Sam Lowry said:

---

LOL, I guess you missed the clip of Sen. Hawley high-tailing it out of the building.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Yeah, the non-combatants that were not present were under threat from the unarmed protestors who had weapons in the next state. Pretty sure the random walking around in the Capitol proved it was far from calculated, unless you count the calculated way the FBI used its assets within the crowd.

---

The legislators were very much present and very much under threat from your "protesters," both armed and unarmed.

---

None were seen on the security footage. How odd. None of the protestors were armed with anything other than the mob of idiots around them. I guess that means they were armed. Well I'll be damned. Anyway, not an insurrection nor was it domestic terrorism. Never will be.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

Assassin said:

---

Portland Trantifa Emery Rose Hall, a man aka Gordon Hall, was arrested at the Antifa attack at PSU on May 5. He's been quickly released without bail. In May 2021, he was arrested at another riot and had all the charges dropped. https://t.co/yYffp7zHj3 https://t.co/zw3OLryDFd pic.twitter.com/BPmAsVaKqN

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) May 6, 2025

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Portland Trantifa Emery Rose Hall, a man aka Gordon Hall, was arrested at the Antifa attack at PSU on May 5. He's been quickly released without bail. In May 2021, he was arrested at another riot and had all the charges dropped. https://t.co/yYffp7zHj3 https://t.co/zw3OLryDFd pic.twitter.com/BPmAsVaKqN

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) May 6, 2025

---

Would ya?

---

Assassin said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Portland Trantifa Emery Rose Hall, a man aka Gordon Hall, was arrested at the Antifa attack at PSU on May 5. He's been quickly released without bail. In May 2021, he was arrested at another riot and had all the charges dropped. https://t.co/yYffp7zHj3 https://t.co/zw3OLryDFd pic.twitter.com/BPmAsVaKqN

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) May 6, 2025

---

Would ya?

---

Can't imagine anyone asking that question, much less doing it. Unless of course, he/she's were your cup of tea

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

You can buy into that if you feel so. Ashli Babbitt was murdered. No two ways about it. She had no gun, she did not brandish a gun, she did not threaten anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

You can buy into that if you feel so. Ashli Babbitt was murdered. No two ways about it. She had no gun, she did not brandish a gun, she did not threaten anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a violent riot assaulting cops and a government building. What do you think the officer was there to do, give the rioters a tour? Are you that brainwashed?

---

THEY FEARED FOR THEIR LIVES pic.twitter.com/P4hcvN0Yit

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 7, 2025

Assassin said:

---

She was ferocious indeed. It was an intense mob. And Micheal Moore was standing there in the midst of it, watching it unfold, fearing for his life

THEY FEARED FOR THEIR LIVES pic.twitter.com/P4hcvN0Yit

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 7, 2025

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

You can buy into that if you feel so. Ashli Babbitt was murdered. No two ways about it. She had no gun, she did not brandish a gun, she did not threaten anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a violent riot assaulting cops and a government building. What do you think the officer was there to do, give the rioters a tour? Are you that brainwashed?

---

That's the real irony of the J6 apologist narrative. We actually are supposed to believe the cops were welcoming all of the mostly peaceful protesters into the Capitol and giving them a tour…while also believing the cops were totally off the leash and engaging in wanton violence and brutality.

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

You can buy into that if you feel so. Ashli Babbitt was murdered. No two ways about it. She had no gun, she did not brandish a gun, she did not threaten anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a violent riot assaulting cops and a government building. What do you think the officer was there to do, give the rioters a tour? Are you that brainwashed?

---

You certainly appear to be. Wow.

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

You can buy into that if you feel so. Ashli Babbitt was murdered. No two ways about it. She had no gun, she did not brandish a gun, she did not threaten anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a violent riot assaulting cops and a government building. What do you think the officer was there to do, give the rioters a tour? Are you that brainwashed?

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

You can buy into that if you feel so. Ashli Babbitt was murdered. No two ways about it. She had no gun, she did not brandish a gun, she did not threaten anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a violent riot assaulting cops and a government building. What do you think the officer was there to do, give the rioters a tour? Are you that brainwashed?

---

Certainly not to casually murder an unarmed civilian.

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

You can buy into that if you feel so. Ashli Babbitt was murdered. No two ways about it. She had no gun, she did not brandish a gun, she did not threaten anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a violent riot assaulting cops and a government building. What do you think the officer was there to do, give the rioters a tour? Are you that brainwashed?

---

Certainly not to casually murder an unarmed civilian.

---

You are ignoring her actions. And the fact that she disobeyed what law enforcement tod her to do. And you haven't even admitted what she did was illegal...

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a riot forcing their way into a government building while Congress was in session. Not only is it the hill Ms. Babbitt died on, she was absolutely a threat, the cop could not have known if she was armed or not, and officers had already been assaulted en masse.

---

You can buy into that if you feel so. Ashli Babbitt was murdered. No two ways about it. She had no gun, she did not brandish a gun, she did not threaten anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---

She was part of a violent riot assaulting cops and a government building. What do you think the officer was there to do, give the rioters a tour? Are you that brainwashed?

---

Certainly not to casually murder an unarmed civilian.

---

You are ignoring her actions. And the fact that she disobeyed what law enforcement tod her to do. And you haven't even admitted what she did was illegal...

---

So, in your way ot thinking, we need to set up firing ranges for those illegally crossing the street?

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Bottom line: If Jan. 6th is the best example of so called "right wing domestic terrorists" in action the left can point to, it's laughable at best to assert that there is any kind of significant threat to the country or to democracy coming from the right to be concerned about.

---

Wangchung said:

---

Years of Antifa violence, looting and murders. The fact that the leftists have deflected to talking about a 3 hour unarmed "riot" tells you all you need to know.

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Years of Antifa violence, looting and murders. The fact that the leftists have deflected to talking about a 3 hour unarmed "riot" tells you all you need to know.

---

Some were armed. Don't keep spreading lies.

---

🚨 DECIPHERING NED DROP 4️⃣: WHY J6 IS AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT🏛️

Many have asked me to do a deep dive on @SenThomTillis , but before I do that, I think it is important to contextualize why the events of January 6, 2021 were such an existential threat to NED, Open Society…

— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) May 6, 2025

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Years of Antifa violence, looting and murders. The fact that the leftists have deflected to talking about a 3 hour unarmed "riot" tells you all you need to know.

---

Some were armed. Don't keep spreading lies.

---

No they weren't . No one used any arms against anyone else. Stop lying.

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Years of Antifa violence, looting and murders. The fact that the leftists have deflected to talking about a 3 hour unarmed "riot" tells you all you need to know.

---

Some were armed. Don't keep spreading lies.

---

No they weren't . No one used any arms against anyone else. Stop lying.

---

Are you confused about what armed means?

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Years of Antifa violence, looting and murders. The fact that the leftists have deflected to talking about a 3 hour unarmed "riot" tells you all you need to know.

---

Some were armed. Don't keep spreading lies.

---

No they weren't . No one used any arms against anyone else. Stop lying.

---

Are you confused about what armed means?

---

Nope. They were all armed with a mob, for sure. No weapons were used on anyone except the woman armed with a mob as she broke through a window in an interior hallway. Antifa is far worse than the 3 hour January 6th event in every aspect.

---

Assassin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Years of Antifa violence, looting and murders. The fact that the leftists have deflected to talking about a 3 hour unarmed "riot" tells you all you need to know.

---

Some were armed. Don't keep spreading lies.

---

No they weren't . No one used any arms against anyone else. Stop lying.

---

Are you confused about what armed means?

---

Nope. They were all armed with a mob, for sure. No weapons were used on anyone except the woman armed with a mob as she broke through a window in an interior hallway. Antifa is far worse than the 3 hour January 6th event in every aspect.

---

When you thiink about it, the only terrorist groups that are worse than ANTIFA that hasn't been declared that yet is probably either BLM or Liberal White Women. It's a tossup

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Years of Antifa violence, looting and murders. The fact that the leftists have deflected to talking about a 3 hour unarmed "riot" tells you all you need to know.

---

Some were armed. Don't keep spreading lies.

---

No they weren't . No one used any arms against anyone else. Stop lying.

---

Are you confused about what armed means?

---

Nope. They were all armed with a mob, for sure. No weapons were used on anyone except the woman armed with a mob as she broke through a window in an interior hallway. Antifa is far worse than the 3 hour January 6th event in every aspect.

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

contrario said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Hopefully they are all arrested. Generally the police try for de-escalation in these cases, and try to nab them later.

But labeling Americans as terrorists is not likely, to answer your question. They're just organized hoodlums.

---

There has never been an issue with (rightfully) calling right wing extremists, domestic terrorists. I'm not sure why anyone would try to downplay this as just "hoodlums".

---

No issue? Around here you can't even call them insurrectionists, much less domestic terrorists.

---

They have to actually be those things is the only point of contention your labels have run up against.

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological goals, primarily to instill fear and influence policy makers."

Pretty good dictionary definition...all it needs is a picture of J6.

---

Who were the non-combatants? I say that as the cops there were ultra-violent, even killing people

---

The cops were quite restrained, but never mind that. Congress, i.e. the policy makers, were non-combatants.

---

How many of the policymakers saw action? Meanwhile the cops were mowing down an unarmed Ashli Babbitt

---

"The calculated use of violence or the threat of violence."

---

An unarmed women crawling through a window and they shot her. You cannot justify that with words Sam

---

Kyle Rittenhouse, George Zimmerman, and Darren Wilson all shot unarmed assailants, and all were likely justified in doing so. You understand this as well as I do.

---

What do they have to do with a conversation about an unarmed woman being butchered by the police on Jan 6th? The Capital Police had no justification

---

Being unarmed doesn't necessarily mean you're not a threat.

---

But it does mean that you don't have a weapon and Ashli Babbitt was not threatening anyone. Again, not a hill to die on

---