Because your definition of an insurrection does not match our definition of an insurrection.
Godwin's. You lose.
Call it what you will.
Like this?The dictionary definition of "Insurrection" does not include lethal weapons, Einstein.
So you'll have to do the normal MAGA thing and run with your own definition to fit your cult's worldview.
If you don't like that, tough shit.
Well, DUH!, look at their leader, Diaper Don!
Oh my, you're more childish and impudent today. Here's some advice: drop the caffeine.
Not my covfefe!
Oy vey. Get back in the playpen, kid.
My “guilt” on January 6 is on the same level of the guilt expressed by Leftists who raised bail for protestors that Burned, Looted, and Maimed US cities in 2020.
Dictionary Definition
According to Merriam-Webster:
Synonyms: uprising, rebellion, revolt, mutiny, sedition.
So, at its core, it’s about a violent or active resistance against authority, especially the state or its institutions.
Legal Definition
Under 18 U.S. Code § 2383 – Rebellion or insurrection:
Key legal elements:
This statute is part of the broader framework of federal sedition and rebellion laws, which include:
- It involves organized or purposeful action against the U.S. government’s authority or law.
- Includes those who incite, assist, or give aid to such efforts—not just those who physically act.
- Punishment includes fines, imprisonment, and disqualification from public office.
- Sedition (18 U.S.C. § 2384)
- Advocating the overthrow of the government (18 U.S.C. § 2385)
Summary:
***There is no legal requirement that insurrectionists be armed for an act to qualify as an insurrection under U.S. law.
- In general usage, insurrection means a revolt or violent resistance against authority.
- Legally, it’s a defined federal crime involving action or support of a rebellion against the U.S. government.
Looking at the Law Again (18 U.S.C. § 2383):
- The statute does not mention weapons, arms, or armed conflict as a required element.
- What matters is the intent and action to oppose or overthrow lawful authority.
- Courts look at things like:
- Organization and planning
- Use of force or violence (armed or not)
- Targeting of government institutions
- Interference with the execution of law
Historical Context Confirms This:
In U.S. history, not all insurrections were armed in the traditional military sense:
Examples of actions that could qualify:
- Storming a federal building to prevent the certification of an election (even if only a subset were armed).
- Overpowering law enforcement to disrupt government proceedings.
- Coordinated occupation of government facilities.
Legal Nuance:
The presence of weapons may escalate the severity of the charges (e.g., adding weapons charges or terrorism enhancements), but they are not required to classify the event as an insurrection under 18 U.S.C. § 2383.
They have been conditioned and indoctrinated by politicians like Pelosi, Schumer, Jeffries, Crockett, and their media lackeys like Jake Tapper to call it an insurrection. People who are in power use idiots to stay in power and calling a trespassing an insurrection to make Republicans seem like the terrorist Democrats is what the sheep have been trained to say.I guarantee you at least half of the remaining Trump Hater Cult sticks with the "insurrection" fantasy and will take it to their grave. LOL as if a few dozen unarmed dudes were "trying to overthrow our government".
Yes. At the most, the majority of the people who entered the building were LET in by the guards. There are videos of them removing the barriers and on the inside, there are videos of them giving a peaceful tour. There was not even any pushing and shoving. It looked like a Sunday event to view the premises. It only took about 3 people to break the window.
Really… so how did ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY COPS GET INJURED?
They're told that most of the people who were violent were Antifa and FBI. They caused all the violence.
Those are lies is why. Just like the lies that 6 cops died from J6 when it had nothing at all to do with them dying.
Mac 1958
