was 1/6 an insurrection and are we in the throes of a civil war?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Quit your pathetic whining. People are indicted, tried and convicted in a court of law and you still cray and cry. How about don't go beat the crap out of cops with a flagpole and all the other crimes if you don't want to tangle with the justice system.

Can't answer it. I thought so. Because your whole premise is BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Quit your pathetic whining. People are indicted, tried and convicted in a court of law and you still cray and cry. How about don't go beat the crap out of cops with a flagpole and all the other crimes if you don't want to tangle with the justice system.

Can't answer it. I thought so. Because your whole premise is BS.

Why do I have to do your work for you. Look at all the court cases with the various charges and evidence and convictions and sentences and you will have your answer. Don't be so lazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Quit your pathetic whining. People are indicted, tried and convicted in a court of law and you still cray and cry. How about don't go beat the crap out of cops with a flagpole and all the other crimes if you don't want to tangle with the justice system.

Can't answer it. I thought so. Because your whole premise is BS.

Why do I have to do your work for you. Look at all the court cases with the various charges and evidence and convictions and sentences and you will have your answer. Don't be so lazy.

The court cases aren't answering the question I asked you.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Quit your pathetic whining. People are indicted, tried and convicted in a court of law and you still cray and cry. How about don't go beat the crap out of cops with a flagpole and all the other crimes if you don't want to tangle with the justice system.

Can't answer it. I thought so. Because your whole premise is BS.

Why do I have to do your work for you. Look at all the court cases with the various charges and evidence and convictions and sentences and you will have your answer. Don't be so lazy.

The court cases aren't answering the question I asked you.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Who overthrew the govt? Good thing the attempt was unsuccessful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Quit your pathetic whining. People are indicted, tried and convicted in a court of law and you still cray and cry. How about don't go beat the crap out of cops with a flagpole and all the other crimes if you don't want to tangle with the justice system.

Can't answer it. I thought so. Because your whole premise is BS.

Honey belle. Just because you’re snowed into your little cabin by right wing lies doesn’t mean the rest of us are. Donald Trump and the GOP planned an insurrection that was going to do the following at a minimum: halt the certification of the election so that Biden and the rest of the Democrats who were elected in 2020 couldn’t be seated. They were then going to “certify” the election for Trump and the other traitor bozos who didn’t win. They were planning on physically removing Pence - if you’d read anything fact based about this, you’d know that he refused to get in a car to leave- and bringing in Grassley to “certify.” And if you’re hearing tones of the Nazis in this “‘by the books’ but do it fascism” scenario, you are correct.

There have been more than hints that what the insurrectionists had planned that day involved murdering several Democratic lawmakers. We still don’t know who pulled the panic buttons out from the wall. We still don’t know who specifically told the traitors where to go as they knew the true office locations of several lawmakers that are not featured on any publicly available maps.

And it’s arguable that the failure of this ding bat treachery hinged on the heroic actions of one Officer Goodman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Quit your pathetic whining. People are indicted, tried and convicted in a court of law and you still cray and cry. How about don't go beat the crap out of cops with a flagpole and all the other crimes if you don't want to tangle with the justice system.

Can't answer it. I thought so. Because your whole premise is BS.

Why do I have to do your work for you. Look at all the court cases with the various charges and evidence and convictions and sentences and you will have your answer. Don't be so lazy.

The court cases aren't answering the question I asked you.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Do you expect the court cases to tell you if you don’t read about them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Quit your pathetic whining. People are indicted, tried and convicted in a court of law and you still cray and cry. How about don't go beat the crap out of cops with a flagpole and all the other crimes if you don't want to tangle with the justice system.

Can't answer it. I thought so. Because your whole premise is BS.

Why do I have to do your work for you. Look at all the court cases with the various charges and evidence and convictions and sentences and you will have your answer. Don't be so lazy.

The court cases aren't answering the question I asked you.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

You seem to disagree that crimes were committed. Ok. But you are a random anonymous poster on a chat forum for moms.

These criminals were tried and convicted in courts of law.

Gee whiz...who is more convincing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1/6 was the redneck reverse of a BLM protest. And their savior Trump hasn't even tried to help any of his minions who got nto trouble.

No, it was way more serious than that. Sure some of the people there were just standard meal team six afficianados but others went much further. They were specifically trying to stop the electoral count and overthrow the election. It was straight up an attempted coup.

So we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of gun owners left their firearms at home? Is that how you’re seeing this?

What you’re seeing is uninformed and incorrect.
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

You’re evading the issue. Is your position that we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of GUN OWNERS left their FIREARMS at home?

The NPR article details pepper spray, stun guns and baseball bats which is very consistent with some of the left riots we’ve seen, particularly in the Pacific Northwest.

There were plenty who actually had guns there.
https://nypost.com/2022/12/23/capitol-riot-report-details-weapons-toted-by-28k-strong-trump-mob/

“Plenty”? Five firearms documented in the article, none at the Capitol, out of 28,000 people there that day. My guess is the guys and gals who were armed with firearms knew to stay out of the cap building because most responsible gun owners are exceedingly careful about where they take their firearms.

This has to be the first revolution in history where a bunch of gun owners left their guns at home.

You're right. This could be the first revolution in modern history where guns where left at home. It is what it is. Any other thoughts back on topic?

Most reasonable people in a nonpartisan context would say if the gun owners leave their firearms at home, it wasn’t an insurrection/revolution. It was a riot.

Be careful about the standards you set. E.g., protestors storming the senate during the confirmation hearings of a SCOTUS nominee.

bOtH sIDeS

(IOW not the same)

It’s not “both sides”. I’d be equally appalled at trespassing and interruption of government proceedings during the BK hearings being stretched into insurrection/revolution charges. I’d feel the same way about the attacks on the federal courthouse in Portland. But believe me that it wouldn’t take many changes to the indictments in the Jan 6 cases to be applied to the people trying to stop the BK confirmation hearings.

Except for that whole trying to overthrow the election part. It's kind of a big distinction.

Not if you expect equal justice under the law. You’re kinda proving the allegation that this is political.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to interrupt government proceedings to prevent an electoral count but it is okay to interrupt BK confirmation hearings.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to trespass and remain in the capitol building to stop and electoral count but it is legal to trespass and remain in the capital to prevent/protest BK hearings.

Again, this isn’t a defense of the J6 rioters. But your distinctions only matter if you bring politics into it.

This.

Not, not really "this", because the PP was factually incorrect about the various laws that do, and do not apply to these different circumstances.

+1 Just at its most basic level, the people at the hearings had been allowed into the Capitol and cleared by security. No one on January 6 had because the Capitol was closed to the public due to Covid.

I’d love to know which laws I’m wrong about. Prosecutorial discretion is a real thing. But political legitimacy of any government rests on the just treatment of the minority party. And that’s based on equal justice for all.

On the BK hearings, your comment is revisionist BS. There were at least 225 arrests at the BK senate confirmation hearings. I remember that very clearly. Some were arrested for blocking physical spaces and others for outbursts in the hearing room.

By elements of the crimes, the BK protestors could have been charged the same as about 75% of those charged for the J6 riots. But I think every single one paid a fine and moved on with their life. Again, prosecutorial discretion is real, but if either party truly wishes to govern in this country, then equal justice under the law has to mean something.

No, they couldn't Facts and laws matter. The BK people were prostesting and by your own admission, were arrested. The J6 people were literally staging a coup. It wasn't "riots" it was a freaking coup attempt. Hence the laws they are being charged under are related to disrupting a consitutional action, not just "a protest"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

You understand there were over 20,000 people charged during the Floyd protests for doing a whole lot less than ANYONE who was inside the Capitol building illegally, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1/6 was the redneck reverse of a BLM protest. And their savior Trump hasn't even tried to help any of his minions who got nto trouble.

No, it was way more serious than that. Sure some of the people there were just standard meal team six afficianados but others went much further. They were specifically trying to stop the electoral count and overthrow the election. It was straight up an attempted coup.

So we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of gun owners left their firearms at home? Is that how you’re seeing this?

What you’re seeing is uninformed and incorrect.
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

You’re evading the issue. Is your position that we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of GUN OWNERS left their FIREARMS at home?

The NPR article details pepper spray, stun guns and baseball bats which is very consistent with some of the left riots we’ve seen, particularly in the Pacific Northwest.

There were plenty who actually had guns there.
https://nypost.com/2022/12/23/capitol-riot-report-details-weapons-toted-by-28k-strong-trump-mob/

“Plenty”? Five firearms documented in the article, none at the Capitol, out of 28,000 people there that day. My guess is the guys and gals who were armed with firearms knew to stay out of the cap building because most responsible gun owners are exceedingly careful about where they take their firearms.

This has to be the first revolution in history where a bunch of gun owners left their guns at home.

You're right. This could be the first revolution in modern history where guns where left at home. It is what it is. Any other thoughts back on topic?

Most reasonable people in a nonpartisan context would say if the gun owners leave their firearms at home, it wasn’t an insurrection/revolution. It was a riot.

Be careful about the standards you set. E.g., protestors storming the senate during the confirmation hearings of a SCOTUS nominee.

bOtH sIDeS

(IOW not the same)

It’s not “both sides”. I’d be equally appalled at trespassing and interruption of government proceedings during the BK hearings being stretched into insurrection/revolution charges. I’d feel the same way about the attacks on the federal courthouse in Portland. But believe me that it wouldn’t take many changes to the indictments in the Jan 6 cases to be applied to the people trying to stop the BK confirmation hearings.

Except for that whole trying to overthrow the election part. It's kind of a big distinction.

Not if you expect equal justice under the law. You’re kinda proving the allegation that this is political.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to interrupt government proceedings to prevent an electoral count but it is okay to interrupt BK confirmation hearings.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to trespass and remain in the capitol building to stop and electoral count but it is legal to trespass and remain in the capital to prevent/protest BK hearings.

Again, this isn’t a defense of the J6 rioters. But your distinctions only matter if you bring politics into it.

This.

Not, not really "this", because the PP was factually incorrect about the various laws that do, and do not apply to these different circumstances.

+1 Just at its most basic level, the people at the hearings had been allowed into the Capitol and cleared by security. No one on January 6 had because the Capitol was closed to the public due to Covid.

I’d love to know which laws I’m wrong about. Prosecutorial discretion is a real thing. But political legitimacy of any government rests on the just treatment of the minority party. And that’s based on equal justice for all.

On the BK hearings, your comment is revisionist BS. There were at least 225 arrests at the BK senate confirmation hearings. I remember that very clearly. Some were arrested for blocking physical spaces and others for outbursts in the hearing room.

By elements of the crimes, the BK protestors could have been charged the same as about 75% of those charged for the J6 riots. But I think every single one paid a fine and moved on with their life. Again, prosecutorial discretion is real, but if either party truly wishes to govern in this country, then equal justice under the law has to mean something.

No, they couldn't Facts and laws matter. The BK people were prostesting and by your own admission, were arrested. The J6 people were literally staging a coup. It wasn't "riots" it was a freaking coup attempt. Hence the laws they are being charged under are related to disrupting a consitutional action, not just "a protest"

How in the hell are several hundred people in the Capitol going to run a coup against TWO MILLION federal employees? Hullo?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

If you seriously don't know the answer to this question, there are several threads in this forum that are scores of pages long, with citations, links etc, or you could read the various Jack Smith and Fanni Willis indictment documents, but in a nutshell...

the J6 people take the Capitol and delay the proceedings. Simultaeously, Mike Pence or Chuck Grassley, whoever is ultimately presiding over the Senate, accepts the state challenges and buys the time to "throw it back to the states for review" - then the "fake electors" are nominated by the GOP controlled state houses and voila, there is all of the sudden enough electoral votes to install Trump for a second term. If that failed, then it falls to the Constitution, which says the state delegations choose the electors, and since the majority of state delegations were GOP, they install Trump for a second term. This was all outlined in John Eastman's doctrine that was made public in the Fall of 2020 and was attempted by virtue of the 'fake elector" slates accepted in Michigan, Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin - all purple states that ended up in Biden's column but would have been stolen by the GOP.

I mean, you are posting in this forum where there is all sorts of discussion about what Jack Smith and Fanni Willis are prosecuting. How about reading up a little?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the people were just useful idiots. However, unfortunately for them, there were useful idiots in an attempt to overthrow the government which made them accomplices. If they show remors, cooperate and realize what they ended up being a part of they get a slap on the wrist. If they don't and think it was normal and ok to have unwittingly taken part in an attempt to overthrow the government then they get something longer. That's how a justice system is supposed to work. January 6th was an attempted coup. What happened was very serious and cannot be swept under the rug, minimized or ever worse normalized as "just politics".

Feel free to cite where people were charged with “being useful idiots” to overthrow a government. If they didn’t have the mens rea for revolt/insurrection/sedition, then they were rioters, and nothing more. And it is not unreasonable for them to be treated the same as other rioters in the country. Anything else, and this gets the appearance of being political.

Explain to me one thing.

How were they going to overthrow the government?

Let's say for a scenario, they're in the Capital. They get everything they want.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Quit your pathetic whining. People are indicted, tried and convicted in a court of law and you still cray and cry. How about don't go beat the crap out of cops with a flagpole and all the other crimes if you don't want to tangle with the justice system.

Can't answer it. I thought so. Because your whole premise is BS.

Why do I have to do your work for you. Look at all the court cases with the various charges and evidence and convictions and sentences and you will have your answer. Don't be so lazy.

The court cases aren't answering the question I asked you.

HOW have they overthrown the government? <---- answer it.

Actually, they do answer the question. You are either being lazy, obtuse or just plain ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1/6 was the redneck reverse of a BLM protest. And their savior Trump hasn't even tried to help any of his minions who got nto trouble.

No, it was way more serious than that. Sure some of the people there were just standard meal team six afficianados but others went much further. They were specifically trying to stop the electoral count and overthrow the election. It was straight up an attempted coup.

So we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of gun owners left their firearms at home? Is that how you’re seeing this?

What you’re seeing is uninformed and incorrect.
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

You’re evading the issue. Is your position that we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of GUN OWNERS left their FIREARMS at home?

The NPR article details pepper spray, stun guns and baseball bats which is very consistent with some of the left riots we’ve seen, particularly in the Pacific Northwest.

There were plenty who actually had guns there.
https://nypost.com/2022/12/23/capitol-riot-report-details-weapons-toted-by-28k-strong-trump-mob/

“Plenty”? Five firearms documented in the article, none at the Capitol, out of 28,000 people there that day. My guess is the guys and gals who were armed with firearms knew to stay out of the cap building because most responsible gun owners are exceedingly careful about where they take their firearms.

This has to be the first revolution in history where a bunch of gun owners left their guns at home.

You're right. This could be the first revolution in modern history where guns where left at home. It is what it is. Any other thoughts back on topic?

Most reasonable people in a nonpartisan context would say if the gun owners leave their firearms at home, it wasn’t an insurrection/revolution. It was a riot.

Be careful about the standards you set. E.g., protestors storming the senate during the confirmation hearings of a SCOTUS nominee.

bOtH sIDeS

(IOW not the same)

It’s not “both sides”. I’d be equally appalled at trespassing and interruption of government proceedings during the BK hearings being stretched into insurrection/revolution charges. I’d feel the same way about the attacks on the federal courthouse in Portland. But believe me that it wouldn’t take many changes to the indictments in the Jan 6 cases to be applied to the people trying to stop the BK confirmation hearings.

Except for that whole trying to overthrow the election part. It's kind of a big distinction.

Not if you expect equal justice under the law. You’re kinda proving the allegation that this is political.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to interrupt government proceedings to prevent an electoral count but it is okay to interrupt BK confirmation hearings.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to trespass and remain in the capitol building to stop and electoral count but it is legal to trespass and remain in the capital to prevent/protest BK hearings.

Again, this isn’t a defense of the J6 rioters. But your distinctions only matter if you bring politics into it.

This.

Not, not really "this", because the PP was factually incorrect about the various laws that do, and do not apply to these different circumstances.

+1 Just at its most basic level, the people at the hearings had been allowed into the Capitol and cleared by security. No one on January 6 had because the Capitol was closed to the public due to Covid.

I’d love to know which laws I’m wrong about. Prosecutorial discretion is a real thing. But political legitimacy of any government rests on the just treatment of the minority party. And that’s based on equal justice for all.

On the BK hearings, your comment is revisionist BS. There were at least 225 arrests at the BK senate confirmation hearings. I remember that very clearly. Some were arrested for blocking physical spaces and others for outbursts in the hearing room.

By elements of the crimes, the BK protestors could have been charged the same as about 75% of those charged for the J6 riots. But I think every single one paid a fine and moved on with their life. Again, prosecutorial discretion is real, but if either party truly wishes to govern in this country, then equal justice under the law has to mean something.

No, they couldn't Facts and laws matter. The BK people were prostesting and by your own admission, were arrested. The J6 people were literally staging a coup. It wasn't "riots" it was a freaking coup attempt. Hence the laws they are being charged under are related to disrupting a consitutional action, not just "a protest"

How in the hell are several hundred people in the Capitol going to run a coup against TWO MILLION federal employees? Hullo?

Hullo....read the indictments against the 19 in Georgia, and the various people Jack Smith is prosecuting, including Donald Trump. Read the John Eastman document, it outlines the plan they tried to execute.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_memos

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1/6 was the redneck reverse of a BLM protest. And their savior Trump hasn't even tried to help any of his minions who got nto trouble.

No, it was way more serious than that. Sure some of the people there were just standard meal team six afficianados but others went much further. They were specifically trying to stop the electoral count and overthrow the election. It was straight up an attempted coup.

So we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of gun owners left their firearms at home? Is that how you’re seeing this?

What you’re seeing is uninformed and incorrect.
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

You’re evading the issue. Is your position that we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of GUN OWNERS left their FIREARMS at home?

The NPR article details pepper spray, stun guns and baseball bats which is very consistent with some of the left riots we’ve seen, particularly in the Pacific Northwest.

There were plenty who actually had guns there.
https://nypost.com/2022/12/23/capitol-riot-report-details-weapons-toted-by-28k-strong-trump-mob/

“Plenty”? Five firearms documented in the article, none at the Capitol, out of 28,000 people there that day. My guess is the guys and gals who were armed with firearms knew to stay out of the cap building because most responsible gun owners are exceedingly careful about where they take their firearms.

This has to be the first revolution in history where a bunch of gun owners left their guns at home.

You're right. This could be the first revolution in modern history where guns where left at home. It is what it is. Any other thoughts back on topic?

Most reasonable people in a nonpartisan context would say if the gun owners leave their firearms at home, it wasn’t an insurrection/revolution. It was a riot.

Be careful about the standards you set. E.g., protestors storming the senate during the confirmation hearings of a SCOTUS nominee.

bOtH sIDeS

(IOW not the same)

It’s not “both sides”. I’d be equally appalled at trespassing and interruption of government proceedings during the BK hearings being stretched into insurrection/revolution charges. I’d feel the same way about the attacks on the federal courthouse in Portland. But believe me that it wouldn’t take many changes to the indictments in the Jan 6 cases to be applied to the people trying to stop the BK confirmation hearings.

Except for that whole trying to overthrow the election part. It's kind of a big distinction.

Not if you expect equal justice under the law. You’re kinda proving the allegation that this is political.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to interrupt government proceedings to prevent an electoral count but it is okay to interrupt BK confirmation hearings.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to trespass and remain in the capitol building to stop and electoral count but it is legal to trespass and remain in the capital to prevent/protest BK hearings.

Again, this isn’t a defense of the J6 rioters. But your distinctions only matter if you bring politics into it.

This.

Not, not really "this", because the PP was factually incorrect about the various laws that do, and do not apply to these different circumstances.

+1 Just at its most basic level, the people at the hearings had been allowed into the Capitol and cleared by security. No one on January 6 had because the Capitol was closed to the public due to Covid.

I’d love to know which laws I’m wrong about. Prosecutorial discretion is a real thing. But political legitimacy of any government rests on the just treatment of the minority party. And that’s based on equal justice for all.

On the BK hearings, your comment is revisionist BS. There were at least 225 arrests at the BK senate confirmation hearings. I remember that very clearly. Some were arrested for blocking physical spaces and others for outbursts in the hearing room.

By elements of the crimes, the BK protestors could have been charged the same as about 75% of those charged for the J6 riots. But I think every single one paid a fine and moved on with their life. Again, prosecutorial discretion is real, but if either party truly wishes to govern in this country, then equal justice under the law has to mean something.

No, they couldn't Facts and laws matter. The BK people were prostesting and by your own admission, were arrested. The J6 people were literally staging a coup. It wasn't "riots" it was a freaking coup attempt. Hence the laws they are being charged under are related to disrupting a consitutional action, not just "a protest"

How in the hell are several hundred people in the Capitol going to run a coup against TWO MILLION federal employees? Hullo?

Hullo....read the indictments against the 19 in Georgia, and the various people Jack Smith is prosecuting, including Donald Trump. Read the John Eastman document, it outlines the plan they tried to execute.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_memos

Can we see these memos and not a restatement of them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1/6 was the redneck reverse of a BLM protest. And their savior Trump hasn't even tried to help any of his minions who got nto trouble.

No, it was way more serious than that. Sure some of the people there were just standard meal team six afficianados but others went much further. They were specifically trying to stop the electoral count and overthrow the election. It was straight up an attempted coup.

So we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of gun owners left their firearms at home? Is that how you’re seeing this?

What you’re seeing is uninformed and incorrect.
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

You’re evading the issue. Is your position that we had an insurrection/revolution where a bunch of GUN OWNERS left their FIREARMS at home?

The NPR article details pepper spray, stun guns and baseball bats which is very consistent with some of the left riots we’ve seen, particularly in the Pacific Northwest.

There were plenty who actually had guns there.
https://nypost.com/2022/12/23/capitol-riot-report-details-weapons-toted-by-28k-strong-trump-mob/

“Plenty”? Five firearms documented in the article, none at the Capitol, out of 28,000 people there that day. My guess is the guys and gals who were armed with firearms knew to stay out of the cap building because most responsible gun owners are exceedingly careful about where they take their firearms.

This has to be the first revolution in history where a bunch of gun owners left their guns at home.

You're right. This could be the first revolution in modern history where guns where left at home. It is what it is. Any other thoughts back on topic?

Most reasonable people in a nonpartisan context would say if the gun owners leave their firearms at home, it wasn’t an insurrection/revolution. It was a riot.

Be careful about the standards you set. E.g., protestors storming the senate during the confirmation hearings of a SCOTUS nominee.

bOtH sIDeS

(IOW not the same)

It’s not “both sides”. I’d be equally appalled at trespassing and interruption of government proceedings during the BK hearings being stretched into insurrection/revolution charges. I’d feel the same way about the attacks on the federal courthouse in Portland. But believe me that it wouldn’t take many changes to the indictments in the Jan 6 cases to be applied to the people trying to stop the BK confirmation hearings.

Except for that whole trying to overthrow the election part. It's kind of a big distinction.

Not if you expect equal justice under the law. You’re kinda proving the allegation that this is political.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to interrupt government proceedings to prevent an electoral count but it is okay to interrupt BK confirmation hearings.

The law doesn’t say: it is illegal to trespass and remain in the capitol building to stop and electoral count but it is legal to trespass and remain in the capital to prevent/protest BK hearings.

Again, this isn’t a defense of the J6 rioters. But your distinctions only matter if you bring politics into it.

This.

Not, not really "this", because the PP was factually incorrect about the various laws that do, and do not apply to these different circumstances.

+1 Just at its most basic level, the people at the hearings had been allowed into the Capitol and cleared by security. No one on January 6 had because the Capitol was closed to the public due to Covid.

I’d love to know which laws I’m wrong about. Prosecutorial discretion is a real thing. But political legitimacy of any government rests on the just treatment of the minority party. And that’s based on equal justice for all.

On the BK hearings, your comment is revisionist BS. There were at least 225 arrests at the BK senate confirmation hearings. I remember that very clearly. Some were arrested for blocking physical spaces and others for outbursts in the hearing room.

By elements of the crimes, the BK protestors could have been charged the same as about 75% of those charged for the J6 riots. But I think every single one paid a fine and moved on with their life. Again, prosecutorial discretion is real, but if either party truly wishes to govern in this country, then equal justice under the law has to mean something.

No, they couldn't Facts and laws matter. The BK people were prostesting and by your own admission, were arrested. The J6 people were literally staging a coup. It wasn't "riots" it was a freaking coup attempt. Hence the laws they are being charged under are related to disrupting a consitutional action, not just "a protest"

How in the hell are several hundred people in the Capitol going to run a coup against TWO MILLION federal employees? Hullo?

Hullo....read the indictments against the 19 in Georgia, and the various people Jack Smith is prosecuting, including Donald Trump. Read the John Eastman document, it outlines the plan they tried to execute.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_memos

I found the memo (via CNN) - https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21066248/eastman-memo.pdf

It's not stating what your wiki is stating.

?