Democrats misuse definition of insurrection, like they do many other terms

[forkup]

That really is all it's about. That's all it's ever about. It's always just shallow partisan bullshit. All they care about is hurting the Republicans and winning. These people aren't seeking justice; they're seeking victory and vengeance.

What I find interesting is this hiding behind "partisan bullshit."

Firstly a violent mob breaking into the capitol should be taken seriously. Especially when their stated goal is to prevent a peaceful transition of power. It should be even more serious when this happens at the behest of the previous president. The" it wasn't successful argument should not matter.

Secondly Democrats offered a bipartisan commission of experts were both parties would have equal representation. The GOP rejected that offer. It seems that the GOP wanted it to be partisan.

If a Democratic loser of the elections would claim the election was stolen without providing evidence in court and he would call a rally asking his supporters to stop the certification I would consider it a breach of his oath of office and support the severest possible consequences under the law to punish him. It is not even an academic question. Gore lost the election over a few hundred votes. When he didn't have any legal arguments to protest he conceded the presidency.

Republicans on the other hand overwhelmingly support a guy who rejects the Democratic process to the point of causing the Capitol being stormed. One of us is looking at this through a partisan lense. It is not me.

 

[forkup]

Yeah, yeah...

I know.

We came so close to an orange haired Hitler, right? Our very Republic almost came tumbling down due to the evil tyranny of Trump, right? You're an idiot. Seriously, put on a helmet and go sit in the corner before you hurt yourself.

I'll ask you this question. Would you support the state assemblies refusing to certify an election if Trump loses in 2024 if they assert fraud without proving it in court. Providing they have laws on the books allowing them to do so?

 

[22lcidw]

What I find interesting is this hiding behind "partisan bullshit."

Firstly a violent mob breaking into the capitol should be taken seriously. Especially when their stated goal is to prevent a peaceful transition of power. It should be even more serious when this happens at the behest of the previous president. The" it wasn't successful argument should not matter.

Secondly Democrats offered a bipartisan commission of experts were both parties would have equal representation. The GOP rejected that offer. It seems that the GOP wanted it to be partisan.

If a Democratic loser of the elections would claim the election was stolen without providing evidence in court and he would call a rally asking his supporters to stop the certification I would consider it a breach of his oath of office and support the severest possible consequences under the law to punish him. It is not even an academic question. Gore lost the election over a few hundred votes. When he didn't have any legal arguments to protest he conceded the presidency.

Republicans on the other hand overwhelmingly support a guy who rejects the Democratic process to the point of causing the Capitol being stormed. One of us is looking at this through a partisan lense. It is not me.

The current President sad paying over a dollar more for a pound of hamburger is not any reason to be worried and upset. The reality is that hamburger should be one third the price.

 

[Anomalism]

What I find interesting is this hiding behind "partisan bullshit."

Firstly a violent mob breaking into the capitol should be taken seriously. Especially when their stated goal is to prevent a peaceful transition of power. It should be even more serious when this happens at the behest of the previous president. The" it wasn't successful argument should not matter.

Secondly Democrats offered a bipartisan commission of experts were both parties would have equal representation. The GOP rejected that offer. It seems that the GOP wanted it to be partisan.

If a Democratic loser of the elections would claim the election was stolen without providing evidence in court and he would call a rally asking his supporters to stop the certification I would consider it a breach of his oath of office and support the severest possible consequences under the law to punish him. It is not even an academic question. Gore lost the election over a few hundred votes. When he didn't have any legal arguments to protest he conceded the presidency.

Republicans on the other hand overwhelmingly support a guy who rejects the Democratic process to the point of causing the Capitol being stormed. One of us is looking at this through a partisan lense. It is not me.

Partisan lense? See, you people do this every time. I bet you think I'm a right winger, but in all likelihood I'm to the left of you on a bunch of issues. I just have enough integrity to not call a riot an insurrection.

Partisans use the most extreme wording possible in an attempt to damage the other side as much as possible. That's all this is and that's all you're doing.

 

[forkup]

The current President sad paying over a dollar more for a pound of hamburger is not any reason to be worried and upset. The reality is that hamburger should be one third the price.

Oh, please show me were he did. Also, can you refuse to actually engage my premise any clearer?

 

[Anomalism]

I'll ask you this question. Would you support the state assemblies refusing to certify an election if Trump loses in 2024 if they assert fraud without proving it in court. Providing they have laws on the books allowing them to do so?

I didn't vote for Trump and I never will. I support our Republic operating the way it's supposed to.

 

[BlackSand]

Insurrection Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

Insurrection refers to an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government. It is a violent revolt against an oppressive authority. Insurrection is different from

definitions.uslegal.com

Insurrection refers to an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government. It is a violent revolt against an oppressive authority. Insurrection is different from riots and offenses connected with mob violence. In insurrection there is an organized and armed uprising against authority or operations of government whereas riots and offenses connected with mob violence are simply unlawful acts in disturbance of the peace which do not threaten the stability of the government or the existence of political society.

So if the people of January 6th were insurrectionists, then where are the charges of insurrection upon detaining them?

Is it the first insurrection in world history that was conducted unarmed? Being armed is part of what makes it an insurrection.

And if it was organized, was it run by the Viking and the unarmed woman shot dead in the Capital?

Lastly, if these people murdered others, where are the murder charges?

Democrats are notorious for misusing terms, such as racist. When every political opponent is charged with being a racist, it tends to bastardize it's meaning.

.

Dude ... They have been calling themselves Liberals, and then calling Classic Liberals, Fascists for decades now.
Expecting them not to stumble over Insurrection would be being a bit optimistic ....

. ​

 

[IM2]

Don't forget to get a helmet with plenty of padding. They make some pretty good ones now.

You do that. I'm just fine.

 

[forkup]

Partisan lense? See, you people do this every time. I bet you think I'm a right winger, but in all likelihood I'm to the left of you on a bunch of issues. I just have enough integrity to not call a riot an insurrection. Partisans use the most extreme wording possible in an attempt to damage the other side as much as possible. That's all this is and that's all you're doing.

I just call it like I see it. What happened on 1/6 was more than a riot or a protest. There is nothing I said that was hyperbole. In fact today one year after the people who did this are considered patriots to much of the GOP. Something that speaks to the seriousness of ir. If we can't even agree that the people who stormed the capitol did something wrong. And downplaying it like you do in itself is telling.

 

[IM2]

There were real protests attached to the BLM crap, but the MSM tries to link the thugs to the peaceful protesters. At the Capitol there were people rioting and committing crimes, but the MSM in this case tries to link the people just protesting to the violence.

Just another extension of the progressive mantra: Our violence is speech, your speech is violence.

The same thugs that fucked up the BLM rallies showed up on 1-6..

Proud Boys, 3 percenters, etc.

 

[IM2]

.

Dude ... They have been calling themselves Liberals, and then calling Classic Liberals, Fascists for decades now.
Expecting them not to stumble over Insurrection would be being a bit optimistic ....

. ​

Conservatives are classical liberals.

 

[martybegan]

The same thugs that fucked up the BLM rallies showed up on 1-6..

Proud Boys, 3 percenters, etc.

So the BLM/Anti-fa rioting was all due to Right wing agitators?

LOL.

CHAZ/CHOP was run by rightwingers?

 

[BlackSand]

Conservatives are classical liberals.

.

Conservatives are more in line with Classic Liberals than Progressives are.
Modern Conservatives aren't, but they didn't come around until the Cold War.

There hasn't been anyone near a true Conservative in the White House since President Coolidge.

.​

 

[Anomalism]

I just call it like I see it. What happened on 1/6 was more than a riot or a protest. There is nothing I said that was hyperbole. In fact today one year after the people who did this are considered patriots to much of the GOP. Something that speaks to the seriousness of ir. If we can't even agree that the people who stormed the capitol did something wrong. And downplaying it like you do in itself is telling.

I didn't say they did nothing wrong. That's you distorting reality again. You're good at that. Riots are bad, obviously, and the people that broke the law should have the book thrown at them.

It's been a year dude. When can the left move on and start talking about something productive? When can we look to the future and discuss plans for America? When can we actually be better than they are? Or will we just continue to spiral the toilet with them?

 

[DBA]

Sure, if you'd like. I just want you to be happy.

He is right you know. I would think that taking over an entire city block including a police station would qualify by this definition.

Snarky remarks don't help your cause.

 

[elektra]

We aren't conservatives.

1-6 was an insurrection. Not a riot, not a protest. Those people went in there with the aim of fucking up the process so trump could be reinstalled.

You are such full of shit.

If that was the intent, what stopped them?

 

[DBA]

January 6th should damage Trump politically. He started the shit and now he should pay the price.

And the Democrats started the riots of 2020 which cause FAR more damage than Jan 6.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Aw, you're getting upset.

For the fiftieth time, the insurrectionists are being charged with the various individual crimes they committed during the insurrection.

This really isn't that complicated.

I'm not sure why this has you people so worked up, but it's a hoot to watch.

Collectively or individually, why aren’t any of these people being charged with insurrection?? In this case, Insurrection is what you people are calling it. The Law does not agree with you. Otherwise, they would be charged with insurrection.

 

[forkup]

I didn't say they did nothing wrong. That's you distorting reality again. You're good at that. Riots are bad, obviously, and the people that broke the law should have the book thrown at them.

It's been a year dude. When can the left move on and start talking about something productive? When can we look to the future and discuss plans for America? When can we actually be better than they are? Or will we just continue to spiral the toilet with them?

I would like nothing better. The problem is, is that the Republican front runner doesn't just refuse to stop claiming the exact thing that prompted people to storm the capitol. But he is running again. And this with the wholehearted support of the Republican base.

Hell its even worse than that. People who don't support that claim are punished by the people in charge of the Republican party. This goes from those that refused to decertify the elections to those that wanted Trump to have consequences for what happened. And as we speak dozens of laws are passing through statehouses that will make possible all the things that Trump wanted to do to overturn the actual vote.

You want to act like January 6th happened in a vacuum and that it doesn't matter anymore. I wish you are right but it simply isn't reality. Because the whole point of storming the capitol is still actively pursuit by its beneficiary.

 

[Votto]

Aw, you're getting upset.

For the fiftieth time, the insurrectionists are being charged with the various individual crimes they committed during the insurrection.

This really isn't that complicated.

I'm not sure why this has you people so worked up, but it's a hoot to watch.

I listed the charges. Where is the charge of insurrection in any of the charges?

In fact, if it is your position they were trying to overthrow the government, where are the charges of treason?