Is Fox News, Rush, and similar also guilty of Insurrection and Sedition?

[Burning Man 847]

I think unequivocally that they are. 

It's fine and all to impeach trump and make him go away, but that is no way addresses the root cause of the problem.  I have said from the very beginning, even before he got elected, that el presidente was a symptom - not the cause.  He did what he was sent there to do.  

Here's an interesting article on the subject:  https://www.npr.org/2021/01/13/955694096/after-deadly-capitol-riot-fox-news-stays-silent-on-stars-incendiary-rhetoric

Quote

 

Among some prominent Republicans, inside social media companies and in other major institutions throughout society, a reckoning has erupted following the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol last week.

Not at the Fox News Channel, however. On the contrary, the network that has helped shape conservative politics in the U.S. for more than two decades has yet to acknowledge how the heated rhetoric radiating from its shows and stars may have helped inspire the pro-Trump rampage.

Comments from prominent Fox News hosts and guests had helped stoke the MAGA mob's fury for the two months following the November elections. In December, Fox Business host Lou Dobbs said opponents of President Trump throughout the government had committed "treason," and later suggested that any Republican who upheld President-elect Joe Biden's victory in the Electoral College may be "criminal."

Three days before the protest that turned into the riot, Fox News host Mark Levin told viewers, "If we don't fight on Jan. 6 on the floor of the Senate and the House — and that is the joint meeting of Congress on these electors — then we are done."

 

Quote

On the day of the siege, MacCallum (FOX NEWS) initially said breaching the U.S. Capitol represented a "huge victory for these protesters," even as she told viewers of tear gas in the Rotunda and orders to lawmakers to put on gas masks. "Revolt is a word that can be used here in some ways."

I honestly don't see how these "corporate people" have the ability to literally outright stoke insurrection and sedition.  Free speech and freedom of the press is one thing...... But I also can't yell "FIRE" in a crowded movie theater.  If "FIRE" is not what FOX, OANN, rush, hannity, bannon, et al has been yelling for all these years - then we are speaking a different language.  These media corps and other various social media outlets have been deliberately stoking this movement that culminated in Jan 6th.  And likely even more to come.  How can they continue to operate??  Where is the line between Free Speech and Press and spreading outright violent hate speech?  

I asked in another thread a while back "When does Social Media Hate Speech Become a Real Threat?"

I think we just saw it.

I'd be interested to hear what our rezident Dean of Libertarianism @Polytelum Tom thinks about this.  I would consider myself fairly libertarian on most speech and press issues, but there has to be a line that media companies cannot cross without repercussions.  

 

[Steam Flyer 5,087]

Is this still a law enforcement matter?

Asking for some friends.....

Sorry, couldn't resist. But I agree. If I were family of one of the dead people, or if I were a Congressperson who had fled for my life, I'd look pretty hard at suing them for everything they'll ever own.

Clearly a case of shouting FIRE!! in a crowded theater

- DSK

[Dex Sawash 481]

Fire in a theater crowded full of patrons slow-boiled to be pyrophobic

[Burning Man 847]

11 minutes ago, Dex Sawash said:

Fire in a theater crowded full of patrons slow-boiled to be pyrophobic

Are you sure "pyrophobic" is the word you meant.  I would have thought it was more like a theater crowded full of patrons who are Pyrophoric.  

[Dex Sawash 481]

The metaphor can go either direction, I reckon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Metaphor isn't the right word is it?

[Pedagogical Tom 1,515]

34 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

I'd be interested to hear what our rezident Dean of Libertarianism @Polytelum Tom thinks about this. 

The history of such seditious publishing is illuminating. I'd be interested to hear what you think about that.

[Steam Flyer 5,087]

25 minutes ago, Dex Sawash said:

The metaphor can go either direction, I reckon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Metaphor isn't the right word is it?

Well, is it aluminum or one of the new carbon fiber ones?

- DSK

[Mrleft8 2,268]

Incendiary speech is still inviting panic, whether the fire is true, or just rhetorical.

[Burning Man 847]

29 minutes ago, Polytelum Tom said:

The history of such seditious publishing is illuminating. I'd be interested to hear what you think about that.

The big difference is that Thomas Paine wasn't making up blatant lies to rile people up.  I have zero issue with incendiary speech, as long as it's true.  

[Venom 36]

4 hours ago, Burning Man said:

Not at the Fox News Channel, however. On the contrary, the network that has helped shape conservative politics in the U.S. for more than two decades has yet to acknowledge how the heated rhetoric radiating from its shows and stars may have helped inspire the pro-Trump rampage.

Yup, exactly the same as CNN, MSMBC has helped shape (appropriate) progressive politics in the U.S. for more than two decades has yet to acknowledge how the heated rhetoric radiating from its shows and stars may have helped inspire the ANTFA rampage. That's a damn good point, burning man!

[Pedagogical Tom 1,515]

7 hours ago, Burning Man said:

The big difference is that Thomas Paine wasn't making up blatant lies to rile people up.  I have zero issue with incendiary speech, as long as it's true.  

OK but that wasn't your original point.

9 hours ago, Burning Man said:

I honestly don't see how these "corporate people" have the ability to literally outright stoke insurrection and sedition.

As for your new point, I have a big issue with our servants in government deciding for us what is true and what is not and suppressing what is not. We do that for ourselves.

[Not for nothing 240]

FAUX NEWS, shouldn't be allowed to broadcast in the USA, talk about fake news , 

[hasher 791]

5 hours ago, Venom said:

Yup, exactly the same as CNN, MSMBC has helped shape (appropriate) progressive politics in the U.S. for more than two decades has yet to acknowledge how the heated rhetoric radiating from its shows and stars may have helped inspire the ANTFA rampage. That's a damn good point, burning man!

Dear poison,

Your bile has no value.

You regurgitate your own puke.

You are not fun to play with.

Go count your pennies.

l

[Steam Flyer 5,087]

1 hour ago, Polytelum Tom said:

...

As for your new point, I have a big issue with our servants in government deciding for us what is true and what is not and suppressing what is not. We do that for ourselves.

When you're a dumbass who literally has not the foggiest clue what a virus -IS- at a basic level, you should not get to decide what the best state/national policy is for preventing/minimizing a deadly viral infection.

When your decisions do not harm others, THEN you can lie and dumbass all you want.

- DSK

 

[Pedagogical Tom 1,515]

2 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

When you're a dumbass who literally has not the foggiest clue what a virus -IS- at a basic level, you should not get to decide what the best state/national policy is for preventing/minimizing a deadly viral infection.

When your decisions do not harm others, THEN you can lie and dumbass all you want.

- DSK

 

I agree with you w/regard to people in charge of setting policy but not sure what it has to do with pre$$ corper$on$.

[hasher 791]

2 minutes ago, Polytelum Tom said:

I agree with you w/regard to people in charge of setting policy but not sure what it has to do with pre$$ corper$on$.

Pull your head out of your ass and look around.

[kent_island_sailor 3,552]

There is a context here.

Tell a room full of PTA ladies "We need to eliminate the Democrats" and they might not vote for them or maybe have a bake sale and raise money for the local Republicans.

Tell a room full of armed people to "We need to eliminate the Democrats" and you just might maybe get a different result

Is there ANY alternative universe where the Fennec News Network (a fennec is a desert fox found in Arab countries) could go on and on about the election being stolen by infidels and organize an assault on Congress and somehow not end up with every single one of them dead or in jail?

[TyeDyedGary 3]

  There is a real need to reinstate the Fairness in Broadcasting regulation, that Ronny Rayguns pushed through legislation to do away with in 1986. News outlets could only broadcast facts, if someone gave an opinion, the broadcaster had to give equal time to an opposing opinion. And it was made clear that it was only that individual persons opinion and not a fact. 

[Pedagogical Tom 1,515]

1 hour ago, TyeDyedGary said:

  There is a real need to reinstate the Fairness in Broadcasting regulation, that Ronny Rayguns pushed through legislation to do away with in 1986. News outlets could only broadcast facts, if someone gave an opinion, the broadcaster had to give equal time to an opposing opinion. And it was made clear that it was only that individual persons opinion and not a fact. 

One opposing opinion? What if there are more than two opinions on an issue?

For example, Trump wants to get rid of Section 230 of the CDA because FAKE NEWS censors conservatives. Biden wants to get rid of it because FAKE NEWS promotes conservatives.

Would there be any "fair" space for those who don't want to get rid of it because we don't think that people like The Ed should be responsible for what all of us post here?

And what is the "public interest" anyway?

We can look to what it has meant in the past for guidance...

Quote

the very idea of a singular “public interest” has always been a convenient fiction, albeit one that wears poorly in a pluralistic society. For example, under the banner of advancing the public interest, the FCC once required radio stations to give away free airtime to religious groups (most of which went to mainline Protestants, Roman Catholics, and the larger Jewish denominations) since it seemed obvious to the commissioners that there was a singular public interest in promoting a vague baseline religiosity. Agnostics, atheists, and members of smaller religious groups need not apply.

Oh. Nah, I still don't like it, thanks.

[Olsonist 1,914]

I see. So Tedious Tom is in favor of One Opinion. That's the Fakebertarian we know and love.

[Sol Rosenberg 6,288]

1 hour ago, TyeDyedGary said:

  There is a real need to reinstate the Fairness in Broadcasting regulation, that Ronny Rayguns pushed through legislation to do away with in 1986. News outlets could only broadcast facts, if someone gave an opinion, the broadcaster had to give equal time to an opposing opinion. And it was made clear that it was only that individual persons opinion and not a fact. 

That's it in a nutshell. Allowing unfettered bullshit has brought us to an untenable situation where we have opposing realities thanks to the bullshitters' relative truth. 

[kent_island_sailor 3,552]

1 hour ago, TyeDyedGary said:

  There is a real need to reinstate the Fairness in Broadcasting regulation, that Ronny Rayguns pushed through legislation to do away with in 1986. News outlets could only broadcast facts, if someone gave an opinion, the broadcaster had to give equal time to an opposing opinion. And it was made clear that it was only that individual persons opinion and not a fact. 

Be careful what you wish for. The Reich would decide EVERYTHING is an opinion and want equal time.

[MR.CLEAN 3,842]

Fairness doctrine ain’t the answer. Laws imposing penalties for unprotected speech that incites or misleads are the answer.  Doesn’t even need to be the government who brings the action though civil enforcement actions and asset seizure would be appropriate. 

Call it treble damages for intentionally misleading statements plus punitives, with any audience member holding the right to bring a civil action. Class action expressly approved. Whistleblowers get 1/3 of any recovery.   Watch how fucking fast the news goes back to being fact based (and me hang out a new shingle)

[Ishmael 6,174]

I was reading this morning that the Murdochs are going to shuffle bodies around and go more hard-core right because they are losing viewers to NewsMax, who make no pretense of telling the truth. I wouldn't count on Fox to hew to any semblance of fact-based reporting in the future, far less than now.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-ceo-suzanne-scotts-job-is-in-jeopardy-insiders-say?ref=home

[Sol Rosenberg 6,288]

14 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Fairness doctrine ain’t the answer. Laws imposing penalties for unprotected speech that incites or misleads are the answer.  Doesn’t even need to be the government who brings the action though civil enforcement actions and asset seizure would be appropriate. 

Call it treble damages for intentionally misleading statements plus punitives, with any audience member holding the right to bring a civil action. Class action expressly approved. Whistleblowers get 1/3 of any recovery.   Watch how fucking fast the news goes back to being fact based (and me hang out a new shingle)

I like it.  Put it in the hands of the people and get government out of the way....  

[MR.CLEAN 3,842]

I have a strong suspicion that Newsmax, OANN, Gateway Pundit, and Epoch Times are going to have a very Gawker-esque year and I would predict that all four either disappear or move offshore this year.  
 

Fox want to go harder right but their lawyers may not let them depending on what the Smartmatic and Dominion suits allege. My understanding is that plaintiff’ counsel are researching all the ownership and corporate/affiliate structure so they can properly plead all the special damages  with respect to these entities. 

[Black Jack 335]

My AT&T TV app that i use for cable has dropped RT, OANN and others mentioned and replaced it with Cheddar News. Watching big business cable and internet companies strangle fringe and inflammatory networks and news outlets will all but kill the extremist echo chambers to most of these semi literate populations.  

[Pedagogical Tom 1,515]

45 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Fairness doctrine ain’t the answer. Laws imposing penalties for unprotected speech that incites or misleads are the answer.  Doesn’t even need to be the government who brings the action though civil enforcement actions and asset seizure would be appropriate. 

I much prefer your previous position on civil asset forfeiture. This one:

On 2/7/2020 at 2:24 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

my belief that CAF should be illegal and every dime returned to the people it was stolen from.

 

[Dog 666]

15 hours ago, Burning Man said:

I think unequivocally that they are. 

It's fine and all to impeach trump and make him go away, but that is no way addresses the root cause of the problem.  I have said from the very beginning, even before he got elected, that el presidente was a symptom - not the cause.  He did what he was sent there to do.  

Here's an interesting article on the subject:  https://www.npr.org/2021/01/13/955694096/after-deadly-capitol-riot-fox-news-stays-silent-on-stars-incendiary-rhetoric

 

I honestly don't see how these "corporate people" have the ability to literally outright stoke insurrection and sedition.  Free speech and freedom of the press is one thing...... But I also can't yell "FIRE" in a crowded movie theater.  If "FIRE" is not what FOX, OANN, rush, hannity, bannon, et al has been yelling for all these years - then we are speaking a different language.  These media corps and other various social media outlets have been deliberately stoking this movement that culminated in Jan 6th.  And likely even more to come.  How can they continue to operate??  Where is the line between Free Speech and Press and spreading outright violent hate speech?  

I asked in another thread a while back "When does Social Media Hate Speech Become a Real Threat?"

I think we just saw it.

I'd be interested to hear what our rezident Dean of Libertarianism @Polytelum Tom thinks about this.  I would consider myself fairly libertarian on most speech and press issues, but there has to be a line that media companies cannot cross without repercussions.  

 

Those assholes are entirely responsible for their actions but I would submit that the context is much broader. They were incited by efforts to remove their duly elected guy by propagating a lie about collusion with Russia. They were incited by the relaxation of election safeguards that appeared to be designed to facilitated fraud, by highly questionable behavior of election officials. They were incited by a lot of shit...

[MR.CLEAN 3,842]

27 minutes ago, Polytelum Tom said:

I much prefer your previous position on civil asset forfeiture. This one:

 

You’re confusing asset seizure pursuant to a federal media fraud/defamation/misleading statements statute with civil asset forfeiture due to the drug war.  
 

is this conflation intentional or just a silly error on your part?

[Danceswithoctopus 159]

12 minutes ago, Dog said:

 

I'm sure glad I didn't vote for HER!

[kent_island_sailor 3,552]

This IS the new talking point - The Deplorables just can't help themselves, Democrats have been so mean to them they have to beat police officers to death. A certain mentally challenged canine equates a 2nd rate comedienne tweeting a silly photo with the actual president of the USA telling an actual violent mob to attack Congress after his flufffer declares it is time for "trial by combat".

[Raz'r 3,355]

11 hours ago, Venom said:

Yup, exactly the same as CNN, MSMBC has helped shape (appropriate) progressive politics in the U.S. for more than two decades has yet to acknowledge how the heated rhetoric radiating from its shows and stars may have helped inspire the ANTFA rampage. That's a damn good point, burning man!

Progressive? You must be joking. Oh, no, sorry, you're just stupid.

[SloopJonB 8,324]

1 hour ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Fox want to go harder right

???

How would they do that?

They're fucking Der Sturmer now.

[Mike G 1,321]

A few outlets trying to avoid losing TOO much money.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/statement.html

It was wrong for us to publish these false statements. We apologize to Dominion for all of the harm this caused them and their employees. We also apologize to our readers for abandoning 9 journalistic principles and misrepresenting Dominion’s track record and its limited role in tabulating votes for the November 2020 election. We regret this grave error. 

[kent_island_sailor 3,552]

2 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

???

How would they do that?

They're fucking Der Sturmer now.

Fire the few real news people and keep only the liars. That won't take long

[MR.CLEAN 3,842]

5 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

???

How would they do that?

They're fucking Der Sturmer now.

Daily stormer almost gone too.  New filings from one of the people awarded multi million judgments against Anglin came earlier this week I think. They gonna take it all. 

[SloopJonB 8,324]

3 minutes ago, Mike G said:

A few outlets trying to avoid losing TOO much money.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/statement.html

It was wrong for us to publish these false statements. We apologize to Dominion for all of the harm this caused them and their employees. We also apologize to our readers for abandoning 9 journalistic principles and misrepresenting Dominion’s track record and its limited role in tabulating votes for the November 2020 election. We regret this grave error. 

Who cares what they say now?

Bankrupt the MoFo's.

[MR.CLEAN 3,842]

7 minutes ago, Mike G said:

A few outlets trying to avoid losing TOO much money.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/statement.html

It was wrong for us to publish these false statements. We apologize to Dominion for all of the harm this caused them and their employees. We also apologize to our readers for abandoning 9 journalistic principles and misrepresenting Dominion’s track record and its limited role in tabulating votes for the November 2020 election. We regret this grave error. 

This is better

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/a_statement_about_the_decision_to_shut_down_comments.html?utm_source=vuukle&utm_medium=newsfeed

[MR.CLEAN 3,842]

3 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Who cares what they say now?

Bankrupt the MoFo's.

A retraction can mean the difference in regard to punitive damages.  They also shut down comments. “We either shut down comments or we shut down the site.”  For context, the award mentioned above was I think 4M in compensatories and 10M in punitives.  

[Sol Rosenberg 6,288]

8 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

This is better

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/a_statement_about_the_decision_to_shut_down_comments.html?utm_source=vuukle&utm_medium=newsfeed

This part is awesome:

Quote

 if you're really exploding with things to say, or you're unable for whatever reason to get your articles published at American Thinker, maybe you're the right person to start a blog.  With social media platforms excluding conservatives, the clock is turning back to a time when conservative content was on blogs — remember the Army of Pajama-Clad Davids?  Maybe this is your time.

In other words, if you want to pinch that hot legal potato out of your own ass, have at it, but don't snap that log on our floor. 

[Steam Flyer 5,087]

6 hours ago, Dog said:

Those assholes are entirely responsible for their actions ....

And that lady got fired.

When was the last time Fox News.... much less OAN or Newsmax (which I have never seen)... fired a " reporter"  for saying something that wasn't true, or presenting something derogatory/threatening against Democrats/liberals?

So, no. Absolutely not even close to a similar comparison.

- DSK

[bpm57 47]

21 hours ago, Burning Man said:

I think unequivocally that they are. 

The press (and (D) politicians) pushed the "he was unarmed" story that led to the Kenosha riots, are they guilty of insurrection now that we know it was all a lie?

How about the (D) politicians that called for violence? Not worthy of mention?

How about the "VP elect" giving material aid to the rioters?

22 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

And that lady got fired.

How does one "fire" a stand-up comedienne? She has done work since then, she has even decided that those pictures are a way to drum up more work - or she wouldn't be reposting them.

 

[Pedagogical Tom 1,515]

6 hours ago, Mike G said:

A few outlets trying to avoid losing TOO much money.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/statement.html

It was wrong for us to publish these false statements. We apologize to Dominion for all of the harm this caused them and their employees. We also apologize to our readers for abandoning 9 journalistic principles and misrepresenting Dominion’s track record and its limited role in tabulating votes for the November 2020 election. We regret this grave error. 

The intro was funny.

Quote

We received a lengthy letter from Dominion's defamation lawyers explaining why they believe that their client has been the victim of defamatory statements.  Having considered the full import of the letter, we have agreed to their request that we publish the following statement:

...having considered the ass kicking we were about to receive...

[Steam Flyer 5,087]

8 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

35 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

And that lady got fired.

How does one "fire" a stand-up comedienne?

Got fired from the show she was on.

Seems to me that "getting fired"  is a pretty easy concept to grasp.

Getting fired from a job does not mean that one will never ever have any job ever again

Have you ever had a job?

- DSK

[Venom 36]

9 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Progressive? You must be joking. Oh, no, sorry, you're just stupid.

Absolutely, fascist would be the correct term but stupid as a sack of shit will suffice in your case. 

[Ishmael 6,174]

4 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Got fired from the show she was on.

Seems to me that "getting fired"  is a pretty easy concept to grasp.

Getting fired from a job does not mean that one will never ever have any job ever again

Have you ever had a job?

- DSK

Like...work? Probably none of the better jobs, like hand, blow, or steve. 

[Dog 666]

16 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

This IS the new talking point - The Deplorables just can't help themselves, Democrats have been so mean to them they have to beat police officers to death. A certain mentally challenged canine equates a 2nd rate comedienne tweeting a silly photo with the actual president of the USA telling an actual violent mob to attack Congress after his flufffer declares it is time for "trial by combat".

Listen genius ....I'm just saying there is history that got us to this point. Calling other people deplorable is part of that history BTW

[dylan winter 1,488]

15 minutes ago, Dog said:

Listen genius ....I'm just saying there is history that got us to this point. Calling other people deplorable is part of that history BTW

the emailing woman was right

the deplorable people did and are doing  deplorable things

 

attempting a coup, dissing a legal election, killing cops, telling and believing lies, refusing to wear masks, threatening people with varmint rifles

Dylan

[Dog 666]

4 minutes ago, dylan winter said:

the emailing woman was right

the deplorable people did and are doing  deplorable things

 

attempting a coup, dissing a legal election, killing cops, telling and believing lies, refusing to wear masks, threatening people with varmint rifles

Dylan

Burning and looting our cities is pretty deplorable too.

[Pedagogical Tom 1,515]

17 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

You’re confusing asset seizure pursuant to a federal media fraud/defamation/misleading statements statute with civil asset forfeiture due to the drug war.  
 

is this conflation intentional or just a silly error on your part?

Just having some fun. If an INTERNATIONAL MEDIA outlet calls someone a fat grifter, and the fat part is obviously true, does the "grifter" part have to be proven to be false before anything can be seized?

[dylan winter 1,488]

7 minutes ago, Dog said:

Burning and looting our cities is pretty deplorable too.

squirrel!

[Dog 666]

10 minutes ago, dylan winter said:

squirrel!

"Deplorables" does not equate to political orientation.

[Teener 126]

It does correlate.

[kent_island_sailor 3,552]

4 hours ago, Polytelum Tom said:

Just having some fun. If an INTERNATIONAL MEDIA outlet calls someone a fat grifter, and the fat part is obviously true, does the "grifter" part have to be proven to be false before anything can be seized?

Truth is an absolute defence, but you have to prove it. If you call someone a grifter and they sue, they don't have to prove they aren't one, you have to prove they are. It can be an expensive undertaking and that particular word is a tough one. "Grifting" to some people means a whole host of unseemly conduct, but to others it would mean doing something against the law. It might be a tough case to win.

[Burning Man 847]

6 hours ago, Dog said:

Listen genius ....I'm just saying there is history that got us to this point. Calling other people deplorable is part of that history BTW

Yeah, and that history is that right wing media and politicians used lies and propaganda to brainwash a huge segment of our population which just culminated in a coup attempt.  I also don't like the use of the word "deplorable" to describe everyone on the right, as hillary basically did.  They have been brainwashed into believing fanta$ie$ that the politicians and RW media Corps have profited bigly from.  

But the people who showed up in DC at trump's behest and committed insurrection, treason and sedition..... they actually ARE deplorable.  As is their leader.

I think I honestly never realized just how ignorant people are.  And how susceptible they are to propaganda.  I thought that only happened in movies to that degree.  I was at the gun range yesterday sighting in a new toy and the two gentlemen there on the range with me were talking about how the election was stolen and how they would fight to the death to "take back the country".  One guy's big thing he was ranting on about was "they" were deploying NG troops to the capitol for the inauguration and that having armed NG troops on the streets was violating the Posse Comitatus act.  "How dare they!!!!"  I just stayed out of the conversation and shook my head because there was no good that was going to come from me interjecting facts.  

I honestly don't know what the answer is. I don't know how you deprogram that level of ignorance and anger.  The ONLY place I can think of to start has to be with the media they consume.  I'm a huge believer in free speech and freedom of the press, but there has to be a way to stop the promulgation of outright lies, conspiracy theories and incitement to violence.  Fox news, newsmax, oann, rush, et al have been yelling "FIRE" in the movie theater for a long time.  What happened last week was the inevitable culmination of that.  

I blame the people themselves far less than the politicians, the opportunists and the media who have created this hyper-partisan divided atmosphere and manipulated them into this sort of hatred for their fellow citizens.  Yes, the white blue collar folks and other people who have looked to trump as their savior DO have some legitimate grievances.  And yes, those grievances have been long ignored in favor of the identity politics and zero sum strategy to lift up minorities by belittling pushing down the majority.  So yes, some of the anger is justified.  And that simmering anger made them ripe for manipulation by folks who also don't care about them, but are telling them what they want to hear for their own desire for power and profit. 

Something's gotta give.