17 GOP Congressmen Vote No On Resolution Condemning QAnon

[Bodakane]

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/qanon...215233580.html

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution Friday condemning the far-right conspiracy movement QAnon, yet 17 white Republican men and one independent voted no on the measure, demonstrating the sway of the movement — which the FBI considers a potential domestic terrorism threat — over a significant portion of the GOP.

The resolution, which passed by a vote of 371-18, was introduced in August by Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-N.J.) and Rep. Denver Riggleman (R-Va.) in response to an alarming rise in QAnon’s popularity.

Here's the list:

Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas)

Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas)

Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah)

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.)

Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas)

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.)

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio)

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.)

Rep. Drew Ferguson (R-Ga.)

Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas)

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.)

Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.)

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa)

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.)

Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.)

Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-Wis.)

Rep. Daniel Webster (R-Fla.)

[Elegiac]

Why would they vote to condemn their voters? Lol.

[Felya]

Why would they vote to condemn their voters? Lol.

Amush is using free speech... but... This still counts as a bipartisan resolution. With 18 morons...

[Azadina]

How many of the shitheels voted yes only as face saving exercise, despite fully agreeing with the group?

[Shadowferal]

So...yesterday...

[Ursus]

Well they don't know much about QAnon, except that QAnon says very nice things about them, which they appreciate.

[Bodakane]

I'm guessing soon, we will start hearing very positive talking points about the names listed here bubbling up from the depths of the internet and bleeding into forums and FOX, OAN, etc.

[Xeones]

Steve King one of the most open racists in our politics supports QAnon? Who could have guessed.

[Adam Jensen]

Rep. Justin Amash, a Michigan independent who left the Republican Party in July 2019, also voted against the resolution. He defended his vote in a tweet, stating that the “resolution threatens protected speech (absurd as that speech may be).”

WTF?

It's not a law, it doesn't forbid anyone from supporting Q. It's just a statement that says "members of Congress don't like this."

- - - Updated - - -

Steve King one of the most open racists in our politics supports QAnon? Who could have guessed.

I was surprised to not see Matt Gaetz on that list.

[Zeth Hawkins]

It's not a law, it doesn't forbid anyone from supporting Q. It's just a statement that says "members of Congress don't like this."

What is the point of it, then? Sounds like political grandstanding and virtue signaling.

Also, this thread will likely be closed.

[Bodakane]

What is the point of it, then? Sounds like political grandstanding and virtue signaling.

Also, this thread will likely be closed.

You are using words incorrectly.

[Felya]

What is the point of it, then? Sounds like political grandstanding and virtue signaling.

You don’t know what those words mean... The point of condemning, is the assumed condemnation... lol?

Also, this thread will likely be closed.

You going to argue Q is a culture?

[Xeones]

What is the point of it, then? Sounds like political grandstanding and virtue signaling.

Also, this thread will likely be closed.

To make official statements on the position of the government. Qanon is a very dangerous group of deeply disturbed individuals, it's pretty normal for the government to state "this isn't supported".

[Felya]

To make official statements on the position of the government. Qanon is a very dangerous group of deeply disturbed individuals, it's pretty normal for the government to state "this isn't supported".

Especially considering they are acting on government authority, spoken to them through secret code in Trump tweets. Not joking...

[Spectral]

From the text of the resolution:

(2) condemns all other groups and ideologies, from the far left to the far right, that contribute to the spread of unfounded conspiracy theories and that encourage Americans to destroy public and private property and attack law enforcement officers;

It really is bizarrely gaslighting to see this pop up as we wrap a summer of rioting and destruction that most people have noticed isn't exactly a QAnon thing. Why not name anyone specific that's been responsible for a fair bit of destruction this summer instead of pretending that Facebook boomers are the real threat?

[Bodakane]

From the text of the resolution:

It really is bizarrely gaslighting to see this pop up as we wrap a summer of rioting and destruction that most people have noticed isn't exactly a QAnon thing. Why not name anyone specific that's been responsible for a fair bit of destruction this summer instead of pretending that Facebook boomers are the real threat?

If the language is that, why would ANYONE vote against?

[s_bushido]

From the text of the resolution:

It really is bizarrely gaslighting to see this pop up as we wrap a summer of rioting and destruction that most people have noticed isn't exactly a QAnon thing. Why not name anyone specific that's been responsible for a fair bit of destruction this summer instead of pretending that Facebook boomers are the real threat?

Yes, equating well-documented and publicized examples of abuses of police power with "unfounded conspiracy theories" is some pretty bizarre gaslighting. Well...I take that back. It's not bizarre...and it's not really gaslighting. It's just fucking stupid.

[Elegiac]

From the text of the resolution:

It really is bizarrely gaslighting to see this pop up as we wrap a summer of rioting and destruction that most people have noticed isn't exactly a QAnon thing. Why not name anyone specific that's been responsible for a fair bit of destruction this summer instead of pretending that Facebook boomers are the real threat?

I dunno, something about 90% of said protests being peaceful but 100% of white supremacists being fascist assholes might seem to indicate your argument is in bad faith.

[Spectral]

Yes, equating well-documented and publicized examples of abuses of police power with "unfounded conspiracy theories" is some pretty bizarre gaslighting. Well...I take that back. It's not bizarre. And it's not really gaslighting. It's just fucking stupid.

I actually don't really know what you're trying to claim here. Are you under the impression that QAnon was out burning cities this summer? They're not even an organization, they're an idea.

- - - Updated - - -

I dunno, something about 90% of said protests being peaceful but 100% of white supremacists being fascist assholes might seem to indicate your argument is in bad faith.

I'm kind of amazed how many of you decided to run with "only 7% of our peaceful protests are violent riots" as a selling point. Even in an incredibly stupid year, that's dumber than the usual agitprop.

[Elegiac]

I actually don't really know what you're trying to claim here. Are you under the impression that QAnon was out burning cities this summer? They're not even an organization, they're an idea.

Yes, an idea which is inherently couched in a genocidal cosmology. Something y'all repeatedly ignore.

"It's an idea" is only a defense if one is blithely sheltered enough to hold all strong forms of political belief as equally worthless, which in itself is just being facile for the status quo, so...

- - - Updated - - -

I'm kind of amazed how many of you decided to run with "only 7% of our peaceful protests are violent riots" as a selling point. Even in an incredibly stupid year, that's dumber than the usual agitprop.

Y'all have been playing the "acceptable losses" card in regards to everything from foreign policy to public assistance since tsarist Russia, so excuse us if we don't belief a word of your pearl clutching.