You must log in or register to comment.
Um…duh? I fucking watched it live. I always hate people saying that the media somehow pushed a narrative. Maybe they did, I don’t watch broadcast or cable TV. But I literally watched the event unfolding live on the TV above my desk. I watched Trump supporters match on the capital AS INSTRUCTED.
Let’s just hope the orange turd never returns to the Whitehouse…
People keep calling it a riot, we all know what happened but that subtle rebranding does a lot to subconsciously change how people feel about it.
A riot is when a crowd spontaneously becomes violent and starts breaking shit.
People don’t bring zip ties and build gallows at riots, they don’t plan and rehearse for riots, people don’t get guided tours from insiders of the place they’re planning to riot in a few months.
That’s why it needs to keep being said loudly that it was an insurrection and why people should be careful to never call it a riot.Imagine spontaneously building a gallows, like where the fuck would you even find the wood at in the capital?? Who randomly thinks "I should take multiple 12 foot lengths of 2x4 to hear the person who lost the election speak?
Who else thinks a big old fat length of rope is what I should take with me to see the peaceful transfer of power for myself?
Fuck those cunts.
I saw the gross trash in person a few blocks away…it looked like the worst trash of Winston era NASCAR fandom decided to put their foot down…I was in DC for work not treason and was disgusting looking at the lot of them.
Please note that Winston cup NASCAR wasn’t all full of trash but all country trash was fans of NASCAR.
I watched it live being streamed by the insurrectionists themselves. There were tons of aggregation streams on Twitch showing several different angles from inside the crowd, just switching between the ones with interesting things happening. I’d say that’s about the most non-mainstream source to see it through possible, and even through that lense, it was obvious that it was an insurrection.
It was an insurrection in 1861, and an insurrection in 2021.
An insurrection, not a riot.
¿Por qué no los dos?
Because it’s important to distinguish that it was an insurrection and to not water it down with other terms.
That’s what I thought too, but the author made an interesting point:
Calabresi suggests that the January 6 attack fits the definition of a “riot.” Perhaps so. But “riot” and “insurrection” aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. An event can be both at the same time. Indeed, that’s a common occurrence in history.
A riot attacking the seat of government, attempting to overthrow the government, is an insurrection
Edit: NO, for any pedants trying with say what about BLM, protesting abuse of power is not the same thing
Today is the third anniversary of the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol, intended to keep Donald Trump in power after he lost the 2020 election
We have an attack on center of government intending to overthrow a lawful election and keep the losing candidate in power. We have intent of an insurrection, location of an insurrection, and targets to make it an insurrection. How does the ultimate success or failure, or the type of weapon change the crime?
The full clause also contains “shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” They’ve held socialists out of Congress in war time just for giving speeches that gave “comfort” to the enemies.
For context, this article is from the conservative/libertarian Reason.com, and it addresses some conservative counter-arguments.
Normally I am extremely hesitant to believe anything Reason or other libertarians say, but yeah it sure was an insurrection.
A conservative professor made a counter post saying how Jan 6 was not an insurrection. Quite frankly I think this guy’s false equivalencies are equal parts scary and hilarious. Jan 6th wasn’t an insurrection because not enough people died, then he made a bunch of whataboutisms. The party of family values needs to learn empathy.
they respect values for specifically white, christian, heteronormative, American families with money.
they want a fascist ethnostate, and there’s really nothing else to it
No shit. What, are people calling the militant takeover of our Nation’s Capitol a “protest” again?
The cons are, and have never really stopped. Sometimes, they like to throw in “peaceful” as some kind of hyuk-hyuk jab at them-thar BLM protests (since most of the BLM protests were entirely peaceful, a fact the hard right cannot handle)
@HLMenckenFan Let’s hope the Orange Monster never returns to the White House.
deleted by creator
Why keep writing these articles. It’s a fact, and you’re only feeding the trolls by continuing to debate a fact with them. They don’t care about truth, they just want to bog you down and keep you arguing over facts, while they make off with the country
This is the Koch brother funded Reason magazine/website. The Kochs have tossed their 1 billion+ of donor network money behind Nikki Haley, so of course their mouthpieces attack her competition.
That’s not fair to Reason. Unlike some other Koch funded enterprises they’ve long since corrected their stance on climate change. They’ve consistently covered police corruption and overreach as well.
The are like a drunk driver climbing out of the wreckage of an accident they caused and acknowledging drunk driving is bad.
The damage is already done.
Fuck them.
I didn’t say you had to like them. I said it’s not fair to accuse them of toeing the line for Koch.
Preponderance of evidence
In a related story: the sky is made of air.
Fucking clearly. And the sc will allow trump to remain on ballots.
They’ll likely rule that there needs to be a conviction, but that means they won’t be able to pull Biden in red states either.
Id call it a terrorist attack but white people can’t be terrorists.
ok, that is your opinion, right?
As the trial about this Jan 6 event has not even started he is innocent until proven guilty, right?
The problem with that argument is that the 14th amendment doesn’t require any findings of guilt (by a court of law). It only requires that the individual “engaged” in insurrection:
shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.
A court of law (Colorado Supreme Court) found that Trump did engage in an insurrection against the United States. From the perspective of the 14th amendment, he was found guilty in a court of law.
deleted by creator
Even if we ignore those facts entirely… I’d argue that impeachment is an equivalent trial for a sitting President.
The House of Representatives found he did do it and impeached him, the Senate chose not to punish him. That’s not the same as being found innocent or having charges dropped. That’s like eing found guilty and the Judge sentencing someone to time already served.
