Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

Osodecentx said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

I think anyone who broke the law and committed violence on Jan. 6th needs to be held accountable. I've said that from day one. So, how is that "excusing" them?

Like you, I do wish Trump would go away. The difference between us is I don't let my personal dislike of the man make me nuts. I still have the ability to think rationally.

---

You're allegiance to your narrative determines your response

Video of mostly peaceful Jan 6 insurrection
HBO trailer 2 hours of mostly peaceful mob

---

I notice you didn't answer my question. Let me repeat it in case you missed it.

How is not believing this was a violent insurrection excusing the protestors who committed violence?

The only one married to a narrative here is you, bro.

---

Cool answer, Bro

---

Are you scared to answer my question? Too difficult for you?

Huh. Never figured you for a coward.

---

It's a fiction.
This was an insurrection trying to install the losing candidate as POTUS

You're spiinning Trump's narrative

Did I answer your question?

---

How could they have installed the losing candidate?

---

I don't think they could. They believed they could.
A stupid bank robber still tried to rob the bank

---

Harassing the tellers and the manager doesn't make you a bank robber.

---

What about throwing hammers, injuring 140 policemen, violently breaking in, and disrupting a Constitutionally delegated duty at the direction of the losing candidate?

---

Yeah, they harassed the hell out of them. That's what rioters do.

---

Rioters "harassed" police?

---

Use the term of your choosing. I was sticking with my analogy theme.

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

We call that fantastical projection. I couldn't imagine how many insurrections we've had thus far taking all the things people said they wanted to do to politicians or the government or the outcome of an election.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

I think anyone who broke the law and committed violence on Jan. 6th needs to be held accountable. I've said that from day one. So, how is that "excusing" them?

Like you, I do wish Trump would go away. The difference between us is I don't let my personal dislike of the man make me nuts. I still have the ability to think rationally.

---

You're allegiance to your narrative determines your response

Video of mostly peaceful Jan 6 insurrection
HBO trailer 2 hours of mostly peaceful mob

---

I notice you didn't answer my question. Let me repeat it in case you missed it.

How is not believing this was a violent insurrection excusing the protestors who committed violence?

The only one married to a narrative here is you, bro.

---

Cool answer, Bro

---

Are you scared to answer my question? Too difficult for you?

Huh. Never figured you for a coward.

---

It's a fiction.
This was an insurrection trying to install the losing candidate as POTUS

You're spiinning Trump's narrative

Did I answer your question?

---

It was indeed violent Listen to Capitol Police. Our eyes don't lie. 1/6 was violent and an insurrection

---

RIP Ashley Babbitt. Should you ****ers attempt to steal another election, you are gonna see what a REAL insurrection looks like! That is not a threat. It is a promise.

---

Good luck.
And may Ms Bobbitt Rest In Peace as well as the officer who died

Waco1947 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

I think anyone who broke the law and committed violence on Jan. 6th needs to be held accountable. I've said that from day one. So, how is that "excusing" them?

Like you, I do wish Trump would go away. The difference between us is I don't let my personal dislike of the man make me nuts. I still have the ability to think rationally.

---

You're allegiance to your narrative determines your response

Video of mostly peaceful Jan 6 insurrection
HBO trailer 2 hours of mostly peaceful mob

---

I notice you didn't answer my question. Let me repeat it in case you missed it.

How is not believing this was a violent insurrection excusing the protestors who committed violence?

The only one married to a narrative here is you, bro.

---

Cool answer, Bro

---

Are you scared to answer my question? Too difficult for you?

Huh. Never figured you for a coward.

---

It's a fiction.
This was an insurrection trying to install the losing candidate as POTUS

You're spiinning Trump's narrative

Did I answer your question?

---

It was indeed violent Listen to Capitol Police. Our eyes don't lie. 1/6 was violent and an insurrection

---

RIP Ashley Babbitt. Should you ****ers attempt to steal another election, you are gonna see what a REAL insurrection looks like! That is not a threat. It is a promise.

---

Good luck.
And may Ms Bobbitt Rest In Peace as well as the officer who died

---

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/capitol-police-officer-brian-sicknick-died-natural-causes-after-riot-n1264562

One died of natural causes and one was murdered. Zero accountability with you people. None.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

You aren't a conservative. Your lies demonstrate that fact.

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

---

I saw some violent protestors on the video, and many that weren't. That does not make it fit within the definition of insurrection.

But the question remains why you continue to bring it up. What purpose do you think you are accomplishing, if any?

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

---

That does not make it fit within the definition of insurrection. No

But the question remains why you continue to bring it up. What purpose do you think you are accomplishing, if any?

---

No

Because it happened. Truth is usually beneficial. We lost confidence in Obama, Trump and Biden because they weren't honest with us.
The thread began 11 days ago. I answer posters who post.

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

---

That does not make it fit within the definition of insurrection. No

But the question remains why you continue to bring it up. What purpose do you think you are accomplishing, if any?

---

No

Because it happened. Truth is usually beneficial. We lost confidence in Obama, Trump and Biden because they weren't honest with us.
The thread began 11 days ago. I answer posters who post.

---

Please identify the leaders of this alleged organized attempt to overthrow the U.S. govt. Who were they? And what were their plans and stated aims? What weapons were employed to do take control of the govt.? If this was undoubtedly an insurrection and not some spontaneous, disorganized protest in which some members became violent, surely you can answer these questions.

Opinions are not the same as truth, just FYI.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

---

That does not make it fit within the definition of insurrection. No

But the question remains why you continue to bring it up. What purpose do you think you are accomplishing, if any?

---

No

Because it happened. Truth is usually beneficial. We lost confidence in Obama, Trump and Biden because they weren't honest with us.
The thread began 11 days ago. I answer posters who post.

---

Opinions are not the same as truth, just FYI.

---

I couldn't have said it better.

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

---

That does not make it fit within the definition of insurrection. No

But the question remains why you continue to bring it up. What purpose do you think you are accomplishing, if any?

---

No

Because it happened. Truth is usually beneficial. We lost confidence in Obama, Trump and Biden because they weren't honest with us.
The thread began 11 days ago. I answer posters who post.

---

Opinions are not the same as truth, just FYI.

---

I couldn't have said it better.

---

I am not so sure. You don't appear to understand the difference between your interpretation of the events of 1/6 and the truth.

I look forward to you answering the questions posed.

The problem with all this back and forth is that the word "insurrection" is not defined in the law. It is stated as being a crime and what the punishment for it is, but does not specify what is necessary to meet the definition.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383

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.

Most legal commentary I have read on this has stated that is partly why it has been so rarely charged.

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

---

If you can't find the answer to your question in my post you need some new readers. Round, square, they just need to work for your eye balls.

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

---

If you can't find the answer to your question in my post you need some new readers. Round, square, they just need to work for your eye balls.

---

It's humorous that you think what the crowd chanted, and what a few defendants said in court hearings evidences a meeting of the minds on an organized insurrection with stated goals.

In truth, we need look no further than the charges brought to see the fiction you are perpetuating. I understand your motivations for perpetuating that fiction.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

I think anyone who broke the law and committed violence on Jan. 6th needs to be held accountable. I've said that from day one. So, how is that "excusing" them?

Like you, I do wish Trump would go away. The difference between us is I don't let my personal dislike of the man make me nuts. I still have the ability to think rationally.

---

You're allegiance to your narrative determines your response

Video of mostly peaceful Jan 6 insurrection
HBO trailer 2 hours of mostly peaceful mob

---

I notice you didn't answer my question. Let me repeat it in case you missed it.

How is not believing this was a violent insurrection excusing the protestors who committed violence?

The only one married to a narrative here is you, bro.

---

Cool answer, Bro

---

Are you scared to answer my question? Too difficult for you?

Huh. Never figured you for a coward.

---

It's a fiction.
This was an insurrection trying to install the losing candidate as POTUS

You're spiinning Trump's narrative

Did I answer your question?

---

It was indeed violent Listen to Capitol Police. Our eyes don't lie. 1/6 was violent and an insurrection

---

RIP Ashley Babbitt. Should you ****ers attempt to steal another election, you are gonna see what a REAL insurrection looks like! That is not a threat. It is a promise.

---

Good luck.
And may Ms Bobbitt Rest In Peace as well as the officer who died

---

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/capitol-police-officer-brian-sicknick-died-natural-causes-after-riot-n1264562

One died of natural causes and one was murdered. Zero accountability with you people. None.

---

What would demonstrate accountability?

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection.

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. Let Biden do fiction. Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th.

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

---

That does not make it fit within the definition of insurrection. No

But the question remains why you continue to bring it up. What purpose do you think you are accomplishing, if any?

---

No

Because it happened. Truth is usually beneficial. We lost confidence in Obama, Trump and Biden because they weren't honest with us.
The thread began 11 days ago. I answer posters who post.

---

Opinions are not the same as truth, just FYI.

---

I couldn't have said it better.

---

I am not so sure. You don't appear to understand the difference between your interpretation of the events of 1/6 and the truth.

I look forward to you answering the questions posed.

---

Look, I'm OK, you're OK. We disagree. There is no chance I will change your mind, and that's OK

There is no chance you will change my mind. Let's just agree to disagree.

Insults and snark won't do it.

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. %A0They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection. %A0

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. %A0Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. %A0Let Biden do fiction. %A0Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. %A0And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. %A0You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. %A0Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. %A0That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th. %A0

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. %A0Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. %A0But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

---

That does not make it fit within the definition of insurrection. %A0No

But the question remains why you continue to bring it up. %A0What purpose do you think you are accomplishing, if any?

---

No

Because it happened. %A0Truth is usually beneficial. %A0We lost confidence in Obama, Trump and Biden because they weren't honest with us.
The thread began 11 days ago. %A0I answer posters who post.

---

Opinions are not the same as truth, just FYI. %A0

---

I couldn't have said it better.

---

I am not so sure. %A0You don't appear to understand the difference between your interpretation of the events of 1/6 and the truth.

I look forward to you answering the questions posed.

---

Look, I'm OK, you're OK. %A0We disagree. %A0There is no chance I will change your mind, and that's OK

There is no chance you will change my mind. %A0Let's just agree to disagree. %A0

Insults and snark won't do it.

---

That is fine, but I remain curious what you think insisting it was an insurrection accomplishes, other than hurting conservatives. If you care to discuss, let me know.

Waco1947 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

I think anyone who broke the law and committed violence on Jan. 6th needs to be held accountable. I've said that from day one. So, how is that "excusing" them?

Like you, I do wish Trump would go away. The difference between us is I don't let my personal dislike of the man make me nuts. I still have the ability to think rationally.

---

You're allegiance to your narrative determines your response

Video of mostly peaceful Jan 6 insurrection
HBO trailer 2 hours of mostly peaceful mob

---

I notice you didn't answer my question. Let me repeat it in case you missed it.

How is not believing this was a violent insurrection excusing the protestors who committed violence?

The only one married to a narrative here is you, bro.

---

Cool answer, Bro

---

Are you scared to answer my question? Too difficult for you?

Huh. Never figured you for a coward.

---

It's a fiction.
This was an insurrection trying to install the losing candidate as POTUS

You're spiinning Trump's narrative

Did I answer your question?

---

It was indeed violent Listen to Capitol Police. Our eyes don't lie. 1/6 was violent and an insurrection

---

RIP Ashley Babbitt. Should you ****ers attempt to steal another election, you are gonna see what a REAL insurrection looks like! That is not a threat. It is a promise.

---

Good luck.
And may Ms Bobbitt Rest In Peace as well as the officer who died

---

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/capitol-police-officer-brian-sicknick-died-natural-causes-after-riot-n1264562

One died of natural causes and one was murdered. Zero accountability with you people. None.

---

What would demonstrate accountability?

---

A cop that murders an unarmed civilian goes to prison. That is accountablity. He wasn't even indicted.

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

No doubt about it. %A0They handed Pelosi and Schumer a big stick with which to hit us

I guess hanging the VP would have been described as "really harassing"

---

What's ironic is conservatives such as yourself unwittingly put that stick in their hand by continuing to insist it was a violent insurrection. %A0

You just give them more fodder to feed the narrative.

---

By calling an insurrection a riot doesn't change what it was. %A0Attacking the Capitol handed them the stick, calling it a "riot" is just fiction. %A0Let Biden do fiction. %A0Conservatives do facts.

---

By continuing to insist that a protest/riot is an insurrection, you put the stick in their hand by which they will bludgeon us. %A0And you are seeing them try to use it for political purposes. %A0You, and those like you, are mere pawns that they will use to achieve their political goals.

I am all in favor of dealing in facts instead of fiction. %A0Here are some facts: An insurrection is an organized attempt by a group of people to take control of their country, usually by violence. %A0That is simply not what happened on Jan. 6th. %A0

You would cut off your nose to spite your face.

---

We disagree. %A0Telling people it wasn't an insurrection doesn't make it so.

---

Nor does telling people it was an insurrection make it so. %A0But more importantly, it doesn't serve any constructive purpose, which is why it's curious you continue to spout it.

---

Because it happened

Denial won't work when people look at the video

---

That does not make it fit within the definition of insurrection. %A0No

But the question remains why you continue to bring it up. %A0What purpose do you think you are accomplishing, if any?

---

No

Because it happened. %A0Truth is usually beneficial. %A0We lost confidence in Obama, Trump and Biden because they weren't honest with us.
The thread began 11 days ago. %A0I answer posters who post.

---

Opinions are not the same as truth, just FYI. %A0

---

I couldn't have said it better.

---

I am not so sure. %A0You don't appear to understand the difference between your interpretation of the events of 1/6 and the truth.

I look forward to you answering the questions posed.

---

Look, I'm OK, you're OK. %A0We disagree. %A0There is no chance I will change your mind, and that's OK

There is no chance you will change my mind. %A0Let's just agree to disagree. %A0

Insults and snark won't do it.

---

That is fine, but I remain curious what you think insisting it was an insurrection accomplishes, other than hurting conservatives. If you care to discuss, let me know.

---

Sent PM

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

---

If you can't find the answer to your question in my post you need some new readers. Round, square, they just need to work for your eye balls.

---

It's humorous that you think what the crowd chanted, and what a few defendants said in court hearings evidences a meeting of the minds on an organized insurrection with stated goals.

In truth, we need look no further than the charges brought to see the fiction you are perpetuating. I understand your motivations for perpetuating that fiction.

---

You have a serious lack of honesty. You know what the motivation for the mob was, overthrowing the election, and yet you decide that doesn't matter because it wasn't organized enough?

And I've only said it dozens of times, but the state rarely charges anyone with treason or insurrection, due to how the law defines both, and the power of the First Amendment. That doesn't mean insurrection never happens, just that the state normally has plenty other things they can get an insurrectionist on.

If you are bringing up court proceedings, guess how many judges called it an insurrection?

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

---

If you can't find the answer to your question in my post you need some new readers. Round, square, they just need to work for your eye balls.

---

It's humorous that you think what the crowd chanted, and what a few defendants said in court hearings evidences a meeting of the minds on an organized insurrection with stated goals.

In truth, we need look no further than the charges brought to see the fiction you are perpetuating. I understand your motivations for perpetuating that fiction.

---

You have a serious lack of honesty. You know what the motivation for the mob was, overthrowing the election, and yet you decide that doesn't matter because it wasn't organized enough?

And I've only said it dozens of times, but the state rarely charges anyone with treason or insurrection, due to how the law defines both, and the power of the First Amendment. That doesn't mean insurrection never happens, just that the state normally has plenty other things they can get an insurrectionist on.

If you are bringing up court proceedings, guess how many judges called it an insurrection?

---

The only person being dishonest here is you. The protest revolved around a demand that Pence and Congress reject Biden's victory, due to perceived voter fraud. I've given you the definition of insurrection, and this protest doesn't come close to falling within that definition.

If it's not an insurrection under the law, it's not an insurrection.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Dayum!! I guess in his next life he wants to come back as a Chicago or San Francisco smash and grabber! Great to see our DOJ cracking down and getting tough on crime.

---

ATL Bear said:

People who assault law enforcement officers deserve criminal punishment. It's not that hard to understand.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

I think anyone who broke the law and committed violence on Jan. 6th needs to be held accountable. I've said that from day one. So, how is that "excusing" them?

Like you, I do wish Trump would go away. The difference between us is I don't let my personal dislike of the man make me nuts. I still have the ability to think rationally.

---

You're allegiance to your narrative determines your response

Video of mostly peaceful Jan 6 insurrection
HBO trailer 2 hours of mostly peaceful mob

---

I notice you didn't answer my question. Let me repeat it in case you missed it.

How is not believing this was a violent insurrection excusing the protestors who committed violence?

The only one married to a narrative here is you, bro.

---

Cool answer, Bro

---

Are you scared to answer my question? Too difficult for you?

Huh. Never figured you for a coward.

---

It's a fiction.
This was an insurrection trying to install the losing candidate as POTUS

You're spiinning Trump's narrative

Did I answer your question?

---

It was indeed violent Listen to Capitol Police. Our eyes don't lie. 1/6 was violent and an insurrection

---

RIP Ashley Babbitt. Should you ****ers attempt to steal another election, you are gonna see what a REAL insurrection looks like! That is not a threat. It is a promise.

---

Good luck.
And may Ms Bobbitt Rest In Peace as well as the officer who died

---

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/capitol-police-officer-brian-sicknick-died-natural-causes-after-riot-n1264562

One died of natural causes and one was murdered. Zero accountability with you people. None.

---

What would demonstrate accountability?

---

A cop that murders an unarmed civilian goes to prison. That is accountability. He wasn't even indicted.

---

People who assault law enforcement officers deserve criminal punishment. It's not that hard to understand.
Atl Bear
She assaulted the Capitol and police officers. she, too, iss accountable.
In the words of a police officer dragged through a door window "What the f#### were you doing there?

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

---

If you can't find the answer to your question in my post you need some new readers. Round, square, they just need to work for your eye balls.

---

It's humorous that you think what the crowd chanted, and what a few defendants said in court hearings evidences a meeting of the minds on an organized insurrection with stated goals.

In truth, we need look no further than the charges brought to see the fiction you are perpetuating. I understand your motivations for perpetuating that fiction.

---

You have a serious lack of honesty. You know what the motivation for the mob was, overthrowing the election, and yet you decide that doesn't matter because it wasn't organized enough?

And I've only said it dozens of times, but the state rarely charges anyone with treason or insurrection, due to how the law defines both, and the power of the First Amendment. That doesn't mean insurrection never happens, just that the state normally has plenty other things they can get an insurrectionist on.

If you are bringing up court proceedings, guess how many judges called it an insurrection?

---

The only person being dishonest here is you. The protest revolved around a demand that Pence and Congress reject Biden's victory, due to perceived voter fraud. I've given you the definition of insurrection, and this protest doesn't come close to falling within that definition.

If it's not an insurrection under the law, it's not an insurrection.

---

insurrection an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.
Insurrectionist a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions)
Law the act or an instance of revolting especially violently against civil or political authority or against an established government also : the crime of inciting or engaging in such revolt whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States…

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

---

If you can't find the answer to your question in my post you need some new readers. Round, square, they just need to work for your eye balls.

---

It's humorous that you think what the crowd chanted, and what a few defendants said in court hearings evidences a meeting of the minds on an organized insurrection with stated goals.

In truth, we need look no further than the charges brought to see the fiction you are perpetuating. I understand your motivations for perpetuating that fiction.

---

You have a serious lack of honesty. You know what the motivation for the mob was, overthrowing the election, and yet you decide that doesn't matter because it wasn't organized enough?

And I've only said it dozens of times, but the state rarely charges anyone with treason or insurrection, due to how the law defines both, and the power of the First Amendment. That doesn't mean insurrection never happens, just that the state normally has plenty other things they can get an insurrectionist on.

If you are bringing up court proceedings, guess how many judges called it an insurrection?

---

The only person being dishonest here is you. The protest revolved around a demand that Pence and Congress reject Biden's victory, due to perceived voter fraud. I've given you the definition of insurrection, and this protest doesn't come close to falling within that definition.

If it's not an insurrection under the law, it's not an insurrection.

---

insurrection an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.
Insurrectionist a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions)
Law the act or an instance of revolting especially violently against civil or political authority or against an established government also : the crime of inciting or engaging in such revolt whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States…

---

imbecile
mb-sl, -sl
noun
A person who is considered foolish or stupid.
A person of moderate to severe mental ******ation having a mental age of from three to seven years and generally being capable of some degree of communication and performance of simple tasks under supervision. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.
One who is imbecile.

Canon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

---

If you can't find the answer to your question in my post you need some new readers. Round, square, they just need to work for your eye balls.

---

It's humorous that you think what the crowd chanted, and what a few defendants said in court hearings evidences a meeting of the minds on an organized insurrection with stated goals.

In truth, we need look no further than the charges brought to see the fiction you are perpetuating. I understand your motivations for perpetuating that fiction.

---

You have a serious lack of honesty. You know what the motivation for the mob was, overthrowing the election, and yet you decide that doesn't matter because it wasn't organized enough?

And I've only said it dozens of times, but the state rarely charges anyone with treason or insurrection, due to how the law defines both, and the power of the First Amendment. That doesn't mean insurrection never happens, just that the state normally has plenty other things they can get an insurrectionist on.

If you are bringing up court proceedings, guess how many judges called it an insurrection?

---

The only person being dishonest here is you. The protest revolved around a demand that Pence and Congress reject Biden's victory, due to perceived voter fraud. I've given you the definition of insurrection, and this protest doesn't come close to falling within that definition.

If it's not an insurrection under the law, it's not an insurrection.

---

insurrection an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.
Insurrectionist a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions)
Law the act or an instance of revolting especially violently against civil or political authority or against an established government also : the crime of inciting or engaging in such revolt whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States…

---

imbecile
mb-sl, -sl
noun
A person who is considered foolish or stupid.
A person of moderate to severe mental ******ation having a mental age of from three to seven years and generally being capable of some degree of communication and performance of simple tasks under supervision. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.
One who is imbecile.

---

Going for the brute force method? Call enough people enough names that you'll get the attention you are so desperate for?

I've said it a hundred times but again, Baylor should be teaching everyone logic 101. The absolute destruction of intelligent discourse is just pitiful to watch.

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Why is anyone adding the "violent" insurrection qualifier? Some attempt to muddy the waters?

It was definitely an insurrection. The mob had the stated purpose of overthrowing the election, arresting Pelosi, a few wanted to hang the Vice President. That's just what insurrections are.

---

Everyone in that crowd wanted to overthrow the election? Interesting. Link?

---

It's a bit late for you to start wanting details from Jan 6. I've been over this on this forum several times. You can Google what the crowd chanted, you can Google what they posted on Facebook during the insurrection, you can Google who they hunted around the Capitol for, what they said in their court hearings of their motivation, I mean you could inform yourself any number of ways, but in the end, they wanted to breach the Capitol at that specific time to prevent Congress from accepting the States' certified results, and instead accept the alternate group of electors Trump wanted, or revote in states he lost.

---

I suspect I am more informed than you on the events of Jan. 6th. I was just curious if you could answer the question, which would help fit your square peg in the round hole.

Apparently not.

---

If you can't find the answer to your question in my post you need some new readers. Round, square, they just need to work for your eye balls.

---

It's humorous that you think what the crowd chanted, and what a few defendants said in court hearings evidences a meeting of the minds on an organized insurrection with stated goals.

In truth, we need look no further than the charges brought to see the fiction you are perpetuating. I understand your motivations for perpetuating that fiction.

---

You have a serious lack of honesty. You know what the motivation for the mob was, overthrowing the election, and yet you decide that doesn't matter because it wasn't organized enough?

And I've only said it dozens of times, but the state rarely charges anyone with treason or insurrection, due to how the law defines both, and the power of the First Amendment. That doesn't mean insurrection never happens, just that the state normally has plenty other things they can get an insurrectionist on.

If you are bringing up court proceedings, guess how many judges called it an insurrection?

---

The only person being dishonest here is you. The protest revolved around a demand that Pence and Congress reject Biden's victory, due to perceived voter fraud. I've given you the definition of insurrection, and this protest doesn't come close to falling within that definition.

If it's not an insurrection under the law, it's not an insurrection.

---

Words have meaning. This was an attempt to unseat a legitimate government. It can rightfully be called an insurrection, as it meets the standard set by the dictionary.

You might think it wasn't a particularly violent insurrection, even though you admit there was violence.... Or that it wasn't organized enough, even though right wing hate groups definitely planned on storming the Capitol..... But your opinion is just that. It's not sufficient to overthrow the dictionary.

You're pretty obviously contesting the dictionary because you feel adhering to it would hurt conservatives. You actually said that. That's what I mean by lack of honesty.

Honest people don't save reason for when it's convenient. They don't filter their facts through what makes their side look like it's winning.