About Those J6 “People”

[CletusSnow]

HAHAHAHAHA! "MAGS" is shorthand for Magnetometers which were put in place at the capital on J6 to detect & prevent Trump's goons from entering carrying armed weapons. The same "MAGS" that he demanded the Secret Service remove, & it's a damn good thing that they didn't.

That is ridiculous and false.

Magnetometers are in place, and have remained in place, at the Capitol for decades. The mags were not removed and the Secret Service has absolutely nothing to do with security at the Capitol building.

You are clueless or blatantly lying.

The mags Trump was talking about were temporary ones the Secret Service set up at the Ellipse for Trump’s speech. This is 16 blocks from the Capitol and has nothing to do with the riots that occurred there.

 

[jacksonlamb]

GFY leftist scum. Perfectly normal to ask someone to back up what they're saying.

Then do it yourself, but you just point and scream.

 

[Correll]

I wouldn't call the attempt to steal the election a coup, but it's in that universe. We were well along the way of proving this in court, before the case was ended after you elected the ringleader and the prosecution couldn't continue. There's absolutely no need for reveal confidential sources for this, it's just an excuse.

We have a real disagreement on a very important question. Did the President of the United States try to end democracy.

That is not just an excuse. That is a question that needs to be answered.

If True, then we need to know.

If NOT true, then we need to know that too. In that case, your false accusations are the divisive problem, tearing us apart and undermining out democracy.

They requested the National Guard be on standby with a quick reaction force, unfortunately it took hours for that "quick" reaction force to arrive.

They could have had them there, lined up and ready to fight. Their behavior makes no sense in a world where the fbi had infiltrated the proud boys and oath keepers.

UNLESS, the feds and the capitol police were working together to incite a riot.

That's simply not true. There is plenty of video showing that the mob was still fighting with the police at the line they formed on the steps.

The cops did not fire on the people supposedly fighting. THey fired on the crowd quietly milling around, this inciting more violence.

Your denial of reality, is you supporting a FALSE NARRATIVE, for the purpose of causing political division and conflict.

The premise is false so I'm unable to answer your question truthfully. The fight did not stop. The Trump rioters continued fighting with police and attempting to push them back.

For the record, they get reinforcements from Capitol Police riot control units and MPD.

You refuse to answer the question, not because the premise is false, but because the question shows that the behavior of the cops, WAS TO INCITE A RIOT.


That, or utter, gross incompetence is the only possible answers. AND, there are other factors that support the INCITE answer. As I have covered extensively.

It looks like Trump predicted there would be a riot. I guess he knew his supporters better than everyone else. The fact that he didn't cancel the rally would imply he wanted there to be a riot.

What you just asserted there, flies in the face of everything, including shit you have admitted.

You are stonewalling, like an asshole.

Why do you want division and conflict?

It's an extremely stupid idea. If that's your idea, then why would the police use these means as standard practice for dealing with riots? It would make no sense.

Here the leftist pretends to be so retarded as to not understand the importance of "not having the force on hand to win the fight".

The cops restarted a fight they had just lost. And that led to the capitol being swarmed.

Their behavior only makes sense, if that was their GOAL.

You're making excuses for Trump supporters engaging in violence.

Not at all. I am pointing out that the behavior of the feds and cops do not make sense, if their goal was to avoid violence or a riot.

That is not excusing the violence. That is showing that the behavior of the feds and cops strongly support the theory that the riot was incited and entrapped. As a politiacl operation.

Again, the premise is wrong. Plenty of video proves that the fight never stopped. The cops used standard procedures to deal with a group of violent illegal protestors, including flash bangs, rubber bullets and tear gas.

"Standard procedure" does not mean turn off your brain. You are pretending it does mean that.

That is retarded of you. You are pretending to be retarded, to defend retarded behavior from teh cops.

You'd have to ask them.

Actually, I do not have to ask why the lefty protestors taunt the cops. We can see by their behaivor when the taunts work, what htey are going for.


They lefties protestors WANT to provoke a violent response, so that they can use the violence for propaganda purposes, to advance their political agenda.


You know that. I know that. Everyone knows that, but leftards are never called on it,, by the leftard legacy media.


So, we see that provoking violence to make their enemies look bad, is a massively widespread strategy of the left.


So, apply that to the 1/6 riot and all the retarded actions of the police and feds, immediate make complete sense.

 

[Marener]

We have a real disagreement on a very important question. Did the President of the United States try to end democracy.

That is not just an excuse. That is a question that needs to be answered.

If True, then we need to know.

If NOT true, then we need to know that too. In that case, your false accusations are the divisive problem, tearing us apart and undermining out democracy.

I wouldn’t say he’s trying to “end democracy”. That’s a hyperbolic statement. Obviously you don’t have a problem with hyperbolic statements.

Saying he was “ending democracy” implies there’d be no more elections, which isn’t true.

He did try to end one democratic election, the 2020 presidential election.

They could have had them there, lined up and ready to fight. Their behavior makes no sense in a world where the fbi had infiltrated the proud boys and oath keepers.

UNLESS, the feds and the capitol police were working together to incite a riot.

It makes sense in a world where the leadership didn’t take the chance of violence seriously.

The cops did not fire on the people supposedly fighting. THey fired on the crowd quietly milling around, this inciting more violence.

“quietly milling about” is a complete lie. For one, they weren’t quiet, they were screaming like a bunch of wild animals, including lots of violent threats.

Second, they absolutely were firing on the troublemakers and you can hear that in the radio communications at the time.

You might complain about the flash bang, but that’s the nature of those munitions. It’s an area of effect.

Your idea that crowd control methods cause violence is idiotic. This is standard practice for dealing with these crowds.

Your denial of reality, is you supporting a FALSE NARRATIVE, for the purpose of causing political division and conflict.

You refuse to answer the question, not because the premise is false, but because the question shows that the behavior of the cops, WAS TO INCITE A RIOT.

The premise is false. The violent crowd of Trump supporters never stopped fighting with police. It’s on video.

That, or utter, gross incompetence is the only possible answers. AND, there are other factors that support the INCITE answer. As I have covered extensively.




What you just asserted there, flies in the face of everything, including shit you have admitted.

You are stonewalling, like an asshole.

Why do you want division and conflict?

Your false accusations and refusal to accept reality cause division and conflict.

Here the leftist pretends to be so retarded as to not understand the importance of "not having the force on hand to win the fight".

The cops restarted a fight they had just lost. And that led to the capitol being swarmed.

Their behavior only makes sense, if that was their GOAL.

Your still lying about “restarting” a fight.

Not at all. I am pointing out that the behavior of the feds and cops do not make sense, if their goal was to avoid violence or a riot.

That is not excusing the violence. That is showing that the behavior of the feds and cops strongly support the theory that the riot was incited and entrapped. As a politiacl operation.

"Standard procedure" does not mean turn off your brain. You are pretending it does mean that.

That is retarded of you. You are pretending to be retarded, to defend retarded behavior from teh cops.

You think the smart thing to do would be to surrender the Capitol to a crowd of angry, violent Trump supporters while members of Congress were in session. That is stupid.

Actually, I do not have to ask why the lefty protestors taunt the cops. We can see by their behaivor when the taunts work, what htey are going for.


They lefties protestors WANT to provoke a violent response, so that they can use the violence for propaganda purposes, to advance their political agenda.


You know that. I know that. Everyone knows that, but leftards are never called on it,, by the leftard legacy media.


So, we see that provoking violence to make their enemies look bad, is a massively widespread strategy of the left.


So, apply that to the 1/6 riot and all the retarded actions of the police and feds, immediate make complete sense.

You don’t think that the Trump crowd was taunting the police? Have you heard the crazy shit they were yelling at them?

 

[Correll]

You are generally the butt, and you get mad when you are treated as you deserve.

Be honest, be straight, then there is no issue.

Be honest? Sure.

There was a massive difference in the way the lefty rioters were treated and the way that the 1/6 rioters were treated.

That was a massive violation of all their civil rights right there.

That you lefties support that, shows that you are ANTI-CIVIL RIGHTS.

 

[jacksonlamb]

Be honest? Sure.

There was a massive difference in the way the lefty rioters were treated and the way that the 1/6 rioters were treated.

That was a massive violation of all their civil rights right there.

That you lefties support that, shows that you are ANTI-CIVIL RIGHTS.

You lie as you breathe, automatically.

 

[jacksonlamb]

Multiple independent tallies converge on:

• 10,000+ arrests (Associated Press)
• 14,000+ arrests (expanded national count)
• 16,241 arrests (Major Cities Chiefs Association, 68 cities)

These include everything from curfew violations to arson and homicide.

Most of the 10,000–16,000 arrests did not result in incarceration.

Let’s break it down cleanly.

1.​

Multiple independent tallies converge on:

• 10,000+ arrests (Associated Press)
• 14,000+ arrests (expanded national count)
• 16,241 arrests (Major Cities Chiefs Association, 68 cities)

These include everything from curfew violations to arson and homicide.

2.​

Across major cities:

• Over 50% of cases were declined by prosecutors
• Many others were dismissed or diverted
• Only a small minority resulted in felony convictions

This is consistent across Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Portland, Denver, Minneapolis, and others.

3.​

This is the key question — and the answer is much smaller than the arrest numbers.

Federal cases (DOJ)​

• DOJ brought 326 federal protest‑related cases
• About 120–150 resulted in federal prison sentences
  
  • These include arson, explosives, assaults on federal officers, firearms offenses, and organized property destruction.

State & local cases​

State-level data is fragmented, but consistent patterns show:

• Hundreds of people received local jail sentences, typically:
  
  • 10–90 days for assault, rioting, or property destruction
  • Time served for lower-level offenses
• A smaller number received state prison sentences, usually for:
  
  • Arson
  • Aggravated assault
  • Homicide
  • Organized looting with weapons

Best-supported estimate:​

Across all jurisdictions:

​

This includes:

• ~120–150 federal prison sentences
• ~200–350 state/local jail or prison sentences

No credible dataset shows numbers in the thousands.

4.​

• Most arrests were for misdemeanors
• Prosecutors in many cities declined or dismissed cases
• Courts used diversion programs for first‑time offenders
• Only serious violent crimes led to incarceration

Bottom line​

Hundreds of people — not thousands — went to jail or prison because of the 2020 protests. Most arrests did not lead to prosecution, and most prosecutions did not lead to incarceration.

 

[jacksonlamb]

The above demonstrates how more awful J6 was than the Summer of 2020 protests.

 

[Correll]

The violence started before police used anti-riot methods. It's on video. The first act of violence was at a perimeter barricade where protestors fought their way past police, knocking one cop unconscious. The breach of that barricade enabled hundreds of protesters to get to the next layer of police barricades by the Capitol building. Within minutes, the crowd was swelling into the thousands. Then the crowd started wrestling with police over those barricades and that's when police first started firing rubber bullets and flashbangs in an attempt to disperse the unlawful mob. There's video of all of that.

Here the lefty pretends to be retarded twice over.

First in "forgetting" that I have repeatedly discussed described the situation of the crowd overwhelming the first line of barricades and then milling around quietly, before being fired upon.

The lefty NEEDED to pretend to be retarded there, because he needed to make it look like he was scoring a debating point against me, to hide how weak his position clearly is, to anyone with any memory of the events, or who actually THINKS about the questions, for a single second.



SECONDLY, he plays retarded when he pretends to forget that the cops did not fire on the crowd where they were supposedly fighting over the barricades, but where the crowd was quietly milling.

People just standing there and suddenly are attacking by cops with rubber bullets and explosive devices.

I've seen video of a guy with his face tore up, because the cop fired down into the crowd, hitting the guy in the face, who was just standing there.

I bet that was a great move, for firing up, or AGITATING the people standing around that guy.

Great move, if your goal is to get the crowd moving forward, to get into the capitol, so that you can have the RIOT that you need, to create anti-republican propaganda.

 

[Correll]

Most crimes were local, not federal. That's why they were handled by states, not the FBI.

The clear nature of a nationwide campaign of political violence, ie mass riots and dozens of deaths, was ignored, becasue the fbi had been made into a political organization allied with the dems and the far left.

This is clear. Your denial is ******* stupid.

 

[Correll]

False. The answer reveals who dropped the ball. That's the real reason you don't want to answer and you know it. The answer you're avoiding is Miller. And Miller's testimony is the reason you didn't want to answer.

https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/118824/documents/HHRG-119-QJ00-20260114-SD010.pdf

Former Pentagon chief: Trump gave no order to prepare troops before Jan. 6

Former acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller told the House panel investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol that then-President Trump gave no orders to prepare troops before that day.

In testimony shared by the committee Tuesday evening, Miller was asked about an assertion made by former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows that as many as 10,000 National Guard troops were told to be “on the ready” that day.

Miller said he was “never given any direction or order or knew of any plans of that nature.”

“Obviously, we had plans for activating more folks, but that was not anything more than contingency planning,” he added. “There was no official message traffic or anything of that nature.”

Trump and his allies have insisted that he made orders to have National Guard troops ready before Jan. 6.

Miller was responding to a claim Meadows made in a Fox News interview a month after the riot, in which he implied that Trump was “very vocal” in making sure there were “plenty of National Guard.”

“As many as 10,000 National Guard troops were told to be on the ready by the secretary of Defense. That was a direct order from President Trump. And yet here’s what we see is, there’s all kinds of blame going around, but yet not a whole lot of accountability,” Meadows said at the time.

When specifically asked about whether there was a direct order from Trump to have Guard troops ready, Miller said there was not.

“There was no order from the president,” he told the House select committee.

interesting.

My assertion was that Trump offered the troops and was told NO THANK YOU.

So, of course in that case, there would be no orders to prepare troops.


YOu are... Oh, you're pretending to be retarded, so that you can avoid my actual point.

Got it.


Well, yeah, continue.

 

[jacksonlamb]

If Correll was a jay walker's attorney, the perp would be hanged.

 

[Marener]

SECONDLY, he plays retarded when he pretends to forget that the cops did not fire on the crowd where they were supposedly fighting over the barricades, but where the crowd was quietly milling.

 

[Correll]

I wouldn’t say he’s trying to “end democracy”. That’s a hyperbolic statement. Obviously you don’t have a problem with hyperbolic statements.

Saying he was “ending democracy” implies there’d be no more elections, which isn’t true.

He did try to end one democratic election, the 2020 presidential election.

It is nice that you personally might not be saying that.

Plenty of leftards are saying it, and America needs to know what the truth is.

If the accusation is false, then the false accusation is a HUGE assault on our democracy. And it needs to stop.

It makes sense in a world where the leadership didn’t take the chance of violence seriously.

But the proud boys and the oath keepers were inflitrated by the feds. Teh feds knew everything planned.

So, what are you implying? That they didn't share the information with the capitol police?

That would be so incompetent as to strain crediblity.

It is literally MORE believable that the capitol police were told and refused the offer BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO INCITE A RIOT, for political purposes.

“quietly milling about” is a complete lie. For one, they weren’t quiet, they were screaming like a bunch of wild animals, including lots of violent threats.

I've seen the video, hundreds of people quietly millingn about adn then the cops open fire.

...


Your idea that crowd control methods cause violence is idiotic. This is standard practice for dealing with these crowds.

Here teh lefty pretends to be retarded, as though their brain can't hold the idea that the situation was a line of cops facing a large crowd that the cops had already failed to control and was not quiet.

IN that situation, attacking a large number of people, NOT engaging in violence, would clearly have the result of getting them fired up and fighting.

Which is exactly what happened.


QUESTION. HAS THE 1/6 RIOT BEEN OF POLITICAL USE AND ADVANTAGE TO THE VILE LEFTIES OF THIS COUNTRY?

You think the smart thing to do would be to surrender the Capitol to a crowd of angry, violent Trump supporters while members of Congress were in session. That is stupid.

Wow. That was... utterly stupid.

No, I think the smart thing to do, would be to NOT incite the angry crowd, that had just demonstrated was too numerous for you to control.

YOu are really leaning heavy on that PLAYING RETARDED TACTIC, aren't you?

You don’t think that the Trump crowd was taunting the police? Have you heard the crazy shit they were yelling at them?

The right doesn't have the massive legacy media allied with them. That strategy would not work, does not work for the right.

It works wonderfully for the Left.


Where you planning to pretend to not know about that, the entire time you were ridicule the idea that the dems might have incited nad entraped the riot?

I mean, that's insanely dishonest.


The motive I have accused them of, ie inciting the riot for political advantage, is a long standing and widely used leftard strategy.

And yet, you ridiculed the idea, like I had just made it up.


Very scummy of you.

 

[Correll]

You lie as you breathe, automatically.

Why did MLK march to Birmingham?

 

[Marener]

It is nice that you personally might not be saying that.

Plenty of leftards are saying it, and America needs to know what the truth is.

If the accusation is false, then the false accusation is a HUGE assault on our democracy. And it needs to stop

Oh look, someone is now upset at the use of hyperbole. How very, uh, hypocritical.

Doesn’t change the fact that Trump tried to end the democratic election of the president in 2020.

But the proud boys and the oath keepers were inflitrated by the feds. Teh feds knew everything planned.

So, what are you implying? That they didn't share the information with the capitol police?

That would be so incompetent as to strain crediblity.

It is literally MORE believable that the capitol police were told and refused the offer BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO INCITE A RIOT, for political purposes.

There’s no indication they wanted a riot. You’re just making shit up because you want to believe it.

No, they didn’t know everything. They had sources, but their reports weren’t taken seriously because, again, these douche bags always talk about violence and don’t really follow through.

I've seen the video, hundreds of people quietly millingn about adn then the cops open fire.

Here teh lefty pretends to be retarded, as though their brain can't hold the idea that the situation was a line of cops facing a large crowd that the cops had already failed to control and was not quiet.

IN that situation, attacking a large number of people, NOT engaging in violence, would clearly have the result of getting them fired up and fighting.

Which is exactly what happened.

You’re just completely wrong.

QUESTION. HAS THE 1/6 RIOT BEEN OF POLITICAL USE AND ADVANTAGE TO THE VILE LEFTIES OF THIS COUNTRY?

Wow. That was... utterly stupid.

No, I think the smart thing to do, would be to NOT incite the angry crowd, that had just demonstrated was too numerous for you to control.

YOu are really leaning heavy on that PLAYING RETARDED TACTIC, aren't you?

All you can do is whine and *****. You don’t have an argument that stands up to scrutiny or video evidence.

If these methods “create violence”, then why is it standard practice for riot control?

The right doesn't have the massive legacy media allied with them. That strategy would not work, does not work for the right.

It works wonderfully for the Left.


Where you planning to pretend to not know about that, the entire time you were ridicule the idea that the dems might have incited nad entraped the riot?

I mean, that's insanely dishonest.


The motive I have accused them of, ie inciting the riot for political advantage, is a long standing and widely used leftard strategy.

And yet, you ridiculed the idea, like I had just made it up.


Very scummy of you.

The right has massive reach on social media and the internet. They have massive reach with Fox News, OANN, WND, and other fringe media outlets.

That’s exactly how Trump managed to spread the crazy shit about election fraud, which was based on lie after lie after lie.