...'Insurrection' on J6 = the real deal ....

[Billiejeens]

In some cases a death penalty to those of either side is warranted. Jan.6th. would certainly qualify on account of the highest level of the crimes being committed.

Considering the whole, in my opinion has exceeded all bounds of civility on the death penalty.
Justifying murder by gun (the death penalty) on the basis of 'stand your ground', is legalizing murder by a citizenry that is out of control due to a culture of violence and war.

Consequences have come home with the chickens on Jan.6th. Let's all hope that the criminals will learn as they spend their lives behind bars.

The CBC Has rotted your brain.

 

[Doug1943]

if people were tapped inside by the hands of a mob?

yes.




if cops were trapped inside by a violent mob?

yes.



lol ...



all depending on the circumstances, deary. like i said.

Okay, that's fairly clear. Are you familiar with the 2020 riots? I mean the details of what happened? Because I think you'll find that there were numerous instances that match your criteria.

So I can assume that you were in favor of shooting dead some of the summer 2020 rioters, and are disappointed that this did not happen.

Well, brother, welcome to the Dark Side!

 

[Donald H]

Please link to just ONE charge and conviction for insurrection in TWO years.

Improved adult behaviour can be rewarded with answers!
Sincerity needs to be re-established.

 

[Concerned American]

you can keep waiting. 2 trials have just concluded ... not two years ago ... just a couple months & weeks. some are ongoing right now & one is upcoming with ZERO sentencing as of yet.

take a remedial comp class, dude - you are flailing.

BTW, you threw out a stat that they were getting 20 years for seditious conspiracy. Another lie. Longest sentence to date, 68 months--that's 5 years 8 months for the mathmatically challenged--that is somewhat less than 10 years. Go troll someone else. I have exposed every one of your lies today. Tomorrow is another day.

 

[Concerned American]

Improved adult behaviour can be rewarded with answers!
Sincerity needs to be re-established.

Run along duck. You got it right when you said "I have no horse in the race." Take your advice and nose into Canadian races that you have a horse in.

 

[playtime]

Okay, that's fairly clear. Are you familiar with the 2020 riots?

yes.

I mean the details of what happened?

yes.

Because I think you'll find that there were numerous instances that match your criteria.

not really.

So I can assume that you were in favor of shooting dead some of the summer 2020 rioters, and are disappointed that this did not happen.

some were - by the hands of a 17 year old trump humper.

Well, brother, welcome to the Dark Side!

i'm not a dude & can i bring dark brandon with me?

 

[BackAgain]

We must not be prisoners of words, assuming that our existing stock of words is always adequate to describe reality.

I think the term 'insurrection' should be limited to an attempt to seize power, to replace the existing government.

The 6 January events were an attempt to force Congress (or its Republican members) to act in a certain way.

Not really. As misguided as the behavior was, it appears to have been predicated on a belief (wrong or not) that the Presidential election had been stolen. The effort to get Congress to hold off on the “certification” was therefore not an attempt to seize power or alter the government. It was instead an attempt to get Congress to avoid a serious error. It was (in that light) an effort to preserve our republic.

Most riots are less focussed: they're expressions of general discontent with the government (or parts of it). You could say they have a general goal of, in the case of the summer 2020 riots, getting the police to act more professionally with respect to Black suspects.

So the 6 January riot was something in between a 'normal' riot, and an insurrection. We don't have a word for it.

We have a word for what it was not. It was not an insurrection.

If you read in detail about Stewart Rhodes, you will see that he did more than just attend the riot. Like some other people in the militia movement, he was acting out a fantasy -- very unwise.

So ... we have to draw lessons from all this. And act accordingly.

It is possible to disagree with the behavior of the mob that day. (By “mob” I refer to the actual trespassers, and vandals and the folks who engaged in acts of physical violence.) And yet, while disagreeing with that behavior, it is also possible (as well as more accurate) to deny that any of it was an “insurrection.”

 

[playtime]

BTW, you threw out a stat that they were getting 20 years for seditious conspiracy. Another lie.

the lie is you stating i said that. i said the CHARGE carries a 20 year sentence.

Longest sentence to date, 68 months--that's 5 years 8 months for the mathmatically challenged--that is somewhat less than 10 years.

link to where the guilty verdict already was handed down a sentence for seditious conspiracy.

Go troll someone else. I have exposed every one of your lies today. Tomorrow is another day.

^^^

 

[Concerned American]

the lie is you stating i said that. i said the CHARGE carries a 20 year sentence.




link to where the guilty verdict already was handed down a sentence for seditious conspiracy.




^^^

View attachment 753067

Right out of Saul Alinsky's book. I am not surprised, you practice it daily.

 

[playtime]

BTW, you threw out a stat that they were getting 20 years for seditious conspiracy. Another lie. Longest sentence to date, 68 months--that's 5 years 8 months for the mathmatically challenged--that is somewhat less than 10 years. Go troll someone else. I have exposed every one of your lies today. Tomorrow is another day.

nice try, but yer lie doesn't fly. seems the 'marine' you are referring to was convicted of assaulting a police officer & NOT SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY.

those FOUND GUILTY OF SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY HAVE NOT BEEN SENTENCED & COULD FACE 20 YEARS IF THEY 9hopefully) GET THE MAX.

there .... now you can try something else & be caught red faced.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

InSuR-EreCttsHUn - Me dUn foUndeD me a Knoo Werd!

I hate to say this since I just started posting here recently. But the old fud leftists on this board need to be put away in a home somewhere, assuming they are not already put away in homes somewhere. They post the most asinine nonsense I have come across in my life. Clearly, they are trying to satisfy some emptiness in their lives by parroting leftist talking points.

Do you really think those 1/6 protesters were engaging in insurrection? Really? REALLY? I liken this to some guy screwing a blow-up doll and then claiming it was sex. It wasn't and it isn't. Nobody was at the capital to overturn an election. Nobody there had any power to do so. They were there to protest. Amongst the group of middle aged and elderly Trump supporters on the scene were some shit-heads there to start trouble (keep in mind that even some of this small group were working with the FBI). But nobody can seriously assert that these people could actually take control of the U.S. government through some mild rioting.

Do you really think this group was going to take control of the the inside of the Capital Building and gavel both chambers into session and then attempt to nullify the 2020 election? Really? REALLY???? Do you think that a small group of a-holes fired up about the election had the capacity to institute and effect a coup? Do you think that was their goal? I think some in the group were deluded, but no more so than in a leftist protest. Remember when the BLM/ANTIFA morons assaulted a federal courthouse in the summer of 2020? Why is that not a coup? It was certainly more violent that what happened at the Capital on e 1/6.

The bottom line here is that these crazy claims of "insurrection" are merely goofy partisan rhetoric. Most adults know this. Some, however, do not. Perhaps they suffer from mental retardation and/or some acute emotional malady. I don't know. The chain of inferences to link "small patriotic riot" to "insurrection" is ludicrous and irrational. You see it in how the left uses this stupid claim. Everything is insurrectiony these days, even being a Republican. It is an abortion of logic, and a messy one at that.

Oh, and BTW, I have argued against this pathological stupidity since 1/6 happened. That was TWO FUCKING YEARS AGO. Yet you are STILL trying to make out the case that it was an InSooRecTsHun. Really? REALLY? It is like sitting around inside an old man barbershop listening to elderly men talk about how Nixon fucked up trying to coverup the Watergate burglary, like it just happened yesterday. The matter has already been fleshed out. The horse has been long dead and is rotting away. Quit fucking it already! You are going to believe your silly conspiracy ideas because you are stupid and senile. I get it.

So think what you want, gramps. Nobody is listening to you anyway. Go get your Ensure and take a load off in your comfy chair because Wheel of Fortune will be on in a couple of hours.

 

[Doug1943]

Most people were doing nothing more than having a Patriotic tailgate.

The 3 letter agencies needed a distraction.

Nah, c'mon. You're saying it was "mostly peaceful protest". Let's leave those weasel words to the Leftist Mainstream Media.

Look at it this way: suppose we win big in 2024, getting the Presidency and both Houses of Congress, with candidates committed to some really deep changes.

And suppose the radical Left refuse to accept the results -- claiming 'voter suppression' because we required that people actually be citizens and have ID in order to vote. And then suppose a mob of over a thousand people try to invade the Capitol on the first day of the new Congress, fighting with police, smashing windows, tearing down barricades.

How should the police react to them? I know what most people on the Right would say -- they'd join the blood-thirsty liberals here who have been arguing that the AntiFa/BLM rioters of the summer of 2020 should have been shot dead, just like Ashli Babbitt was.

 

[playtime]

Do you really think those 1/6 protesters were engaging in insurrection?

THEY thought they were.

Really?

really.

REALLY?

REALLY.

I liken this to some guy screwing a blow-up doll and then claiming it was sex.

seems you know a freak or two, 'eh?

It wasn't

not for the lack of trying.

and it isn't.

ask the oathkeepers who are getting nailed to the wall what they think....

Nobody was at the capital to overturn an election.

some sure thought that is why they were there & just because they weren't successful, doesn't mean they shouldn't be held accountable for being traitors.

 

[Doug1943]

THEY thought they were.



really.



REALLY.



seems you know a freak or two, 'eh?




not for the lack of trying.



ask the oathkeepers who are getting nailed to the wall what they think....




some sure thought that is why they were there & just because they weren't successful, doesn't mean they shouldn't be held accountable for being traitors.

It always makes me smile to see liberals using the word 'traitor' to describe people who wave the American flag, and don't burn it. So we have to wonder whom liberals really admire, their idea of a true patriot. And the good liberals of the New York City Council have kindly provided us with an example of the sort of person liberals really admire: Ethel Rosenberg, a Soviet spy who helped Stalin get the atom bomb.

The City Council’s ‘heroes’ from hell

The City Council has yet again proved itself one of New York’s biggest political embarrassments. On Monday, several council members held a ceremony on the steps of City Hall to honor “the life and …

nypost.com

City Council honors Ethel Rosenberg for ‘great bravery’

Ethel Rosenberg, who was executed with her husband for espionage in 1953, was honored Monday by the City Council on what would have been her 100th birthday. Three council members joined Manhattan B…

nypost.com

‘60 Minutes’ pushing Ethel Rosenberg pardon — don’t buy it

Obama’s presidency isn’t over until the end of next year, yet rumors already are swirling about who he might pardon. One name in particular keeps surfacing: Ethel Rosenberg, a dedicated communist a…

nypost.com

So, the next time a liberal uses the word 'traitor', everyone should understand just what they mean by that. They mean people who -- however misguidedly they acted -- love their country. And by 'patriot', they mean people who wanted their country to be conquered by the USSR.

Yes, it's an odd use of words, but, hey, it's a free country (still).

 

[Chillicothe]

If there was an insurrection that could be PROVED, you can bet your ample ass that the democrats would have charged someone with it.

Do they really need to show all that insurrection in this matter?
I mean, we have courts naming convicted criminals as "insurrectionists"...... and the effort they undertook in their attack on the Congress as "insurrection". Accordingly, with experienced judges in a serious court calling 'em 'insurrectionist'.....well, why dispute a judge who is so intimately involved with the details and nuance? Plus that judge and other judges are slap 'em in jail for 5yrs, 6yrs, 10yrs.....all cool.

So, I'm quite cool in calling all those J6 Jackasses who struck or sprayed a cop....or beat down a door or window, or pooped in a Legislator's office....calling 'em 'insurrectionist' doesn't seem all that out of order. A rose by any other name is still a rose.
You feel that way too?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The effort to get Congress to hold off on the “certification” was therefore not an attempt to seize power or alter the government.

No, not 'seize' power.
Rather, to 'maintain' power.
What they wanted was to keep the fired guy in the office.....by any means necessary.
-------------------------------------------------------

Do you really think those 1/6 protesters were engaging in insurrection? Really? REALLY?

Yes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

assert that these people could actually take control of the U.S. government

"They" didn't need to.
Nor did that assembly of J6 Jackasses have any ability to do so.
Rather, they simply wanted to prevent the newly hired guy from coming in and replacing the newly fired guy. Their goal...seemingly.... was stop the peaceful passing of power. And keep the fired guy in place.

 

[jotathought]

several have been found guilty of seditious conspiracy-which is the same as being an insurrectionist will be looking at a sentence of 20 years & a hefty fine on each count.

Of the 800 - 900 charges, how many is "several?"

 

[Concerned American]

Do they really need to show all that insurrection in this matter?

Yep, they certainly do. If you are going to claim there was an insurrection, it would behoove you to at least show one person who has been charged and convicted of insurrection.

I mean, we have courts naming convicted criminals as "insurrectionists"

Falsely. I might remind you that you have a SCOTUS diversity hire that can't define what a woman is.

 

[Concerned American]

Plus that judge and other judges are slap 'em in jail for 5yrs, 6yrs, 10yrs.....all cool.

Please link to a sentence of over 5 yrs. 8 mo.

calling 'em 'insurrectionist' doesn't seem all that out of order.

Sure, you call women, men and vice versa, what's a little redefining of a term among friends, eh? Glad you aren't part of the justice system.

No, not 'seize' power.
Rather, to 'maintain' power.

Neither. Determine the actual outcome.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

Do they really need to show all that insurrection in this matter?
I mean, we have courts naming convicted criminals as "insurrectionists"...... and the effort they undertook in their attack on the Congress as "insurrection". Accordingly, with experienced judges in a serious court calling 'em 'insurrectionist'.....well, why dispute a judge who is so intimately involved with the details and nuance? Plus that judge and other judges are slap 'em in jail for 5yrs, 6yrs, 10yrs.....all cool.

So, I'm quite cool in calling all those J6 Jackasses who struck or sprayed a cop....or beat down a door or window, or pooped in a Legislator's office....calling 'em 'insurrectionist' doesn't seem all that out of order. A rose by any other name is still a rose.
You feel that way too?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, not 'seize' power.
Rather, to 'maintain' power.
What they wanted was to keep the fired guy in the office.....by any means necessary.
-------------------------------------------------------


Yes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"They" didn't need to.
Nor did that assembly of J6 Jackasses have any ability to do so.
Rather, they simply wanted to prevent the newly hired guy from coming in and replacing the newly fired guy. Their goal...seemingly.... was stop the peaceful passing of power. And keep the fired guy in place.

So what you are saying is not that they committed insurrection, but that they committed and attempted insurrection?

 

[Lord Long Rod]

THEY thought they were.



really.



REALLY.



seems you know a freak or two, 'eh?




not for the lack of trying.



ask the oathkeepers who are getting nailed to the wall what they think....




some sure thought that is why they were there & just because they weren't successful, doesn't mean they shouldn't be held accountable for being traitors.

You cannot convict a flea of raping a woman if its dick is to small to get the job done. Moreover, the rioters - yes, they are a-holes - were not intending insurrection. If insurrection is not possible (and it was most certainly not on 1/6) then there is no reasonable intention to commit insurrection. Your train of thought is flawed (and retarded).