- Apr 23, 2017
- Reaction score
- New Mexico
I don’t support the actions of any rowdy mob that damages buildings or loots and burns. Therefore I don’t support the actions of those who entered the Capitol Building on Jan 6th.
However this was no “insurrection.” The rioters did not have firearms and it appears the FBI may have been involved in setting up the riot.
BREAKING: FBI official testifies that no guns were recovered from those arrested at the Jan. 6 Capitol siegeFBI assistant director for counterterrorism Jill Sanborn confirmed in a Senate hearing that no guns were recovered during the Capitol protests on Jan 6www.lawenforcementtoday.com
THIS IS RIGHT OUT OF STALIN’S PLAY BOOK Attorney General Merrick Garland said on Monday that white supremacists are the single biggest threat our country faces. He did not define what a white supremacist is or who they are. That’s because the depraved AG is lying. And then there is Christopher...www.independentsentinel.com
You don't have to have guns to have an insurrection.. Many of them did have weapons.. and per Trump's instructions they were there to fight for their country, take back America and overturn the election.
But to implement an insurrection, you have to not just delay the election certification by a day, but prevent it permanently.
Since I did not see any sleeping bags, tents, etc., I saw nothing to indicate this was a permanent attempt, but just headlines grandstanding for a single day. And I see no harm in that. In fact, I kind of like that, even though I totally disagree with their beliefs, values, etc.
In fact, I wish all different opinions and views got similar face time on a regular basis.Nonsense. A failed insurrection is still an insurrection just as a bank robbery is still a bank robbery even if the thief escapes empty handed.But to implement an insurrection, you have to not just delay the election certification by a day, but prevent it permanently.
A attempted bank robbery that fails, still has to express an illegal intent.
The capital protestors say their intent was to draw public attention to an election fraud.
Not a singe one of them ever expressed any illegal intent.
They all claimed to be trying to expose something illegal done by others, instead.
The fact I disagree with them and believe they were wrong about the election, does not change the legality of what they did.
What they did was legal.