First insurrectionist removed from office under 14th amendment

[MagicMike]

If you mean your claims, then, sure. Otherwise, you’re just lying again.

You libtards do that regularly. Consider refraining from such behavior from now on.

I make no such error. Trump didn’t take an oath as an officer of any state. And there was no rebellion against the US on 1/6. No insurrection. Words have meaning. You don’t.

 

[BackAgain]

From your own link:

From your own link:

The violence and destruction of property at the U.S. Capitol building on January 6 showed a blatant and appalling disregard for our institutions of government and the orderly administration of the democratic process. The FBI does not tolerate violent extremists who use the guise of First Amendment-protected activity to engage in violent criminal activity. The destruction of property, violent assaults on law enforcement officers, and imminent physical threats to elected officials betray the values of our democracy.

So yes.....agreed.
Words DO have meaning.

You idiot. I didn’t say that there was no criminality. What I said is that even Director Wray didn’t label it an insurrection. And, of course, he didn’t.

So if you care to be honest and concede. that he didn’t label any of the criminality as an “insurrection,” then we have reached some agreement. Otherwise, you’re just pretending that when I handed you your own ass in a sack, that constitutes your own victory.

 

[BackAgain]

Only imbeciles cite to the Congressional Clown Show “hearings” as evidence of anything.

 

[MagicMike]

Only imbeciles cite to the Congressional Clown Show “hearings” as evidence of anything.

That's just your own misinformed f-ed up opinion.

 

[Slade3200]

Who needs a source? Are you that dumb you can't understand basic definitions?

You need a source if you want to back up your claims. Every definition I’ve seen makes no mention of what you’ve said. Here I’ll post a definition to back up the claim I just made. Do you have anything to refute it?!

Definition of INSURRECTION

an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[MagicMike]

You idiot. I didn’t say that there was no criminality. What I said is that even Director Wray didn’t label it an insurrection. And, of course, he didn’t.

So if you care to be honest and concede. that he didn’t label any of the criminality as an “insurrection,” then we have reached some agreement. Otherwise, you’re just pretending that when I handed you your own ass in a sack, that constitutes your own victory.

At least you have finally admitted that Trump and his followers are criminals.

 

[BackAgain]

That's just your own misinformed f-ed up opinion.

No. It isn’t. Make an allegedly “investigatory” committee from the House to look into the 1/6 Capitol riot. Stack it with liberal Dumbocraps. As Speaker, deny the choices of the Republicans because they’re in the minority, so **** them.

But when a couple of diehard Never Trumpers ask to be out on, as Speaker, say “sure!” See? With a couple of R’s in the stew the loyal apparatchik media will go along with the canard that it’s a “bipartisan” committee.

Then conduct many hearings but only present one sided information publicly.

Then, some liberal will eventually cite the “work” of the Committee as though it was of any actual value.

minimike will do.

 

[martybegan]

You need a source if you want to back up your claims. Every definition I’ve seen makes no mention of what you’ve said. Here I’ll post a definition to back up the claim I just made. Do you have anything to refute it?!

Definition of INSURRECTION

an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

I have reality to refute it. The only reason you want to call it an insurrection is to apply the whole "insurrectionists can't hold office" thing. It's as transparent as Penelope's jew hatred.

 

[BackAgain]

At least you have finally admitted that Trump and his followers are criminals.

Wrong, inasmuch as you just lied.

People did vandalize Capitol property. That’s a crime. Some ( not all ) entered into the Capitol uninvited. A crime. Some, not all, engaged in acts of violence against others. Absolutely criminal.

But I said absolutely nothing about President Trump having any alleged involvement. And you can’t point to any actual evidence that he did.

You are a liar. And you’re also amazingly stupid.

 

[MagicMike]

You need a source if you want to back up your claims. Every definition I’ve seen makes no mention of what you’ve said. Here I’ll post a definition to back up the claim I just made. Do you have anything to refute it?!

Definition of INSURRECTION

an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

So,
Did Trumptards march on the Capitol in

Wrong, inasmuch as you just lied.

People did vandalize Capitol property. That’s a crime. Some ( not all ) entered into the Capitol uninvited. A crime. Some, not all, engaged in acts of violence against others. Absolutely criminal.

But I said absolutely nothing about President Trump having any alleged involvement. And you can’t point to any actual evidence that he did.

You are a liar. And you’re also amazingly stupid.

I'll bet you'd drink Trump's bath water if he told you it was kool-aid.
Wouldn't you?

 

[Concerned American]

The violence and destruction of property

Sounds like you are talking about the BLM/Antifa riots of 2020, not the unarmed protest with no leader that happened on 1/6. Maybe you should look at post #307.

 

[Concerned American]

Did Trumptards march on the Capitol in

What is that. I can't find it in any dictionary. Would you like to repeat--in English this time.

 

[Concerned American]

I'll bet you'd drink Trump's bath water if he told you it was kool-aid.

IDK, he lives in your head not mine.

 

[MagicMike]

No. It isn’t. Make an allegedly “investigatory” committee from the House to look into the 1/6 Capitol riot. Stack it with liberal Dumbocraps. As Speaker, deny the choices of the Republicans because they’re in the minority, so **** them.

But when a couple of diehard Never Trumpers ask to be out on, as Speaker, say “sure!” See? With a couple of R’s in the stew the loyal apparatchik media will go along with the canard that it’s a “bipartisan” committee.

Then conduct many hearings but only present one sided information publicly.

Then, some liberal will eventually cite the “work” of the Committee as though it was of any actual value.

minimike will do.

There is ONLY one side of the story.
And what you are saying is a lie.
Republicans were invited to serve on the committee but Kevin McCarty only wanted to volunteer Trump co conspirators/co-criminals to serve.
This would have tainted the legitimacy of the Committee.
So you get what you get and you don't throw a fit.

At least Cheney and Kinzinger are HONEST Repunlicans, which is kinda rare.Also, anybody is welcome to testify....under oath....to present "their side" to the committee.
The problem with that seems to be that no one from the "other side" seems to have any other "side" to present.
Including Trump.
All they want to do is either defy lawful subpoenas or, when they do show up, plead the 5th.
And like Trump himself was fond of saying, that means GUILT!

So there you have it so quit yer whining snowflake.

 

[meaner gene]

You idiot. I didn’t say that there was no criminality. What I said is that even Director Wray didn’t label it an insurrection. And, of course, he didn’t.

Constitution Check: Does the FBI have power to decide who gets prosecuted? | Constitution Center

Lyle Denniston, the National Constitution Center’s constitutional literacy adviser, looks at the FBI and Attorney General’s role in deciding to press charges in high-profile cases, which can suddenly gain a lot of visibility when a criminal investigation is aimed at a prominent political figure.

constitutioncenter.org

But the public may not always understand that the FBI does not have the job of deciding who should, or should not, be prosecuted for crime. It was created to do investigations – period. When it finishes one of its probes, it can and usually does make recommendations, but someone else has the job of deciding what to do with the results of those investigations – an actual prosecutor.

 

[BackAgain]

So,
Did Trumptards march on the Capitol in

I'll bet you'd drink Trump's bath water if he told you it was kool-aid.
Wouldn't you?

No. I’m not a fuckin’ library’s or cultist. Unlike you, I deal in facts and reasons and honesty.

There is no excuse for you.

 

[meaner gene]

Wrong, inasmuch as you just lied.

People did vandalize Capitol property. That’s a crime. Some ( not all ) entered into the Capitol uninvited. A crime. Some, not all, engaged in acts of violence against others. Absolutely criminal.

But I said absolutely nothing about President Trump having any alleged involvement. And you can’t point to any actual evidence that he did.

You are a liar. And you’re also amazingly stupid.

Nice of you to downplay felonies against the government, and it's agents. Death threats against it's legislators, and even the vice president.

They put their intentions on their websites, and even live streamed the felonious quests. They brought loaded firearms to the capitol, and an assortment of other weapns and implements used by soldiers, not civilians.

 

[Concerned American]

This would have tainted the legitimacy of the Committee.

Damn, so you believe a jury should be made up of prosecutors. Got it. That is what happened with two scam impeachments--Adam Schiff, "I have evidence." Well where is it? What you advocate is a kangaroo court.

 

[BULLDOG]

Even the vegetable in the WH knows an insurrection cannot be accomplished by unarmed rioters with no leader. Hence, no insurrection.

And it was a failed insurrection.

 

[meaner gene]

Sounds like you are talking about the BLM/Antifa riots of 2020, not the unarmed protest with no leader that happened on 1/6. Maybe you should look at post #307.

Maybe you should read the indictments, and allocutions. They were armed, they were organized, and many of the "leaders" were too chickshit to actually participate, sending their followers to do the dirty work.

But it didn't work.