Depends. Are you going to post a link to a "fact check" that says that TWO people were arrested that day who were carrying guns? Because unless there were thousands or even hundreds or even 10's, there was no "armed" "insurrection" as the talking heads insist to this day.
The video won't play for me. I'm getting security errors from it. That might tell you something. But how does ONE shot fired by a loon constitute an "insurrection" when you can't even accept that Ashley Babbitt was murdered in cold blood? Accept the greater reality of - there was no insurrection - and I'll grant that there were probably a bunch of loons there who thought they were going to an insurrection - but "thought" is the operative word. It was all in their minds. It wasn't organized or even suggested by DJT or his people. Admit that Pelosi AND the Mayor REFUSED to allow National Guard troops who would have been able to defuse the situation without an unauthorized incursion into the capitol building - even though the chief of the Capitol police wanted them. Admit that the FBI peppered the crowd with people trying to incite violence and instigated the break-in. Why can't we talk about that? They had chatter that indicated there might be a problem and yet Pelosi and the Mayor DELIBERATELY and with malice aforethought allowed it to happen.
You missed the point. They, the mob, were trying to stop the transfer of power from Trump to Biden, at the behest of the Donald, and others, who are being disbarred or are in prison. I consider that an insurection, a take over of power from an duly elected President. By the way , Trump lost the 2020 election, as expressed by the mountain of evidence available, with absolutely no, zero, zip, nada, evidence to the contrary,
So, what did you call it when BLM and ANTIFA took over government buildings in various cities? Oh, I know, a "mostly peaceful" protest as we watched debris flying through the air and cars and buildings burning in the background?
Your head is "you know where". I really don't think you can see any evidence in there. We have pointed you to multiple infractions and suspicious events. I really don't think we're going to get a confession from the deep state operatives who coordinated this. What else might get you to get your head out of your "..." and actually look at some of the allegations?
Instead of pointing, show me some proof. Not suspicions. Not emptional rants. Proof, Like F-MA. BTW, no neeed to get nasty wth regard to the location of my head.
You will never accept "proof" that is not in conformance with Democratic talking points and/or your animus towards Trump. Therefore any responses such as the fact that there was no insurrection, it was a patriotic rally, will never be accepted by you.
looks like then may be it is (@Pat Hartman)? DJT is not a someone I would choose to heal / unit/ lead a nation.
I asked AI a few questions. There were at least 10,000 people at Trumps rally. Three dozen or so were armed (not all firearms), according to records. Therefore, this amounts to 0.36% of people were armed. Or to put it another way...
I see it differently.
Would you like to show me the evidence that everybody (or even the majority) of the crowd were there to "prevent certification"? It is your assumption, but no such evidence exists. Only in a banana republic are people considered guilty without evidence.
The right to protest the certification is not anti-democratic., it is their legal right. Since only a minority of the crowd entered the compound, you can only correctly conclude that their acts in that instance were breaking the law. And of those who entered, you cannot reasonably conclude they were all there to prevent certification.
And what is the real issue, ignore those events and instead just discriminate against Trump followers? If Democrats were claiming that the BLM riots were "mostly peaceful", and yet the Trump crowd wasn't, you are operating different "truths" depending on your political affiliation. A banana republic will claim that nobody is above the law, while trreating another group differently to the one being targeted.
That's interesting how you now know what someone is thinking in their head as if you really knew and therefore have the right be angry about it. The actual reason they were there was obviously not to stop anything going on inside otherwise things would have been much more violence with the majority of them being armed with something other than two arms and a black belt (doubt they even had that), it was a protest plain and simple. Do you think only your party has the right to protest? Being punished for exercising your right to protest and weaponizing the gov against the people to even assemble for a protest because of your point of view is the real problem here. That was all created by the media and the incoming destroyers of our system of justice.
In post #88, we have the misguided and completely untrue conclusion that because some threats were made (by who I don't know) it was an insurrection, but threats were not made by the protesters. Mob is a label you put on a group you don't like and would rather they didn't have that right to voice their opinion about something. I don't know how you would define taking over a building, but if they had, they would actually control everything in it and would do so forcibly. No such thing happened or was even attempted. I watched the video and yes windows were broken and people were angry but that ain't taking over the building. That idea is something that those that didn't like trump supporters put in the media as a statement of truth when in fact it was obviously a lie anyone with two eyes could clearly see.
I heard about that. Didn't subsequent evidence show that they delayed deploying them, so that the impact of the crowd would be greater?
Speculation, based on inductive reasoning; the "riot" was a false flag operation. Democrats wanted the optics of a riot at the Capital for political gain. Additionally, when you consider other events such as the January 6th Commission and the lawfare attacks on Trump to convict him of something and/or get him off the ballot; it acts as anecdotal evidence that a conspiracy by Democrats really exists. Also consider the hyperbolic negative reactions by the leftist pundits when NBC hired Ronna McDaniel. Trump Derangement Syndrome truly exists.
Exactly, and if all those supporters behaved themselves too well during the protest, they were ready with that threat on the VP over in another building (what the heck was she doing there, no one know?).
There back up plan was in place for just such a lack of mayhem. Where was that Allstate guy on jan 6 anyway?
You seem to be exhibiting symptoms of "projection". How else could you "KNOW" with absolute certainty what is going on inside another person's head? It must be horribly confusing for you to have all those people alive and well and living rent free in your head.
www.psychologytoday.com
