Rightwingers really need to stop comparing the summer riots to the Jan 6th insurrection and here is why

[Billy000]

Only in your dreams

Lesson one: Trump doesn’t give a flying fuck about you.

 

[jc456]

Lesson one: Trump doesn’t give a flying fuck about you.

more than the pedophile in office today. That's your lesson one.

BTW, how long have you hung with Trump to know him so well?

 

[Billy000]

more than the pedophile in office today. That's your lesson one.

BTW, how long have you hung with Trump to know him so well?

Have you heard all the creepy stuff Trump has said about Ivanka starting when she was 13? My god. There’s a huge volume of the weird shit he has said about Ivanka on the record. Let’s also not forget Trump invading Miss Teen USA locker room. Oh and there is the dozens of sexual misconduct accusations against Trump including the rape of a 13 year old. He was best buds with known pedophiles. There’s plenty of picture and video evidence of that.

 

[jc456]

He was best buds with known pedophiles.

name one

 

[jc456]

Have you heard all the creepy stuff Trump has said about Ivanka starting when she was 13? My god. There’s a huge volume of the weird shit he has said about Ivanka on the record. Let’s also not forget Trump invading Miss Teen USA locker room. Oh and there is the dozens of sexual misconduct accusations against Trump including the rape of a 13 year old. He was best buds with known pedophiles. There’s plenty of picture and video evidence of that.

so your judgement of Trump is by what you read, not actually knowing him. So you let the weight of fabricated stories pass your judgement. Got it. So, you can't speak to me about any lessons. Funny, you lied.

 

[Billy000]

so your judgement of Trump is by what you read, not actually knowing him. So you let the weight of fabricated stories pass your judgement. Got it. So, you can't speak to me about any lessons. Funny, you lied.

Jeffery Epstein. Duh!

Umm okay well by this same logic you can’t really judge Joe Biden then huh? See how easy that was to pick apart your logic?

 

[Not a Monkeys Uncle]

FBI confirms there was no insurrection on Jan. 6

FBI confirms there was no insurrection on Jan. 6 - Washington Examiner

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 States Capitol on Jan. 6, according to the FBI. Reuters...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

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 States Capitol on Jan. 6, according to the FBI. Reuters reports:

 

[jc456]

Jeffery Epstein. Duh!

Umm okay well by this same logic you can’t really judge Joe Biden then huh? See how easy that was to pick apart your logic?

I can judge anyone anything I want. what the fk do you think you can do about it?

Epstein was not a Trump buddy. Epstein was Slick Willie's buddy. fking get your facts straight.

 

[Billy000]

I can judge anyone anything I want. what the fk do you think you can do about it?

Epstein was not a Trump buddy. Epstein was Slick Willie's buddy. fking get your facts straight.

Lol umm okay. Your logic about judging a president is blatantly hypocritical either way.

 

[Billy000]

FBI confirms there was no insurrection on Jan. 6​

FBI confirms there was no insurrection on Jan. 6 - Washington Examiner

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 States Capitol on Jan. 6, according to the FBI. Reuters...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

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 States Capitol on Jan. 6, according to the FBI. Reuters reports:

I love how you doofuses cherry pick what the FBI says. Anything they say that doesn’t match your political narrative is disregarded as them being partisan.

Regardless of what the FBI says, 10 Trumptards have been indicted for sedition for their actions on that day. Oops!

 

[Billy_Bob]

Boy this thread has really gotten off the rails and is in full bull shit mode from the leftists... Political prosecution... I wonder what tune they would be singing today if it was, they who were the targets of that political prosecution.

A whole lot of conjecture from the left has been thrown about with very little in the way of facts has been divulged, as the left doesn't want to address the real problem in Nancy Pelosi and her cabal who failed to take appropriate actions in preparing for the demonstration. And I want to know why she is protecting the three individuals that were caught instigating the entry of the capitol building. Nancy has a shit ton to answer for..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Boy this thread has really gotten off the rails and is in full bull shit mode from the leftists... Political prosecution... I wonder what tune they would be singing today if it was, they who were the targets of that political prosecution.

A whole lot of conjecture from the left has been thrown about with very little in the way of facts has been divulged, as the left doesn't want to address the real problem in Nancy Pelosi and her cabal who failed to take appropriate actions in preparing for the demonstration. And I want to know why she is protecting the three individuals that were caught instigating the entry of the capitol building. Nancy has a shit ton to answer for..

What moron... Billy000... An investigation was done, people were cleared of those charges. Now we have a group of political whores trying to push the narrative... Never Trumpers... GFY

 

[Billy000]

What moron... Billy000... An investigation was done, people were cleared of those charges. Now we have a group of political whores trying to push the narrative... Never Trumpers... GFY

Lol that is a complete lie. They pled not guilty over a week ago.

 

[jc456]

Lol umm okay. Your logic about judging a president is blatantly hypocritical either way.

Hohh your irony

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Boiled down: it is an absurdity to claim that the summer riots over Chauvin’s criminal behavior constitute an effort to overthrow the government. SIMILARLY, I maintain that’s equally baseless to claim that a small group with no guns were engaged in an insurrection on 1/6.

NFBW wrote: I have written extensively that the Jan6 event in DC has three rings or circles around one common intent to overturn the election: Stop the transfer of power on Jan20.

(1) Inside the White House circle with Trump involved engaged to carry out the EASTMAN PLAN - no guns or violence involved and actually unneeded and not anticipated . The fake electors are in this ring This protest unintentionally became a riotous mob and thus became a weapon for the outer ring of insurrection. See (3)

​

(2) The call to peaceful but wild protest at the White House on JAN6 circle. It Brought 30,000 I believe to bring attention to what was going on inside the WH

NFBW wrote: the 20,000 to 30,000 protesters that Trump lured to DC were one unified weapon of the insurrection whether they individually breached the Capitol or not. @Correll is absolutely stunned that he put in writing that the concept that Trump brought the weapon on Jan 6 makes logical sense 22JAN19-POST#1000​

​

(3) The Elmer Rhodes circle of indictments defines the militia aspect of the attack. They didn’t bring guns because (2) above the mob was used as a weapon.

I am comfortable assigning “insurrection” as a label to all three and would love to read your objections if any, Thanks.

22FEB04-POST#1115

 

[jc456]

NFBW wrote: I have written extensively that the Jan6 event in DC has three rings or circles around one common intent to overturn the election: Stop the transfer of power on Jan20.

(1) Inside the White House circle with Trump involved engaged to carry out the EASTMAN PLAN - no guns or violence involved and actually unneeded and not anticipated . The fake electors are in this ring This protest unintentionally became a mib and thus became a weapon or the insurrection.

​

(2) The call to peaceful but wild protest at the White House on JAN6 circle. It Brought 30,000 I believe to bring attention to what was going on inside the WH

NFBW wrote: the 20,000 to 30,000 protesters that Trump lured to DC were one unified weapon of the insurrection whether they individually breached the Capitol or not. @Correll is absolutely stunned that he put in writing that the concept that Trump brought the weapon on Jan 6 makes logical sense 22JAN19-POST#1000​

​

(3) The Elmer Rhodes circle of indictments defines the militia aspect of the attack. They didn’t bring guns because (2) above the mob was used as a weapon.

I am comfortable assigning “insurrection” as a label to all three and would love to read your objections if any, Thanks.

22FEB04-POST#1115

The election was overturned. The big cheat won

 

[BackAgain]

NFBW wrote: I have written extensively that the Jan6 event in DC has three rings or circles around one common intent to overturn the election: Stop the transfer of power on Jan20.

(1) Inside the White House circle with Trump involved engaged to carry out the EASTMAN PLAN - no guns or violence involved and actually unneeded and not anticipated . The fake electors are in this ring This protest unintentionally became a riotous mob and thus became a weapon for the outer ring of insurrection. See (3)

​

(2) The call to peaceful but wild protest at the White House on JAN6 circle. It Brought 30,000 I believe to bring attention to what was going on inside the WH

NFBW wrote: the 20,000 to 30,000 protesters that Trump lured to DC were one unified weapon of the insurrection whether they individually breached the Capitol or not. @Correll is absolutely stunned that he put in writing that the concept that Trump brought the weapon on Jan 6 makes logical sense 22JAN19-POST#1000​

​

(3) The Elmer Rhodes circle of indictments defines the militia aspect of the attack. They didn’t bring guns because (2) above the mob was used as a weapon.

I am comfortable assigning “insurrection” as a label to all three and would love to read your objections if any, Thanks.

22FEB04-POST#1115

Much has been written about all of this. Some by me. So, I’ll cut through the smoke.

The usual definition of insurrection Does involve violence. The violence to overthrow a government requires more than a couple of flagpoles and thrown fire extinguishers. The protestors were not armed. Not insurrection.

The purpose of an insurrection is supposedly to overthrow a government (which is clearly not what happened) OR to impede the operation of some facet of government. If we stipulate that the ones who trespassed at the Capitol were seeking to prevent the certification of the election, the intent is close. But no cigar. Because the “certification” was believed (by them) (and with or without a valid factual basis) to be the culmination of a theft of the lawful government. Thus their intent was different than the one required by law.

A “mob” that small wouldn’t qualify as any threat at all to the existence of our lawful government — Not even to the Congressional ability to proceed to the required “certification.”

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The election was overturned. The big cheat won

NFBW wrote: If DJT says it - it must be true. But if Trump calls my peaceful lawful vote against his regime of lies and hate, an insurrection, I can use insurrection to define (1) The Eastman Coup Plot Conspirators (2) The Jan6 protesters who today defined by the RNC as WERE engaged in “legitimate political discourse” on Jan6 (3) GUN GUT GOD militia members and other militant rabble that stormed the Capitol
22FEB04-POST#1118

The purpose of an insurrection is supposedly to overthrow a government (which is clearly not what happened) OR to impede the operation of some facet of government.

NFBW wrote: DICTIONARY.com has no context in the first definition re: overthrowing a government.

​

Insurrection: an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.​

I can make a case that (1) (2) (3) above wanted to stop the peaceful transfer of power on Jan20 which is overthrowing the INCOMING government.

Nevertheless I’ll take the actual meaning And use it’s words

“an act or instance” DJT rally, fake electors, pressure on Pence, militia plots, travel to DC, stockpile firearms across the Potomac, crushing a cop trapped in a door

“of rising in resistance” to the peaceful transfer of power

“against (the) civil authority” of a live active Joint Session of Congress with the Vice President presiding

“ (of) an established government.” The UNITED STATES of AMERICA

. . . All at the behest of a sitting United States president in the hopes of remaining in power after losing the election

it is an insurrection from almost every angle that you look at it
22FEB04-POST#1118

 

[BackAgain]

NFBW wrote: If DJT says it - it must be true. But if Trump calls my peaceful lawful vote against his regime of lies and hate, an insurrection, I can use insurrection to define (1) The Eastman Coup Plot Conspirators (2) The Jan6 protesters who today defined by the RNC as WERE engaged in “legitimate political discourse” on Jan6 (3) GUN GUT GOD militia members and other militant rabble that stormed the Capitol





NFBW wrote: DICTIONARY.com has no context in the first definition re: overthrowing a government.

​

Insurrection: an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.​

I can make a case that (1) (2) (3) above wanted to stop the peaceful transfer of power on Jan20 which is overthrowing the INCOMING government.

Nevertheless I’ll take the actual meaning And use it’s words

“an act or instance” DJT rally, fake electors, pressure on Pence, militia plots, travel to DC, stockpile firearms across the Potomac, crushing a cop trapped in a door

“of rising in resistance” to the peaceful transfer of power

“against (the) civil authority” of a live active Joint Session of Congress with the Vice President presiding

“ (of) an established government.” The UNITED STATES of AMERICA

. . . All at the behest of a sitting United States president in the hopes of remaining in power after losing the election

it is an insurrection from almost every angle that you look at it
22FEB04-POST#1118

Look up the legal definition. It simply is not and never was an insurrection or an attempt at an insurrection.

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection​

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.​

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Look up the legal definition

I have cited DJT’s use of the NON-LEGAL definition of “insurrection” when he called my peaceful lawful vote against his regime of lies and hate, an insurrection.

I think it fair that I use insurrection to define . . . , DJT’s (1) Eastman Coup Plot Conspirators . . . . and DJT’s (2) Jan6 protesters who today defined by the RNC as WERE engaged in “legitimate political discourse” on Jan6 . . . . DJT’s (3) GUN GUT GOD militia members and other militant rabble that stormed the Capitol

Why can’t I ? 22FEB04-POST#1120