Some Of The Biggest Lies Being Spread About The Jan. 6 Insurrection

[Rye Catcher]

The events from last Jan. 6 in Washington unfolded on live television but they've since been up for debate.

Millions of Americans watched the events in Washington last Jan. 6 unfold on live television. Police officers testified to the violence and mayhem. Criminal proceedings in open court detailed what happened.

Yet the hoaxes, conspiracy theories and attempts to rewrite history persist, muddying the public’s understanding of what actually occurred during the most sustained attack on the seat of American democracy since the War of 1812.

By excusing former President Donald Trump of responsibility, minimizing the mob’s violence and casting the rioters as martyrs, falsehoods about the insurrection aim to deflect blame for Jan. 6 while sustaining Trump’s unfounded claims about the free and fair election in 2020 that he lost.

Spread by politicians, broadcast by cable news pundits and amplified by social media, the falsehoods are a stark reminder of how many Americans may no longer trust their own institutions or their own eyes.

Several different conspiracy theories have emerged in the year since the insurrection, according to an analysis of online content by media intelligence firm Zignal Labs on behalf of The Associated Press. Unfounded claims that the rioters were members of antifa went viral first, only to be overtaken by a baseless claim blaming FBI operatives. Other theories say the rioters were peaceful and were framed for crimes that never happened.

Claim: The Rioters Weren’t Trump Supporters​

In fact, many of those who came to the Capitol on Jan. 6 have said — proudly, publicly, repeatedly — that they did so to help the then-president.

Claim: The Rioters Weren’t Violent​

Dozens of police officers were severely injured. One Capitol Police officer who was attacked and assaulted with bear spray suffered a stroke and died a day later of natural causes.

Claim: Trump Did Not Encourage The Rioters​

Trump may now want to minimize his involvement, but he spent months sounding a steadydrumbeat of conspiracy theory and grievance, urging his followers to fight to somehow return him to power.

Claim: Ashli Babbitt Was Killed By An Officer Working For Democrats​

Babbitt died after being shot in the shoulder by a lieutenant in the Capitol Police force as she and others pressed to enter the Speaker’s Lobby outside the House chamber.
Trump falsely claimed the officer was the head of security “for a certain high official, a Democrat,” and was being shielded from accountability. He also misstated where Babbitt was shot.

Claim: The Jan. 6 Suspects Are Political Prisoners And Are Being Mistreated​

No, they are not, despite some assertions from members of Congress.

While it’s true some of the suspects have complained about their time in jail, it’s wrong to argue they’re being held as political prisoners. Authorities have said the suspects in custody are being given the same access to food and medical care as any other inmate.

One of the most notorious rioters, Jacob Chansley, known as the QAnon Shaman, was given organic food in his jail cell after he complained about the food options.

Much more at the link below...

Some Of The Biggest Lies Being Spread About The Jan. 6 Insurrection

The events from last Jan. 6 in Washington unfolded on live television but they've since been up for debate.

www.huffpost.com

We all know what really happened on January 6 - so why do some people keep lying about it and spreading false conspiracy theories?

Q. "why do some people keep lying about it and spreading false conspiracy theories?"
A. Ask PoliticalChic, She(?) is the purveyor of BIG LIES, half-truths, rumors, innuendos, character assassinations and conspiracy stories (aka: fictions).

 

[BackAgain]

Some Of The Biggest Lies Being Spread About The Jan. 6 Insurrection​

You mean like the word “insurrection” itself?

 

[BULLDOG]

Q. "why do some people keep lying about it and spreading false conspiracy theories?"
A. Ask PoliticalChic, She(?) is the purveyor of BIG LIES, half-truths, rumors, innuendos, character assassinations and conspiracy stories (aka: fictions).

Duck tape a douche bag to a keyboard, and you have PoliticalChick.

 

[Rigby5]

Q. "why do some people keep lying about it and spreading false conspiracy theories?"
A. Ask PoliticalChic, She(?) is the purveyor of BIG LIES, half-truths, rumors, innuendos, character assassinations and conspiracy stories (aka: fictions).

I am very anti-Trump, but the truth is Congress is the worst gang of criminal on the planet, who constantly lie, murder millions of innocent people, and steal billions $.

And the police are their minions, started all the violence, and deserve anything anyone gave back.

Anyone defending Congress or the police is just a jerk.

 

[Rye Catcher]

I am very anti-Trump, but the truth is Congress is the worst gang of criminal on the planet, who constantly lie, murder millions of innocent people, and steal billions $.

And the police are their minions, started all the violence, and deserve anything anyone gave back.

Anyone defending Congress or the police is just a jerk.

I guess in your eyes I'm a jerk. I spent a career in law enforcement and very few officers, deputies, agents were the minions who started violence.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Some Of The Biggest Lies Being Spread About The Jan. 6 Insurrection​

You mean like the word “insurrection” itself?

From one who should know:

• Oath Keeper Pleads Guilty to Capitol Insurrection Charges Graydon Young, a member of the right-wing militia group, pleaded guilty to two felony charges related to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Erika Williams / June 23, 2021 Insurrectionists loyal to President Donald Trump breach the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.

Oath Keeper Pleads Guilty to Capitol Insurrection Charges ...​

www.courthousenews.com/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-to-capitol-insurrection-charges/

 

[lantern2814]

From one who should know:

• Oath Keeper Pleads Guilty to Capitol Insurrection Charges Graydon Young, a member of the right-wing militia group, pleaded guilty to two felony charges related to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Erika Williams / June 23, 2021 Insurrectionists loyal to President Donald Trump breach the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.

Oath Keeper Pleads Guilty to Capitol Insurrection Charges ...​

www.courthousenews.com/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-to-capitol-insurrection-charges/

Yet there was no insurrection charge. Still at zero over a year later.

 

[Rigby5]

I guess in your eyes I'm a jerk. I spent a career in law enforcement and very few officers, deputies, agents were the minions who started violence.

I have very little respect for anyone in law enforcement, considering we have the largest % imprisoned in the world, with lots of illegal legislation, like the War on Drugs, mandatory sentences, asset forfeiture, etc.
I ran into confrontations with the police constantly back during the Vietnam protests, and the police were always totally corrupt, violent, bigoted, hateful, brutal, and ignorant of the law.
Most of the federal government is totally illegal, like the BATF, DEA, FDA, CDC, etc.
The constitution is clear the feds can only legally do what the constitution specifically authorizes.
None of these departments are legally authorized.

Vietnam was already settled by the French and Vietnamese, and there was supposed to be an election in 1955, that we illegally prevented.
The invasion of Iraq was completely illegal, and the whole point of creating the UN was to prevent these sorts of illegal arbitrary invasions.
With Libya, we essentially massacred the domestic troops to al Qaeda and ISIS extremists from Iraq and Egypt could take over.
Congress illegally spends over half the national budget on the military, and legally there is not even supposed to be a standing military.
With the Ukraine, they violated the treaties and engaged in criminal activities, so we are aiding and abetting criminals by giving them weapons.

 

[Rigby5]

From one who should know:

• Oath Keeper Pleads Guilty to Capitol Insurrection Charges Graydon Young, a member of the right-wing militia group, pleaded guilty to two felony charges related to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Erika Williams / June 23, 2021 Insurrectionists loyal to President Donald Trump breach the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.

Oath Keeper Pleads Guilty to Capitol Insurrection Charges ...​

www.courthousenews.com/oath-keeper-pleads-guilty-to-capitol-insurrection-charges/

Read more carefully.

{... (CN) --- A member of right-wing militia group Oath Keepers pleaded guilty on Wednesday to felony conspiracy and obstruction charges related to the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection. ...}

NO INSURRECTION CHARGE.
Charges of "felony conspiracy" and "obstruction" are NOT insurrection charges.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I have very little respect for anyone in law enforcement, considering we have the largest % imprisoned in the world, with lots of illegal legislation, like the War on Drugs, mandatory sentences, asset forfeiture, etc.
I ran into confrontations with the police constantly back during the Vietnam protests, and the police were always totally corrupt, violent, bigoted, hateful, brutal, and ignorant of the law.
Most of the federal government is totally illegal, like the BATF, DEA, FDA, CDC, etc.
The constitution is clear the feds can only legally do what the constitution specifically authorizes.
None of these departments are legally authorized.

Vietnam was already settled by the French and Vietnamese, and there was supposed to be an election in 1955, that we illegally prevented.
The invasion of Iraq was completely illegal, and the whole point of creating the UN was to prevent these sorts of illegal arbitrary invasions.
With Libya, we essentially massacred the domestic troops to al Qaeda and ISIS extremists from Iraq and Egypt could take over.
Congress illegally spends over half the national budget on the military, and legally there is not even supposed to be a standing military.
With the Ukraine, they violated the treaties and engaged in criminal activities, so we are aiding and abetting criminals by giving them weapons.

Where do you get the idea there is not supposed to be a standing army? The Constitution does NOT say that or imply it. The only restriction is that no military Budget can be more then 2 years old.

 

[Rigby5]

Where do you get the idea there is not supposed to be a standing army? The Constitution does NOT say that or imply it. The only restriction is that no military Budget can be more then 2 years old.

Wrong.
The only thing the constitution authorizes is funding for the military in times of war.
In all other times, it was not supposed to exist.
That is not only factual as to what was done at the time, but also is detailed by other writings by the founders.
They wanted citizen soldiers ONLY because they correctly did not trust a standing military, and one should never have been created.
We actually did not have a permanent standing military until around 1900.
If you notice, before then each division was created, armed, and uniformed by the individual states, and did not all wear the same uniform.

If there was to be a peacetime standing army, then the Constitution has to explicitly authorize it, and it does not.
{...
There are instruments so dangerous to the rights of the nation, and which place them so totally at the mercy of their governors, that those governors, whether legislative or executive, should be restrained from keeping such instruments on foot, but in well-defined cases. Such an instrument is a standing army.
Thomas Jefferson to David Humphreys, 1789, 549
...}

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Wrong.
The only thing the constitution authorizes is funding for the military in times of war.
In all other times, it was not supposed to exist.
That is not only factual as to what was done at the time, but also is detailed by other writings by the founders.
They wanted citizen soldiers ONLY because they correctly did not trust a standing military, and one should never have been created.
We actually did not have a permanent standing military until around 1900.
If you notice, before then each division was created, armed, and uniformed by the individual states, and did not all wear the same uniform.

If there was to be a peacetime standing army, then the Constitution has to explicitly authorize it, and it does not.
{...
There are instruments so dangerous to the rights of the nation, and which place them so totally at the mercy of their governors, that those governors, whether legislative or executive, should be restrained from keeping such instruments on foot, but in well-defined cases. Such an instrument is a standing army.
Thomas Jefferson to David Humphreys, 1789, 549
...}

LOL quote where the Constitution does not allow a standing army, Be specific and quote the exact passage with reference to article and section.

 

[Rigby5]

LOL quote where the Constitution does not allow a standing army, Be specific and quote the exact passage with reference to article and section.

Sorry, but that shows you do not understand the basics of the constitution.
If you read the 9th and 10th amendments, is clearly says that the feds are only authorized to do what the constitution specifically allows.
So no one should expect there to be a negative forbidding a standing army, but just the lack of any authorization for a standing army.
And there is no such authorization for a standing army.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Sorry, but that shows you do not understand the basics of the constitution.
If you read the 9th and 10th amendments, is clearly says that the feds are only authorized to do what the constitution specifically allows.
So no one should expect there to be a negative forbidding a standing army, but just the lack of any authorization for a standing army.
And there is no such authorization for a standing army.

Congress specifically has the power to create a standing army via the military budget it is allowed to create and pay for.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Sorry, but that shows you do not understand the basics of the constitution.
If you read the 9th and 10th amendments, is clearly says that the feds are only authorized to do what the constitution specifically allows.
So no one should expect there to be a negative forbidding a standing army, but just the lack of any authorization for a standing army.
And there is no such authorization for a standing army.

section 8 article 1 of the US Constitution. To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; The Constitution - Full Text | The National Constitution Center

 

[Rigby5]

Congress specifically has the power to create a standing army via the military budget it is allowed to create and pay for.

Being authorized to pay for something when necessary in an emergency, does not imply you should pay for it all the time, or that you should create an armed force separate from, the state supplied citizen soldiers the Founders intended.
Basically, that amounts to an insurrection by congress, against the states who are supposed to be the real government.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Being authorized to pay for something when necessary in an emergency, does not imply you should pay for it all the time, or that you should create an armed force separate from, the state supplied citizen soldiers the Founders intended.
Basically, that amounts to an insurrection by congress, against the states who are supposed to be the real government.

I provided the power of congress to pay for the military so your claim is BULLSHIT.

 

[Rigby5]

section 8 article 1 of the US Constitution. To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; The Constitution - Full Text | The National Constitution Center

The constitution is not the place to look for explanations for how the Founders felt of what their intentions were.
It is intentionally a very sparse document, because they assumed those of similar believes would always be following them.
But it is clear to anyone who looks, that the Founders were strongly against a standing military, and for very good reasons.
Dictatorships are the norm, and they always come from the military and police.

{...

Just how opposed were the Founding Fathers to a standing army? ​

Their revolutionary experience of the founding fathers forged a deep mistrust of standing armies. They viewed them as a pernicious threat to liberty. Here are just a few quotes that explain how and why the idea (what we would call a police state today) was anathema to the first Americans.

During the Virginia ratifying convention, James Madison described a standing army as the “greatest mischief that can happen.”

In addition, fellow delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787, George Mason put a finer point on it:

“No man has a greater regard for the military gentlemen than I have. I admire their intrepidity, perseverance, and valor. But when once a standing army is established in any country, the people lose their liberty. When, against a regular and disciplined army, yeomanry are the only defence [sic], — yeomanry, unskilful and unarmed, — what chance is there for preserving freedom? Give me leave to recur to the page of history, to warn you of your present danger. Recollect the history of most nations of the world. What havoc, desolation, and destruction, have been perpetrated by standing armies!”

WAS A STANDING ARMY A THREAT TO THE FOUNDING FATHERS?​

In addition, in The Federalist, No. 29, Alexander Hamilton echoes not only Mason’s warning against a standing army, but his solution to the threat, as well.

If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.

In addition, commenting on Blackstone’s Commentaries, founding jurist St. George Tucker speaks as if he foresaw our day. He addresses the fatal combination of an increasingly militarized police force and the disarmament of civilians:

Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.

...}

Founding Fathers: Why They Opposed A Standing Army

The "Founding Fathers" went to great lengths to prevent the United States from having a standing army. Find out why. Charles M. Rowland II, 937-318-1DUI.

daytondui.com

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The constitution is not the place to look for explanations for how the Founders felt of what their intentions were.
It is intentionally a very sparse document, because they assumed those of similar believes would always be following them.
But it is clear to anyone who looks, that the Founders were strongly against a standing military, and for very good reasons.
Dictatorships are the norm, and they always come from the military and police.

{...

Just how opposed were the Founding Fathers to a standing army? ​

Their revolutionary experience of the founding fathers forged a deep mistrust of standing armies. They viewed them as a pernicious threat to liberty. Here are just a few quotes that explain how and why the idea (what we would call a police state today) was anathema to the first Americans.

During the Virginia ratifying convention, James Madison described a standing army as the “greatest mischief that can happen.”

In addition, fellow delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787, George Mason put a finer point on it:

WAS A STANDING ARMY A THREAT TO THE FOUNDING FATHERS?​

In addition, in The Federalist, No. 29, Alexander Hamilton echoes not only Mason’s warning against a standing army, but his solution to the threat, as well.


In addition, commenting on Blackstone’s Commentaries, founding jurist St. George Tucker speaks as if he foresaw our day. He addresses the fatal combination of an increasingly militarized police force and the disarmament of civilians:


...}

Founding Fathers: Why They Opposed A Standing Army

The "Founding Fathers" went to great lengths to prevent the United States from having a standing army. Find out why. Charles M. Rowland II, 937-318-1DUI.

daytondui.com

And yet they SPECIFICALLY gave Congress the power to raise and pay for a standing Army. No limits except that it be renewed every 2 years.

 

[Rigby5]

I provided the power of congress to pay for the military so your claim is BULLSHIT.

The ability to pay for the military means that one can be called up and funded if we are invaded.
It does not imply we should have a standing army, much less troops in Germany, Japan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, etc.