Here are the key statistics to know about the 1/6 insurrection. It’s probably worse than you remember

[playtime]

Then charge them and take them to court. I have no problem with that.

Bottom line my fact of 0 charges of sedition, is absolutely correct. Thank you now please let Billy know it seems that he has reading comprehension issues.

the wheels of justice go slow when there are layers of traitorism to get thru.

 

[Papageorgio]

the wheels of justice go slow when there are layers of traitorism to get thru.

So the count is still 0, so even today my stat is good. Thanks again for confirming I am right.

 

[Rigby5]

Not democrats. People upset about police brutality. Go ahead and post those statistics. I guarantee you they don’t compare to the shit I posted. Specifically, how many people died?

And you do not get the contradiction?
The police have been brutalizing innocent people for decades, and the DC riot was no exception.
The fact the election likely was not defrauded, makes no difference.
The 2 impeachments were a fraud, and congress clearly WAS guilty.
Congress is guilty, not just of fake impeachments, but the illegal War on Drugs, mandatory sentences, asset forfeiture, foreign invasions, mandatory private health insurance, etc.
Congress should not just have been occupied, but burned to the ground.
They are almost all nothing but crooks.

 

[P@triot]

According to the poll, the percentage of U.S. adults who believe an attack like the one on Jan. 6 could happen again

The F.B.I. announced that you’re a pathological liar

FBI Confirms There Was No Insurrection On Jan 6

FBI confirms there was no insurrection on Jan. 6 "The Cambridge Dictionary defines “insurrection” as: “an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence” By that definition, there was no “insurrection” at the United...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Rigby5]

The F.B.I. announced that you’re a pathological liar

FBI Confirms There Was No Insurrection On Jan 6

FBI confirms there was no insurrection on Jan. 6 "The Cambridge Dictionary defines “insurrection” as: “an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence” By that definition, there was no “insurrection” at the United...

www.usmessageboard.com

But the point is there SHOULD likely be an insurrection.
All the wars the US committed were based on lies.
We committed war crimes.
We attacked civilians, used torture, etc.
Federal gun laws are all illegal.
The War on Drugs is completely illegal.
The US has the largest % imprisoned in the world.
The US is about the only large country without public health care, and congress actually mandated private health insurance.
Sentence mandates, asset forfeiture, no-knock-warrants for drugs, etc. are completely illegal.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

But the point is there SHOULD likely be an insurrection.
All the wars the US committed were based on lies.
We committed war crimes.
We attacked civilians, used torture, etc.
Federal gun laws are all illegal.
The War on Drugs is completely illegal.
The US has the largest % imprisoned in the world.
The US is about the only large country without public health care, and congress actually mandated private health insurance.
Sentence mandates, asset forfeiture, no-knock-warrants for drugs, etc. are completely illegal.

Did you ever find your backup for "trade sanctions = war crimes"?

 

[Rigby5]

Did you ever find your backup for "trade sanctions = war crimes"?

Yes, I showed you several places where economic warfare is banned as a war crime by the 1906 Geneva Conventions.
That means "Shock and Awe" was also illegal, as was US submarine warfare against Japan in WWII.
So it is common, but still totally illegal and immoral.
You do not win by starving civilians.
That is criminal.
Or do you support illegally starving civilians?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, I showed you several places where economic warfare is banned as a war crime by the 1906 Geneva Conventions.
That means "Shock and Awe" was also illegal, as was US submarine warfare against Japan in WWII.
So it is common, but still totally illegal and immoral.
You do not win by starving civilians.
That is criminal.
Or do you support illegally starving civilians?

Yes, I showed you several places where economic warfare is banned as a war crime by the 1906 Geneva Conventions.

Only if by several you meant zero.

Or do you support illegally starving civilians?

Give me some examples where trade sanctions stopped food from getting to civilians.

 

[Rigby5]

Yes, I showed you several places where economic warfare is banned as a war crime by the 1906 Geneva Conventions.

Only if by several you meant zero.

Or do you support illegally starving civilians?

Give me some examples where trade sanctions stopped food from getting to civilians.

I showed you abstractions in the UN listing on the Geneva Conventions that showed economic warfare is illegal.
I just did not search the actual UN regulations because they are huge, with many sources, and over long periods of time.

Economic sanctions against Iraq for example, where notorious for causing starvation.
Which is why the US finally allow OFF, Oil For Food.
But that was still illegal because it did not allow market value for the oil.

All economic sanctions always hurt food imports because they reduce the nation's income they need to be able to buy food.

And economic sanctions are against US law because they take aways the ability of US citizens to make a living if they had previously done business with a country that is being cut off, without any compensation.
It is illegal to stop any US citizen from doing business with anyone, without compensation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I showed you abstractions in the UN listing on the Geneva Conventions that showed economic warfare is illegal.
I just did not search the actual UN regulations because they are huge, with many sources, and over long periods of time.

Economic sanctions against Iraq for example, where notorious for causing starvation.
Which is why the US finally allow OFF, Oil For Food.
But that was still illegal because it did not allow market value for the oil.

All economic sanctions always hurt food imports because they reduce the nation's income they need to be able to buy food.

And economic sanctions are against US law because they take aways the ability of US citizens to make a living if they had previously done business with a country that is being cut off, without any compensation.
It is illegal to stop any US citizen from doing business with anyone, without compensation.

I showed you abstractions in the UN listing on the Geneva Conventions that showed economic warfare is illegal.

You didn't show anything that said sanctions were war crimes. Try again?

Economic sanctions against Iraq for example, where notorious for causing starvation.

The sanctions didn't stop food from getting to Iraq.

But that was still illegal because it did not allow market value for the oil.

Which law says it was illegal?

All economic sanctions always hurt food imports because they reduce the nation's income they need to be able to buy food.

If Saddam used the money to buy luxuries and weapons instead of food, that's his fault.

And economic sanctions are against US law because they take aways the ability of US citizens to make a living if they had previously done business with a country that is being cut off

 

[playtime]

So the count is still 0, so even today my stat is good. Thanks again for confirming I am right.

right about what? do you think it will stay that way? do you WANT it to stay that way? kinda sounds like it.

pity.

ever hear of superseding indictments?

 

[Papageorgio]

right about what? do you think it will stay that way? do you WANT it to stay that way? kinda sounds like it.

pity.

ever hear of superseding indictments?

Again, go to my original post and all I said was 0 is the number charged with sedition or insurrection. I never said anything else that you are implying. You go off on a bunch a future crap. How you make up so much shit with one post is beyond me.

 

[Nostra]

Key Statistic: ZERO charges for INSURRECTION!

 

[playtime]

Again, go to my original post and all I said was 0 is the number charged with sedition or insurrection.

you made it sound as if it's a done deal. almost gloating.

 

[Papageorgio]

you made it sound as if it's a done deal. almost gloating.

That is your interpretation, my views are much different. Again, I posted a fact, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[lennypartiv]

the wheels of justice go slow when there are layers of traitorism to get thru.

We found that out when we were waiting for Hillary to be locked up.

 

[lennypartiv]

It is without question their intentions were to stop the election results and keep Trump in power

The goal was to right a wrong. Of course patriotic Americans are going to protest when an election is stolen.

 

[playtime]

We found that out when we were waiting for Hillary to be locked up.

for what again, exactly?

vince foster?

whitewater?

uranium one?

seth rich?

BENGHAZIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!!!! ?

 

[playtime]

That is your interpretation, my views are much different. Again, I posted a fact, nothing more and nothing less.

okey dokey.......

 

[lennypartiv]

for what again, exactly?
vince foster?
whitewater?
uranium one?
seth rich?
BENGHAZIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!!!!! ?

Pick one, I don't care which one.