ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Actually a federal judge did declare it illegal. So did Trump's lawyer.

---

Maybe you can go to PACER and post that declaration.

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Actually a federal judge did declare it illegal. So did Trump's lawyer.

---

cite case docket number please

---

8:22-cv-00099-DOC-DFM.

---

oh yeah, that one..

Weak but valid

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

ATL Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Now for a dose of reality. Megan nails it. And the less you esteem Trump & Trumpers, the more compelling her points are.

Dave looks like he’s about to cry when Megyn Kelly schools him on Trump 2024. pic.twitter.com/EgsgtRbNEF

— Merissa Hansen🇺🇸🕵🏻‍♀️ (@MerissaHansen17) October 16, 2022

At some point, the obvious wisdom of Trump/Desantis will start to settle in.

---

The Trump political clown show needs to die. On both sides. DeSantis isn't hitching his wagon to that.

---

Agreed

Trump is politically self destructive.

Not with his fanatically loyal base of course …..but with independents , women and younger voters .

DeSantis has seen how Trump treated Pence and cabinet members . No way in the world would he accept the same treatment.

Trump needs to disappear and make room for someone who can win in 2024 .

---

I agree. Trump is being treated very un-American in the witch hunt to find some way to prosecute him for something. What the Dems are doing with the Jan 6th Commission and DOJ is right out of McCarthyism.

That said, Trump is political poison. He needs to have a PAC or a Lobby Group, but NOT run for public office. He is a disaster as an elected official. I like his policies, but his personality is too caustic to be able to Govern effectively.

I do believe the Dems made him this way, he was not like this in 2016 and seemed to honestly think he was going to be able to cut deals, thereby making DC work. But he went from a counter-puncher to Mike Tyson just uncontrollable.

---

Reality - People stormed the Capitol to bring down democracy

---

Oh boy...

---

Reality insurrectionists stormed is he Capitol

Waco1947 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Now for a dose of reality. Megan nails it. And the less you esteem Trump & Trumpers, the more compelling her points are.

Dave looks like he’s about to cry when Megyn Kelly schools him on Trump 2024. pic.twitter.com/EgsgtRbNEF

— Merissa Hansen🇺🇸🕵🏻‍♀️ (@MerissaHansen17) October 16, 2022

At some point, the obvious wisdom of Trump/Desantis will start to settle in.

---

The Trump political clown show needs to die. On both sides. DeSantis isn't hitching his wagon to that.

---

Agreed

Trump is politically self destructive.

Not with his fanatically loyal base of course …..but with independents , women and younger voters .

DeSantis has seen how Trump treated Pence and cabinet members . No way in the world would he accept the same treatment.

Trump needs to disappear and make room for someone who can win in 2024 .

---

I agree. Trump is being treated very un-American in the witch hunt to find some way to prosecute him for something. What the Dems are doing with the Jan 6th Commission and DOJ is right out of McCarthyism.

That said, Trump is political poison. He needs to have a PAC or a Lobby Group, but NOT run for public office. He is a disaster as an elected official. I like his policies, but his personality is too caustic to be able to Govern effectively.

I do believe the Dems made him this way, he was not like this in 2016 and seemed to honestly think he was going to be able to cut deals, thereby making DC work. But he went from a counter-puncher to Mike Tyson just uncontrollable.

---

Reality - People stormed the Capitol to bring down democracy

---

Oh boy...

---

Reality insurrectionists stormed is he Capitol

---

Reality proof Capitol diagram Sentence. NO English teach foreign when land in Remove err side on give.

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

The intent? Most of those people had no idea of any plan to over throw the Govt! They were in costume, taking selfies and sitting at desks with their feet up on Pelosi's desk. If anything it was a show of distaste and displeasure with the job they were doing. There was not specific intent to overturn Biden's election because it wan't possible by their actions. You really believe they thought there was the possibility their actions were going to do that? Really? Wearing a Shaman outfit and taking selfies.

You may have had some individuals that took advantage of the demonstration, but they were like looters at a BLM demonstration. The demonstration gave them cover, it was not set up for or by them.

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

The intent? Most of those people had no idea of any plan to over throw the Govt! They were in costume, taking selfies and sitting at desks with their feet up on Pelosi's desk. If anything it was a show of distaste and displeasure with the job they were doing. There was not specific intent to overturn Biden's election because it wan't possible by their actions. You really believe they thought there was the possibility their actions were going to do that? Really? Wearing a Shaman outfit and taking selfies.

You may have had some individuals that took advantage of the demonstration, but they were like looters at a BLM demonstration. The demonstration gave them cover, it was not set up for or by them.

---

the intent was when Trump tried to choke out a USS guy after throwing spaghetti..

4th and Inches said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

The intent? Most of those people had no idea of any plan to over throw the Govt! They were in costume, taking selfies and sitting at desks with their feet up on Pelosi's desk. If anything it was a show of distaste and displeasure with the job they were doing. There was not specific intent to overturn Biden's election because it wan't possible by their actions. You really believe they thought there was the possibility their actions were going to do that? Really? Wearing a Shaman outfit and taking selfies.

You may have had some individuals that took advantage of the demonstration, but they were like looters at a BLM demonstration. The demonstration gave them cover, it was not set up for or by them.

---

the intent was when Trump tried to choke out a USS guy after throwing spaghetti..

---

Oh yeah, when the White House Counsel tasked Cassidy with saving Democracy after she cleaned up the spaghetti....

You couldn't write this in an episode of South Park...

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

Wrong. It was a violent protest. There are many other factors that require it to be classified as an insurrection or rebellion. Framed or projected intent does not qualify.

---

I know my eyes saw.

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

The intent? Most of those people had no idea of any plan to over throw the Govt! They were in costume, taking selfies and sitting at desks with their feet up on Pelosi's desk. If anything it was a show of distaste and displeasure with the job they were doing. There was not specific intent to overturn Biden's election because it wan't possible by their actions. You really believe they thought there was the possibility their actions were going to do that? Really? Wearing a Shaman outfit and taking selfies.

You may have had some individuals that took advantage of the demonstration, but they were like looters at a BLM demonstration. The demonstration gave them cover, it was not set up for or by them.

---

Reality says you're wrong

Waco1947 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

Wrong. It was a violent protest. There are many other factors that require it to be classified as an insurrection or rebellion. Framed or projected intent does not qualify.

---

I know my eyes saw.

---

your eyes saw what they showed you and your ears heard what they told you but did you understand they showed you an incomplete picture?

They showed you kids in cages.. what really happened was kids at a protest

RMF5630 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

The intent? Most of those people had no idea of any plan to over throw the Govt! They were in costume, taking selfies and sitting at desks with their feet up on Pelosi's desk. If anything it was a show of distaste and displeasure with the job they were doing. There was not specific intent to overturn Biden's election because it wan't possible by their actions. You really believe they thought there was the possibility their actions were going to do that? Really? Wearing a Shaman outfit and taking selfies.

You may have had some individuals that took advantage of the demonstration, but they were like looters at a BLM demonstration. The demonstration gave them cover, it was not set up for or by them.

---

the intent was when Trump tried to choke out a USS guy after throwing spaghetti..

---

Oh yeah, when the White House Counsel tasked Cassidy with saving Democracy after she cleaned up the spaghetti....

---

It's "Our Democracy." And Trump beat up Vince McMahon. I saw it on the Tee-Vee.

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

Wrong. It was a violent protest. There are many other factors that require it to be classified as an insurrection or rebellion. Framed or projected intent does not qualify.

---

There are certainly many different connotations that spring to mind for different people, and many "factors" they might try to tack on, depending on whose ox is being gored. But the definition really isn't that complicated.

We need 24/7 January 6 and overdue library books.

The economy is bad ass.

Inflation is transitory.

Your kids are not going to strip shows.

The border has not been surrendered to cartels and the Chinese.

TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP

ULTRAMAGATRONS!

THREAT TO DEMOCRACY!

Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams and Al Gore Jr. were rightfully elected!

In case you havent seen, we get a recession next year(after the red wave in november)

Media already laying the foundation

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

ATL Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

Wrong. It was a violent protest. There are many other factors that require it to be classified as an insurrection or rebellion. Framed or projected intent does not qualify.

---

I know my eyes saw.

---

You wouldn't know an insurrection from the resurrection.

---

LOL. Now that is both hilarious and completely accurate. Blue star.

4th and Inches said:

---

In case you havent seen, we get a recession next year(after the red wave in november)

Media already laying the foundation

---

Release the stories about increasing homelessness.

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

---

"Hang Made me Pence". Shows me intent.

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

---

"Hang Made me Pence". Shows me intent.

---

Does that show actual intent of the entire crowd, or is it a slogan chanted by some people that they may not mean literally? Have you interviewed everyone to ensure that a public hanging of Pence is what they desired?

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

---

"Hang Made me Pence". Shows me intent.

---

Does that show actual intent of the entire crowd, or is it a slogan chanted by some people that they may not mean literally? Have you interviewed everyone to ensure that a public hanging of Pence is what they desired?

---

You are begging the question which is did people yell it, did they assault police officers, did they the House of Representatives? That's question and yes they did.

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

---

"Hang Made me Pence". Shows me intent.

---

Does that show actual intent of the entire crowd, or is it a slogan chanted by some people that they may not mean literally? Have you interviewed everyone to ensure that a public hanging of Pence is what they desired?

---

You are begging the question which is did people yell it, did they assault police officers, did they the House of Representatives? That's question and yes they did.

---

Some people yelled it, and got rowdy and assaulted police officers. That doe snot prove intent of either those people, or the entire crowd of peaceful protestors.

For criminal purposes, you cannot lump them all together. Sorry.

BIBO.

- KKM

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

---

just remember.. The disruption of the Constitutional electoral certification process was timed perfectly, immediately after the first objection was raised but before the debate around it was to start.

It was tantamount to threading a needle at the perfect time..

J6 was an Op by portions of our Govt tjat used a bunch of useful idiots.
It's purpose was preventing the People from watching the 6 pairs of Senator/Rep from objecting to AZ, MI, PA, WI, GA, NV electors AND to demonize MAGA and create domestic terrorists where law fare could be used to crush dissent.

Worked perfectly.

As of today's date, no formal subpoena has been filed.. political theater

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

---

"Hang Made me Pence". Shows me intent.

---

Does that show actual intent of the entire crowd, or is it a slogan chanted by some people that they may not mean literally? Have you interviewed everyone to ensure that a public hanging of Pence is what they desired?

---

You are begging the question which is did people yell it, did they assault police officers, did they the House of Representatives? That's question and yes they did.

---

Some people yelled it, and got rowdy and assaulted police officers. That doe snot prove intent of either those people, or the entire crowd of peaceful protestors.

For criminal purposes, you cannot lump them all together. Sorry.

---

Not rowdy but violent. Did you hear the officers talk about fearing for their lives?

4th and Inches said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

---

just remember.. The disruption of the Constitutional electoral certification process was timed perfectly, immediately after the first objection was raised but before the debate around it was to start.

It was tantamount to threading a needle at the perfect time..

J6 was an Op by portions of our Govt tjat used a bunch of useful idiots.
It's purpose was preventing the People from watching the 6 pairs of Senator/Rep from objecting to AZ, MI, PA, WI, GA, NV electors AND to demonize MAGA and create domestic terrorists where law fare could be used to crush dissent.

Worked perfectly.

---

that useful idiots demonized themselves. Oh yes and they were violent.
Take your red herrings and fake conspiracies away. Rational arguments only please

Waco1947 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The intent of a protest is essentially to persuade. It's the voicing of an opinion or demand and a show of unity with others of like mind. It becomes criminal when it crosses the line from persuasion to the threat or use of violence. It becomes an insurrection when people rebel against a governing authority per se (as opposed to a government policy). J6 was an insurrection because it was an attempt, by force and the threat of force, to deprive Joe Biden of his legitimate authority. That's not what protesters do.

---

Protests take many forms. Many protests are intended to disrupt, interrupt, and stop actions they disagree with. People tie themselves to trees, sit in roads and buildings, and sometimes resort to violence, whether through property destruction, fires, or worse. Because a protest engages in illegal actions doesn't make it an insurrection or a coup. People protest government authority ALL THE TIME not just policy, and is not a rebellion. That is the narrative that has been invented for a much more frightening purpose to turn political opposition into something more like terrorists. Because you so vehemently disagree with the purpose of the protestors does NOT make it any sort of insurrection or participants rebels.

---

None of that is inconsistent with the definitions I stated.

---

You are positing the intent was insurrection and rebellion, not protest. That is a big inconsistency.

---

It was. That's what separates J6 from all the other things you mentioned. Not just that it was illegal, or violent, or that I disagree with it, but the intent.

---

How did you determine intent from a crowd of thousands of people? Did you interview each of them?

---

just remember.. The disruption of the Constitutional electoral certification process was timed perfectly, immediately after the first objection was raised but before the debate around it was to start.

It was tantamount to threading a needle at the perfect time..

J6 was an Op by portions of our Govt tjat used a bunch of useful idiots.
It's purpose was preventing the People from watching the 6 pairs of Senator/Rep from objecting to AZ, MI, PA, WI, GA, NV electors AND to demonize MAGA and create domestic terrorists where law fare could be used to crush dissent.

Worked perfectly.

---

that useful idiots demonized themselves. Oh yes and they were violent.
Take your red herrings and fake conspiracies away. Rational arguments only please

---

you must be new here.. welcome!

JUST IN - Jan. 6 committee subpoenas Trump.https://t.co/NWbTjx6Zrj pic.twitter.com/JS3w2ymB5C

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) October 21, 2022

pic.twitter.com/wSTJVaHnuh

— Mostly Peaceful Memes (@MostlyPeacefull) October 21, 2022