Guy Noir said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Which trial was this information suppressed? or was it not available at the time?

Did this new video offer proof that the old video did not happen? I did see some criminal behavior on the old video. If there is 59 minutes of a person being in good behavior and 1 minute of the person breaking the law, did not that person break the law?

Was anyone convicted of witchcraft at these trials?

---

Nope, and none were convicted of insurrection, either. Your ignorance of the facts on this topic is no defense of your opinion. I would suggest perusing the multiple threads here that contain posts with links to the news stories that came out that exposed suppressed videos from court cases, of the number of fbi assets involved from the very beginning, of the overcharging of protestors, and of the abuses that stemmed from the accusations by democrats. Once you catch up with the rest of us THEN and only then should you bring your opinions to the public forum. I doubt anyone will take the time to start at beginning and walk you through all the discoveries made since the 3 hour riot so it's up to you to do the work. You can do it, you're smart enough and I have faith in you.

---

Calling me ignorant is a cheap debate tactic. I objectively watched the Jan 6th hearings and there was quite a bit of evidence presented that people broke the law. Did you watch the Jan 6 Hearings? or did you and your friends just know that the information was wrong without objectively listening to it.

Stewart Rhodes (leader of the Oath Keepers) was convicted of Seditious Conspiracy.

---

I'm not calling you ignorant in general, just on this topic because it's obvious. Yes, you definitely sound like you watched the network executive produced spectacle put on by the democrats, thank you for being honest about where your disinformation comes from. And at this point, the same number of people have been convicted of witchcraft in these trials as there have been convictions of insurrection.

Guy Noir said:

---

Calling me uninformed?I think that many of your ilk are ignoring a lot of the things that happened.

---

you are a binary.. you quack like a duck.. your representatives love you, we the sheeple

Guy Noir said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Which trial was this information suppressed? or was it not available at the time?

Did this new video offer proof that the old video did not happen? I did see some criminal behavior on the old video. If there is 59 minutes of a person being in good behavior and 1 minute of the person breaking the law, did not that person break the law?

Was anyone convicted of witchcraft at these trials?

---

Nope, and none were convicted of insurrection, either. Your ignorance of the facts on this topic is no defense of your opinion. I would suggest perusing the multiple threads here that contain posts with links to the news stories that came out that exposed suppressed videos from court cases, of the number of fbi assets involved from the very beginning, of the overcharging of protestors, and of the abuses that stemmed from the accusations by democrats. Once you catch up with the rest of us THEN and only then should you bring your opinions to the public forum. I doubt anyone will take the time to start at beginning and walk you through all the discoveries made since the 3 hour riot so it's up to you to do the work. You can do it, you're smart enough and I have faith in you.

---

Calling me ignorant is a cheap debate tactic. I objectively watched the Jan 6th hearings and there was quite a bit of evidence presented that people broke the law. Did you watch the Jan 6 Hearings? or did you and your friends just know that the information was wrong without objectively listening to it.

Stewart Rhodes (leader of the Oath Keepers) was convicted of Seditious Conspiracy.

---

Seditious conspiracy is a crime in various jurisdictions of conspiring against the authority or legitimacy of the state. As a form of sedition, it has been described as a serious but lesser counterpart to treason, targeting activities that undermine the state without directly attacking it

insurrection
/ns-rkshn/

noun
The act or an instance of open revolt against civil authority or a constituted government.

The act of rising against civil authority or governmental restraint; specifically, the armed resistance of a number of persons to the power of the state; incipient or limited rebellion.


You didnt "see" What you thought you did

Nobody was charged with insurrection because it didnt happen..

What about Stewart Rhodes being convicted of seditious conspiracy?

Guy Noir said:

---

Fascism (/fzm/ FASH-iz-m) is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived ...

My question is:
Who is the "dictatorial leader" with whom you reference? Is it Trump (who was in power at the time) or Biden (who is not fully with it)?

---

That's a false definition, at least the far-right part. But the rest describes Obama, Biden, the deep state, & the rest of the fascists across the country very accurately. It's clear they have no problem with trying to control more & more of our lives, centralizing power in their own hands, throwing people in jail for political reasons, etc. How many times did they indict Trump? Doubtful that any are legitimate. Plus they threw the book at the J6 protestors for mostly minor or nonexistent offenses. The FBI, aka Gestapo, declared parents trying to protect their children to be terrorists. Failing to provide Secret Service protection to a presidential candidate. The list goes on. None of these abuses of power are legitimate or constitutional.

They are not nationalists, unless of course they have all the power. Then they love the country or what they think they can transform it into.

https://apnews.com/article/jan-6-enrique-tarrio-seditious-conspiracy-trial-f8738f17552cda21eef6d89504da2a0e

WASHINGTON (AP) Former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and three other members of the far-right extremist group were convicted Thursday of a plot to attack the U.S. Capitol in a desperate bid to keep Donald Trump in power after the Republican lost the 2020 presidential election.

A jury in Washington, D.C., found Tarrio and three lieutenants guilty of seditious conspiracy after hearing from dozens of witnesses over more than three months in one of the most serious cases brought in the stunning attack that unfolded on Jan. 6, 2021, as the world watched on live TV.

.....

Okay, this comes from Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism


1. often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2. : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

Again I ask, Who is the dictator you are referencing (Trump or Biden) when you use the term Fascist?

https://pjmedia.com/stephen-kruiser/2023/12/04/the-trump-will-be-an-authoritarian-destroyer-of-democracy-narrative-is-patently-absurd-n4924458

Claiming there was not an insurrection without acknowledging that there were convictions of Seditious Conspiracy is a failure to present a comprehensive picture of what happened.

Guy Noir said:

---

Okay, this comes from Webster



1. often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2. : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

---

This describes the modern American Left point by point:

- They may not place America first, but the certainly are racists (or are willing to use racist propaganda to promote an agenda).

- Centralized, autocratic government: FBI, CIA, IRS, & the rest of the alphabet soup of government agencies bloated, corrupt, always growing, never shrinking, too many weaponized and politicized against the Dems' political opponents.

- The dictator may not be Biden (he has trouble climbing stairs and remembering his wife's name) but he's the front man for Barack Hussein Obama or someone else--maybe a cabal. It does not matter since they have too much power, abuse it wantonly, and are not held accountable for their crimes. At least so far.

- Severe economic & social regimentation. The Climate Cult, green energy, etc. The science does not back up their increasingly radical claims but they don't care. They will impose it on us because they can. Too many scientists have been bought off using taxpayer money. We've seen the results of Bidenomics, Bidenflation, etc. and it is not pretty. Then there are the pedophiles, groomers and the Trans Cult. For some sick, twisted reason, Biden and the Dems have made perverting and abusing America's children a top priority. They even want to punish parents for trying to protect their own children. And there are the dozens of sports cheaters claiming the prizes for women's sports when they are boys or men who are mediocre at best in the male sports. Several women have been injured, some seriously, because of the hyper aggressive play of these cheaters. It is insane.

- Forcible suppression of opposition: Donald Trump & J6 protestors are the obvious examples but it's much more than that. Parents who show up to school board meetings to complain about pornography targeting young children are labeled terrorists. One father in Louden County, Virginia was arrested when he went to a school board meeting to protest the rape of his daughter by a fake girl ("boy in a dress") in the school's girls restroom and the school board covering it up. Thankfully, he eventually received justice I don't know if any of the administrators or school board members went to jail for their crimes. There are so many other examples, one only need to look for them. It's not difficult unless you only get your news from government approved sources.

Your definition does not include censorship and controlling information but it is a common characteristic of totalitarian regimes regardless of ideology, including fascists. Our government has that in spades. The comical White House press conferences offer plenty of examples but there are also the collusion with most of social media to censor what we the people can say or read. (They really do hate Elon Musk!!) They even want to control their friends in the Joseph Goebbels media!

Thanks for making my point, although I doubt that was your intent.

If Trump would have been successful Throwing out the election results and keeping himself in office that would've be a very Fascist thing to have done.

Guy Noir said:

---

If Trump would have been successful Throwing out the election results and keeping himself in office that would've be a very Fascist thing to have done.

---

Is it really fascist to throw out illegitimate election results, though?

Wangchung said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

If Trump would have been successful Throwing out the election results and keeping himself in office that would've
be a very Fascist thing to have done.

---

Is it really fascist to throw out illegitimate election results, though?

---

The election result issues went through the courts and did not provide enough evidence of widespread failure of the election. It is not for the President to decide,

Guy Noir said:

---

What about Stewart Rhodes being convicted of seditious conspiracy?

---

about it? He and several others were convicted of that..

just so we are all on the same page, there is a completely different US code for insurrection vs seditious conspiracy and nobody has been charged with or convicted of insurrection..

But you knew that because you know things right?

Most of the Others were convicted of interupting a govt proceeding which totally happened.

Guy Noir said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

If Trump would have been successful Throwing out the election results and keeping himself in office that would've
be a very Fascist thing to have done.

---

Is it really fascist to throw out illegitimate election results, though?

---

The election result issues went through the courts and did not provide enough evidence of widespread failure of the election. It is not for the President to decide,

---

you might want to follow up on what actually happened with the court cases..

Oh right, you know everything..

I keep checking back ... have we figured out how the two dozen elderly tourists peacefully walking through the Capitol were a THREAT TO DEMOCRACY and almost overthrew the United States?

Guy Noir said:

---

If Trump would have been successful Throwing out the election results and keeping himself in office that would've be a very Fascist thing to have done.

---

Not if the facts of the 2020 electoral fraud were made clear. It wouldn't even be a coup d'etat, which is what you are getting at, if he restored election integrity and allowed the constitution process to operate.

By the way, a coup d'etat is not fascist or any other ideology, it's a political power play and has happened throughout human history. There are even biblical examples of people using force to seize power. In modern times, Napoleon did it, so did his nephew Napoleon III. Hitler tried it in the failed Beer Hall Putsch and decided to use electoral politics after he was released from prison. The Bolshevik Revolution began with a coup: the March on the Winter Palace. And so on.

The real coup was when the fascists stole the election in November 2020. It was a bloodless coup (until J6 when the fascists killed Ashley Babbitt) but produced the same results.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

I keep checking back ... have we figured out how the two dozen elderly tourists peacefully walking through the Capitol were a THREAT TO DEMOCRACY and almost overthrew the United States?

---

When Democrats describe anything or anyone as a "threat to democracy" what they really mean is a threat to the Democrat Party's hold on power. Besides, the US is a republic. Read the constitution and Federalist #10.

whiterock said:

---

historian said:

---

You mean totalitarian states such as Nazi Germany & the Soviet Union. It's probably true in modern China.

---

Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, etc......

---

East Germany. The Stasi's network of "unofficial collaborators" was one of the most elaborate citizen on citizen spying apparatuses ever constructed.

Parts of the network of American fascists have been compared to the Stasi before….

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

I keep checking back ... have we figured out how the two dozen elderly tourists peacefully walking through the Capitol were a THREAT TO DEMOCRACY and almost overthrew the United States?

---

Peacefully?



Was everyone that went in violent? Of course not. But to say that January 6th was 2 dozen elderly tourists walking peacefully through the Capital is horse*****

Those that broke in and broke into Congress forcing an evacuation SHOULD be prosecuted. You guys are revising it to fit what you want. It may not have been an insurrection, but it was a very bad day that crossed lines that should not be crossed.

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I have very serious doubts about the sentences some have been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

4th and Inches said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Our sacred democracy is real…

---

1. We are not a democracy…but a Republic Spurious reasoning

---

---

you dont even know what type of govt we have.. why would we listen to anything else you post as fact?

We live in a constitutional representative republic..

Its in the pledge" and to the republic"

Facts matter

---

To add, we're not supposed to be a "nation" but rather a union. A union of sovereign states.

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

---

Nope. The BLM riots were from ONE interstate movement sponsored by federal congressmen and women, so pretending it was a state crime to attack federal buildings and murder people is disingenuous at best. It was an 8 month coordinated attack all across the US.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

---

Nope. The BLM riots were from ONE interstate movement sponsored by federal congressmen and women, so pretending it was a state crime to attack federal buildings and murder people is disingenuous at best. It was an 8 month coordinated attack all across the US.

---

Ok, several things there.

If they attack a Federal Courthouse, it is a Federal crime and the Feds should prosecute.

As for the conspiracy, once again, unless there is prove that will stand up in Court AND someone brings it forward (like, Trump's DOJ?) there is no Federal crime.

You guys can rail on the "grassy knoll" stuff, but none of it has stood up in Court in either Red or Blue States. At the end of the day, it is up to the jurisdiction to prosecute.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

---

Nope. The BLM riots were from ONE interstate movement sponsored by federal congressmen and women, so pretending it was a state crime to attack federal buildings and murder people is disingenuous at best. It was an 8 month coordinated attack all across the US.

---

Ok, several things there.

If they attack a Federal Courthouse, it is a Federal crime and the Feds should prosecute.

As for the conspiracy, once again, unless there is prove that will stand up in Court AND someone brings it forward (like, Trump's DOJ?) there is no Federal crime.

You guys can rail on the "grassy knoll" stuff, but none of it has stood up in Court in either Red or Blue States. At the end of the day, it is up to the jurisdiction to prosecute.

---

There it is. "But the DOJ that overcharged Jan6th rioters didn't charge any BLM rioters therefor it's not a federal crime!" That's the topic of discussion when we point out the disparity in charges between the two groups. Pretending it's conspiracy talk to point out that federal employees encouraged and funded nationwide violence but saw the perpetrators either ignored or let off with mere fines by local authorities doesn't lend your argument credibility, it just shows you don't understand the conversation. Now quick, say something about QAnon or Russian disinformation!

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

---

Nope. The BLM riots were from ONE interstate movement sponsored by federal congressmen and women, so pretending it was a state crime to attack federal buildings and murder people is disingenuous at best. It was an 8 month coordinated attack all across the US.

---

Ok, several things there.

If they attack a Federal Courthouse, it is a Federal crime and the Feds should prosecute.

As for the conspiracy, once again, unless there is prove that will stand up in Court AND someone brings it forward (like, Trump's DOJ?) there is no Federal crime.

You guys can rail on the "grassy knoll" stuff, but none of it has stood up in Court in either Red or Blue States. At the end of the day, it is up to the jurisdiction to prosecute.

---

There it is. "But the DOJ that overcharged Jan6th rioters didn't charge any BLM rioters therefor it's not a federal crime!" That's the topic of discussion when we point out the disparity in charges between the two groups. Pretending it's conspiracy talk to point out that federal employees encouraged and funded nationwide violence but saw the perpetrators either ignored or let off with mere fines by local authorities doesn't lend your argument credibility, it just shows you don't understand the conversation. Now quick, say something about QAnon or Russian disinformation!

---

Credibility? You are talking hearsay and your observational skills as proof.

Why didn't Trump's DOJ charge them? Did they charge any? What sentences came from those cases? You keep throwing crap out with no evidence and no metrics to support your view.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

---

Nope. The BLM riots were from ONE interstate movement sponsored by federal congressmen and women, so pretending it was a state crime to attack federal buildings and murder people is disingenuous at best. It was an 8 month coordinated attack all across the US.

---

Ok, several things there.

If they attack a Federal Courthouse, it is a Federal crime and the Feds should prosecute.

As for the conspiracy, once again, unless there is prove that will stand up in Court AND someone brings it forward (like, Trump's DOJ?) there is no Federal crime.

You guys can rail on the "grassy knoll" stuff, but none of it has stood up in Court in either Red or Blue States. At the end of the day, it is up to the jurisdiction to prosecute.

---

There it is. "But the DOJ that overcharged Jan6th rioters didn't charge any BLM rioters therefor it's not a federal crime!" That's the topic of discussion when we point out the disparity in charges between the two groups. Pretending it's conspiracy talk to point out that federal employees encouraged and funded nationwide violence but saw the perpetrators either ignored or let off with mere fines by local authorities doesn't lend your argument credibility, it just shows you don't understand the conversation. Now quick, say something about QAnon or Russian disinformation!

---

Credibility? You are talking hearsay and your observational skills as proof.

Why didn't Trump's DOJ charge them? Did they charge any? What sentences came from those cases? You keep throwing crap out with no evidence and no metrics to support your view.

---

Pretending that was Trump's DOJ is another revelation as to your lack of credibility here. You keep repeating the reason we are calling out the disparity in treatment between the two sets of rioters BY THE DOJ as if that excuses the disparity itself. You fail to realize that disparity IS OUR PROOF. It's not conjecture or hearsay, it's proven fact that a nationwide, democrat promoted and sponsored violent movement that saw billions more in federal building damage and actual murders by participants received totally different treatment from the same DOJ than a 3 hour riot in one location that saw zero murders by participants.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Our sacred democracy is real…

---

Liberals beginning to use religious language for government is very very creepy Mike Johnson says that he will by what the bible say. Liberals don't buy that idea. Clean up your side of the street.

---

---

Where did Mike Johnson say that?

---

Johnson's comments were made during an interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News on Thursday.

"I am a Bible-believing Christian," Johnson said. "Someone asked me today in the media, they said, 'It's curious, people are curious: What does Mike Johnson think about any issue under the sun?' I said, 'Well, go pick up a Bible off your shelf and read it. That's my worldview.'"

Waco1947 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Our sacred democracy is real…

---

Liberals beginning to use religious language for government is very very creepy Mike Johnson says that he will by what the bible say. Liberals don't buy that idea. Clean up your side of the street.

---

---

Where did Mike Johnson say that?

---

Johnson's comments were made during an interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News on Thursday.

"I am a Bible-believing Christian," Johnson said. "Someone asked me today in the media, they said, 'It's curious, people are curious: What does Mike Johnson think about any issue under the sun?' I said, 'Well, go pick up a Bible off your shelf and read it. That's my worldview.'"

---

Sounds like a reasonable explanation of his moral worldview.

He did not say he would only interpret the Constitution only through the Bible or infringe on the rights of others.

Not to mention he is Speaker of the House….not dictator of the Government.

My answer about Johnson using the Bible was that it is "like liberals using sacred religious values." My point is that liberal or conservative we both use sacred religious values. My worldview is shaped by the love commandment.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

---

Nope. The BLM riots were from ONE interstate movement sponsored by federal congressmen and women, so pretending it was a state crime to attack federal buildings and murder people is disingenuous at best. It was an 8 month coordinated attack all across the US.

---

Ok, several things there.

If they attack a Federal Courthouse, it is a Federal crime and the Feds should prosecute.

As for the conspiracy, once again, unless there is prove that will stand up in Court AND someone brings it forward (like, Trump's DOJ?) there is no Federal crime.

You guys can rail on the "grassy knoll" stuff, but none of it has stood up in Court in either Red or Blue States. At the end of the day, it is up to the jurisdiction to prosecute.

---

There it is. "But the DOJ that overcharged Jan6th rioters didn't charge any BLM rioters therefor it's not a federal crime!" That's the topic of discussion when we point out the disparity in charges between the two groups. Pretending it's conspiracy talk to point out that federal employees encouraged and funded nationwide violence but saw the perpetrators either ignored or let off with mere fines by local authorities doesn't lend your argument credibility, it just shows you don't understand the conversation. Now quick, say something about QAnon or Russian disinformation!

---

Credibility? You are talking hearsay and your observational skills as proof.

Why didn't Trump's DOJ charge them? Did they charge any? What sentences came from those cases? You keep throwing crap out with no evidence and no metrics to support your view.

---

Pretending that was Trump's DOJ is another revelation as to your lack of credibility here. You keep repeating the reason we are calling out the disparity in treatment between the two sets of rioters BY THE DOJ as if that excuses the disparity itself. You fail to realize that disparity IS OUR PROOF. It's not conjecture or hearsay, it's proven fact that a nationwide, democrat promoted and sponsored violent movement that saw billions more in federal building damage and actual murders by participants received totally different treatment from the same DOJ than a 3 hour riot in one location that saw zero murders by participants.

---

Wait, for Biden DOJ is the central character in this play. It is the weaponizing of the DOJ and they have all the power. For Trump, DOJ is a non-player? Why? If they are Federal charges, like you say, an interstate conspiracy that occurred in the summer of 2020, why didn't the DOJ do anything?

According to you, DOJ takes their direction from the President. Garland is doing all this Jan 6th and Trump investigations at Biden's behalf? But, Trump didn't have the power? He didn't fire Barr, like he did Sessions?

As for Jan 6th, it was a 3 hour riot in the Capital that forced Congress to evacuate during the Certification of the Election that Trump lost, GOP as well evacuated. They didn't just sit there and say all is welll the Dems are over reacting.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

---

Nope. The BLM riots were from ONE interstate movement sponsored by federal congressmen and women, so pretending it was a state crime to attack federal buildings and murder people is disingenuous at best. It was an 8 month coordinated attack all across the US.

---

Ok, several things there.

If they attack a Federal Courthouse, it is a Federal crime and the Feds should prosecute.

As for the conspiracy, once again, unless there is prove that will stand up in Court AND someone brings it forward (like, Trump's DOJ?) there is no Federal crime.

You guys can rail on the "grassy knoll" stuff, but none of it has stood up in Court in either Red or Blue States. At the end of the day, it is up to the jurisdiction to prosecute.

---

There it is. "But the DOJ that overcharged Jan6th rioters didn't charge any BLM rioters therefor it's not a federal crime!" That's the topic of discussion when we point out the disparity in charges between the two groups. Pretending it's conspiracy talk to point out that federal employees encouraged and funded nationwide violence but saw the perpetrators either ignored or let off with mere fines by local authorities doesn't lend your argument credibility, it just shows you don't understand the conversation. Now quick, say something about QAnon or Russian disinformation!

---

Credibility? You are talking hearsay and your observational skills as proof.

Why didn't Trump's DOJ charge them? Did they charge any? What sentences came from those cases? You keep throwing crap out with no evidence and no metrics to support your view.

---

Pretending that was Trump's DOJ is another revelation as to your lack of credibility here. You keep repeating the reason we are calling out the disparity in treatment between the two sets of rioters BY THE DOJ as if that excuses the disparity itself. You fail to realize that disparity IS OUR PROOF. It's not conjecture or hearsay, it's proven fact that a nationwide, democrat promoted and sponsored violent movement that saw billions more in federal building damage and actual murders by participants received totally different treatment from the same DOJ than a 3 hour riot in one location that saw zero murders by participants.

---

Wait, for Biden DOJ is the central character in this play. It is the weaponizing of the DOJ and they have all the power. For Trump, DOJ is a non-player? Why? If they are Federal charges, like you say, an interstate conspiracy that occurred in the summer of 2020, why didn't the DOJ do anything?

According to you, DOJ takes their direction from the President. Garland is doing all this Jan 6th and Trump investigations at Biden's behalf? But, Trump didn't have the power? He didn't fire Barr, like he did Sessions?

As for Jan 6th, it was a 3 hour riot in the Capital that forced Congress to evacuate during the Certification of the Election that Trump lost, GOP as well evacuated. They didn't just sit there and say all is welll the Dems are over reacting.

---

The president doesn't direct the DOJ to do anything. They are now run by the same uniparty that pulls Biden's strings. When they go after Biden's opponents they aren't doing so for Biden, they are doing it for the uniparty. You keep pointing to the lack of charges as evidence no federal crime was committed while we are pointing to the lack of charges as evidence that federal crimes are ignored if it helps the uniparty.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Those who engaged in violent activity or anything resembling a riot should be prosecuted, even if they were FBI infiltrators. I'm not so sure that's what the government has done. And I gave very respect doubts about the sentences done hav been given. Contrast that too the lack of prosecutions for months of anarchy in several American cities in 2020 & the general lack of prosecution of serious criminals, political or otherwise.

---

I do agree with you.

I would be curious to see the Federal sentences during 2020 and then factor in the attack on the seat of power for the US during session. That to me is much more serious than a Courthouse in Spokane.

As for the State sentences, each State has their own laws. Can't compare a State to Federal sentence. Hell, even a City to a County within the same state. I would think the "States can secede" group would support each State prosecuting at will...

---

Nope. The BLM riots were from ONE interstate movement sponsored by federal congressmen and women, so pretending it was a state crime to attack federal buildings and murder people is disingenuous at best. It was an 8 month coordinated attack all across the US.

---

Ok, several things there.

If they attack a Federal Courthouse, it is a Federal crime and the Feds should prosecute.

As for the conspiracy, once again, unless there is prove that will stand up in Court AND someone brings it forward (like, Trump's DOJ?) there is no Federal crime.

You guys can rail on the "grassy knoll" stuff, but none of it has stood up in Court in either Red or Blue States. At the end of the day, it is up to the jurisdiction to prosecute.

---

There it is. "But the DOJ that overcharged Jan6th rioters didn't charge any BLM rioters therefor it's not a federal crime!" That's the topic of discussion when we point out the disparity in charges between the two groups. Pretending it's conspiracy talk to point out that federal employees encouraged and funded nationwide violence but saw the perpetrators either ignored or let off with mere fines by local authorities doesn't lend your argument credibility, it just shows you don't understand the conversation. Now quick, say something about QAnon or Russian disinformation!

---

Credibility? You are talking hearsay and your observational skills as proof.

Why didn't Trump's DOJ charge them? Did they charge any? What sentences came from those cases? You keep throwing crap out with no evidence and no metrics to support your view.

---

Pretending that was Trump's DOJ is another revelation as to your lack of credibility here. You keep repeating the reason we are calling out the disparity in treatment between the two sets of rioters BY THE DOJ as if that excuses the disparity itself. You fail to realize that disparity IS OUR PROOF. It's not conjecture or hearsay, it's proven fact that a nationwide, democrat promoted and sponsored violent movement that saw billions more in federal building damage and actual murders by participants received totally different treatment from the same DOJ than a 3 hour riot in one location that saw zero murders by participants.

---

Wait, for Biden DOJ is the central character in this play. It is the weaponizing of the DOJ and they have all the power. For Trump, DOJ is a non-player? Why? If they are Federal charges, like you say, an interstate conspiracy that occurred in the summer of 2020, why didn't the DOJ do anything?

According to you, DOJ takes their direction from the President. Garland is doing all this Jan 6th and Trump investigations at Biden's behalf? But, Trump didn't have the power? He didn't fire Barr, like he did Sessions?

As for Jan 6th, it was a 3 hour riot in the Capital that forced Congress to evacuate during the Certification of the Election that Trump lost, GOP as well evacuated. They didn't just sit there and say all is welll the Dems are over reacting.

---

The president doesn't direct the DOJ to do anything. They are now run by the same uniparty that pulls Biden's strings. When they go after Biden's opponents they aren't doing so for Biden, they are doing it for the uniparty. You keep pointing to the lack of charges as evidence no federal crime was committed while we are pointing to the lack of charges as evidence that federal crimes are ignored if it helps the uniparty.

---

Uniparty, right...

Look up the stats. The 2020 riots resulted in just as many convictions. The J6 resulted in higher jail time because of where and when they did it. It is not a Uniparty or conspiracy. It is trying to compare riots from multiple states to one event in a Federal jurisdiction.

Are their Prosecutors that use their personal agendas? Sure, for both sides just as there always has been.

Biden won the 2020 election because Trump was an ******* and the GOP slept on the job during COVID on election rules. Biden has THE worst policies ever for an Administration and he is a very weak President. Hopefully the GOP wins and we can get some normalcy in policy. If Trump keeps doing what he is doing being an ******* and saying how good Robert E Lee was, he will lose. No conspiracy, just normal people don't want this crap.