving them nifty -- fifty years ago -- nicknames. You couldn't carry a briefcase for her at this point.

My guess is DOJ acts pretty promptly on this one, given the seriousness of the potential evidence being withheld from Congress.

What evidence is being withheld from the DoJ in their investigation ?
They may move quickly on the contempt charges, but the witnesses under subpoena have lawyers too.

None of the minority leaders nominee's were included. Only 2 (R) members were deemed suitable by the Speaker..

Liz will need someone to carry her briefcase in 12 mos, unless someone's already carrying a briefcase full of cash from her recent visit to NH, of all places. I'll gladly vote for Liz if she somehow finds her way onto a (R) national ticket with Mitt, Kinzinger or Hogan. Did I use the correct pronouns ? Hope I didn't diminish Mitt.

Jordan is going to turn out to be a material witness before this is over. His texts are all over the evidence they already have and he will be on the list of 10 members whose identities will be made public soon. How could he ever be on a panel investigating himself?

Your lame attempts to be funny are tiresome especially because they aren't actually funny. Ditto for you trying to be a wisea** and not actually contribute to any discussion you're in.

Yup, Jordan's going to have his turn or turns in the hot seat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics ... index.html

Any predications on the final outcome MD or Kismet?

If you clarify your question, it would be helpful.

Do you mean as to Jim Jordan's role?
He's a POS and should be exposed as such, IMO should go to jail (though I'm highly doubtful on that one).....unfortunately it's also rather telling that he's the preferred next Speaker by many GOP Reps...

Or are you asking much more broadly?

Broadly...end of the day, what comes of all this?

Difference between a prediction and my hope...

My hope would be that all of those involved in conspiring to promote the Big Lie, regardless of evidence, regardless of court decisions, and promoting the notion that the election should be overturned, especially down the final stretch to Jan 6 would go to jail. Longer sentences for those who were in contact and encouraged those who were actually violent. That includes Trump.

My hope would be that the weight of the evidence would be such that the cult would break, that rationality would return to the GOP, that we could re-constitute two credible political parties, each committed to the democratic process, albeit with differing policy objectives.

My prediction, however, is that regardless of overwhelming evidence, sedition and conspiracy charges will not be brought against those most responsible.

I also, even more painfully, predict that we really will lose democracy to a form of pseudo-fascistic minority rule in 2024.

[MDlaxfan76]

A criminal referral from a partisan Congressional committee is just more political theater unless DoJ responds with an indictment.

With the leaks & selective disclosures, Liz & supporting cast are trying hard to capture or maintain interest in a Trump scandal-weary public.

Man, you are one really sad case, and getting sadder still by the day. The Committee isn't "partisan." It happens to be populated with people who aren't McCarthy's sheep. There's a difference.

I love how you try to diminish women by using their first names and giving them nifty -- fifty years ago -- nicknames. You couldn't carry a briefcase for her at this point.

My guess is DOJ acts pretty promptly on this one, given the seriousness of the potential evidence being withheld from Congress.

What evidence is being withheld from the DoJ in their investigation ?
They may move quickly on the contempt charges, but the witnesses under subpoena have lawyers too.

None of the minority leaders nominee's were included. Only 2 (R) members were deemed suitable by the Speaker..

Liz will need someone to carry her briefcase in 12 mos, unless someone's already carrying a briefcase full of cash from her recent visit to NH, of all places. I'll gladly vote for Liz if she somehow finds her way onto a (R) national ticket with Mitt, Kinzinger or Hogan. Did I use the correct pronouns ? Hope I didn't diminish Mitt.

Jordan is going to turn out to be a material witness before this is over. His texts are all over the evidence they already have and he will be on the list of 10 members whose identities will be made public soon. How could he ever be on a panel investigating himself?

Your lame attempts to be funny are tiresome especially because they aren't actually funny. Ditto for you trying to be a wisea** and not actually contribute to any discussion you're in.

Yup, Jordan's going to have his turn or turns in the hot seat: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics ... index.html

Any predications on the final outcome MD or Kismet?

Nope. Name is KISMET not CARNAC
Whatever happens should be interesting

I played Carnac for him.

[Typical Lax Dad]

“My prediction, however, is that regardless of overwhelming evidence, sedition and conspiracy charges will not be brought against those most responsible.”

I mentioned this to a friend yesterday. I don’t expect anything different….democracy slipping and most don’t care. I have been talking about minority rule for 2 years. It’s not sustainable and will end ugly at some point.

[seacoaster]

“My prediction, however, is that regardless of overwhelming evidence, sedition and conspiracy charges will not be brought against those most responsible.”

I mentioned this to a friend yesterday. I don’t expect anything different….democracy slipping and most don’t care. I have been talking about minority rule for 2 years. It’s not sustainable and will end ugly at some point.

My prediction is that the GOP really thinks it needs to control the House in 2023 in order that it can find a way to bury the story of its leadership and rank and file members supporting an attempted coup and the reversal of the votes of 81,000,000 Americans. They are not running on policies, that's for sure. The GOP is running on the fear that the January 6 Commission will expose the dirt and filth of their sedition, and betrayal of Americans and the idea of American.

[Typical Lax Dad]

“My prediction, however, is that regardless of overwhelming evidence, sedition and conspiracy charges will not be brought against those most responsible.”

I mentioned this to a friend yesterday. I don’t expect anything different….democracy slipping and most don’t care. I have been talking about minority rule for 2 years. It’s not sustainable and will end ugly at some point.

My prediction is that the GOP really thinks it needs to control the House in 2023 in order that it can find a way to bury the story of its leadership and rank and file members supporting an attempted coup and the reversal of the votes of 81,000,000 Americans. They are not running on policies, that's for sure. The GOP is running on the fear that the January 6 Commission will expose the dirt and filth of their sedition, and betrayal of Americans and the idea of American.

It is really incredible. I wondered a few years ago if we had peaked as an empire and were witnessing the decline. Folks here thought it was outrageous….they probably still feel that way. It’s actually sad.

[Kismet]

“My prediction, however, is that regardless of overwhelming evidence, sedition and conspiracy charges will not be brought against those most responsible.”

I mentioned this to a friend yesterday. I don’t expect anything different….democracy slipping and most don’t care. I have been talking about minority rule for 2 years. It’s not sustainable and will end ugly at some point.

My prediction is that the GOP really thinks it needs to control the House in 2023 in order that it can find a way to bury the story of its leadership and rank and file members supporting an attempted coup and the reversal of the votes of 81,000,000 Americans. They are not running on policies, that's for sure. The GOP is running on the fear that the January 6 Commission will expose the dirt and filth of their sedition, and betrayal of Americans and the idea of American.

It is really incredible. I wondered a few years ago if we had peaked as an empire and were witnessing the decline. Folks here thought it was outrageous….they probably still feel that way. It’s actually sad.

Corruption and self-dealing is what ultimately doomed the Roman Empire. History is replete with similar events, most recently the fall of the USSR as another example.

Sinclair Lewis penned a dystopian novel entitled It Can't Happen Here back in 1935. Some folks around here should read it (or re-read it)

[old salt]

Nope, this was not a long exchange that Salty cut down. It was a short one and the effect was to specifically ignore the context and the rest of my short response to him.

It's a jerk move in such instances.

I totally agree that sometimes the long, multi-party exchanges don't need to copied again and again and again. Getting specific about what is being responded to is indeed helpful.

But that's not what Salty was doing.

...you asked me a specific question, which I quoted, then answered.

There was no need to repeat your diversionary speculation which you call context.
You had no context from the email exchanges. You were speculating.
No need for me to re-post your irrelevant speculation. I was not addressing that.
It was still available to the reader, just two posts up the page. Your words are immortalized.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Nope, this was not a long exchange that Salty cut down. It was a short one and the effect was to specifically ignore the context and the rest of my short response to him.

It's a jerk move in such instances.

I totally agree that sometimes the long, multi-party exchanges don't need to copied again and again and again. Getting specific about what is being responded to is indeed helpful.

But that's not what Salty was doing.

...you asked me a specific question, which I quoted, then answered.

There was no need to repeat your diversionary speculation which you call context.
You had no context from the email exchanges. You were speculating.
No need for me to re-post your irrelevant speculation. I was not addressing that.
It was still available to the reader, just two posts up the page. Your words are immortalized.

[old salt]

For future reference -- the Army's official report re. DC NG operations on Jan 6.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000017d ... db02d50000

It's worth reading pgs 1-11 to understand what was required to re-purpose & deploy the DC NG to the Capitol,
with no advance tasking or planning to do so.

It explains why Gen Milley said the Pentagon's response on Jan 6th was "super fast ...like sprint speed ...from a cold start".

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5413 ... super-fast

[MDlaxfan76]

Nope, this was not a long exchange that Salty cut down. It was a short one and the effect was to specifically ignore the context and the rest of my short response to him.

It's a jerk move in such instances.

I totally agree that sometimes the long, multi-party exchanges don't need to copied again and again and again. Getting specific about what is being responded to is indeed helpful.

But that's not what Salty was doing.

...you asked me a specific question, which I quoted, then answered.

There was no need to repeat your diversionary speculation which you call context.
You had no context from the email exchanges. You were speculating.
No need for me to re-post your irrelevant speculation. I was not addressing that.
It was still available to the reader, just two posts up the page. Your words are immortalized.

Nonsense, it was a jerk move.
Cowardly too...no response to the rest.