comment: >
  
  It is an unconnected group of confused disgruntled individuals in no way reflecting any one political ideology. It's time to talk about how mental health issues . . . oh, wait, it's coordinated Q'Nazis champing at the bit to start Civil War II. Can't call this terrorism because it would offend . . . people.
context: Its called domestic terrorism >
  
  They're too scared to call them that because it makes the shooters look bad >
  
  and nobody wants to offend shooters, because like, what if they get mad and shoot me?
  (/s to be safe, sorry, somehow I managed to forget that there is no longer any situation in which the sarcasm of a statement can be obvious 'enough' anymore.) >
  
  "There are good people on both sides." >
  
  There's bad people, mostly on one side >
  
  Ameri-Qaeda at it again. >
  
  Y'all Qaeda >
  
  Vanilla ISIS >
  
  Yokel Haram >
  
  I mean, I SHOULD HOPE they'd be investigating domestic terrorists?! >
  
  Well, until the House cancels FBI funding because most of the bad actors happen to be Republicans >
  
  Ah yes, the republicans famous leadership strategy of “if we don’t look it didn’t happen”. Made popular by Covid and China. >
  
  Hey, don't forget how popularized it was by Russia! >
  
  
  that may be connected 
  
  We're way past 'may' be connected. The correct word here is 'how' are they connected.