Oh, Alright, I'll Make It A Separate Post

I started this here with an addendum, but I'll carry on wit this:

The amount of revisionist nonsense over the release of a tiny amount of J6 footage  — all of which so far has been unremarkable, recycled or has been available to defendants for years — is breathtaking, especially from bad faith actors who know better. 

Further to the point: the amount of concern over a tiny number of people on a fringe website barely visible to most of the American electorate, and hardly a representative sampling of public opinion (scientific sampling or otherwise) is equally breathtaking.

When it's not all about the horse race in political news, it's the subset that's all about the re-tweets.  It reminds me of the early days of on-line commentary, when Salon hosted "Table Talk" and users could set up sub-topics under topics.  Obviously one of the hot topics was "Politics," which was the neighborhood others on Table Talk looking to swap recipes and pictures of bird feeders considered the neighborhood where you didn't stop at the red lights if you found yourself there.  The subset in "Politics" was "White House."  This was when Clinton was being impeached, and "White House" was so white hot you just abandoned your car and ran for the exits.  Not that we amounted to a speck of dust on the scales of national interest, but we were sure the regulars in "White House" were smarter than the average political junkie and were moving the scales of public opinion, if the public just wasn't composed of "sheeple."

Turns out nobody ever heard of us; and there are no memorials to our wisdom extant in the world.  Twitter is day care compared to that, and less important to the wide, wide world.

That "revisionist nonsense"? It's not even revisionist.  It's just nonsense.  Revisionism at least brings new information to the discussion.  They're just playing with their food and eating the checkers.