- This topic has 70 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
er – I don’t remember calling for investigations. I only jumped in to correct you about what had happened since you presented it as something different. I personally am more frustrated by sham courts and hearings than by none. And if you meant me when you said you were tricked, I did get information and watch some of the depositions (a lot has not been made public) but I learned my lesson about discussing anything TDS people don’t want to hear. I explained it pretty thoroughly tho pointlessly.
My committee has broken all the rules! Okay I’ll go along with the new scheme.
The hardest part of this conversation is the terms. People mean different things with the same words. I’ll try to list then one post at a time. For best results, I’m aiming for how those who say there phrases intend them to be understood. Not how the other side responding understands them.
Mostly peaceful protests – this is including all the vigils that were held all over the country in local parks and down main street. There were hundreds and hundreds of them, so they outnumber the craziness of the destructive protests.
The efforts to overturn the election were following the Constitution – this means to say that the full session of Congress came to the Capitol at the correct time and followed the decorum of the day. It does not mean that the Vice President had full autonomy to do as he saw fit under the Constitution.
Jan 6 rioters say BLM get away with it – I think this means that they moved into restricted government areas, while the government took it’s time to evict them. Certifying the election would take at most three days. Given that some areas were ceded to the racial protests for weeks, the election protesters may have thought that they will not be pushed out until after Congress dispersed. If I remember correctly, the BLM protest on Pennsylvania Avenue lasted a couple of days.
The States ignored the racial riots – some may not remember, but there was a lot of rhetoric about calling in the National Guard. Every Governor almost every time, refused to bring them in to protect property.
They weren’t coming to overthrow the government – this means that the protest by the Capitol had no way of keeping Trump in office. They were there to go to the building So that their protest would influence the proceedings.
It wasn’t a protest, it was an insurrection – is taking about the crazy theories being thrown around in the White House about how they could retain power. Their plan? hope? was to Presque Pence to overturn the results. They needed large crowds outside the Capitol and Congressman inside to vote against certifying the vote.
These last two posts, cut right to the heart of the matter.
One calls it an instruction. The other side points out that they were pressuring the government, not becoming the government.
I think we could agree, that if there was a person who was a go between the White House and the protest, than we have an insurrection. Meaning, say that Wood had Lindel contact the Math Keepers to hype the protest, so that Wood would be assured of extreme pressure on Pence, that is an orchestrated attempt to use non legal ways to maintain power. But if there was no go between, and Wood was relying on the President’s tweets to stir up the pressure and the protest simultaneously, than that is not directly illegal. It becomes a little bit twisted right to gather like the race protests that went way to far. Trump said in his speech were going to go down to the Capitol, not into the Capitol. So he did not encourage the attack. He may have wanted it out of spite, but it probably hurt the plan.
To recap, the White House did not interrupt Congress. And the protesters did not know their role in the plan. If there was a middle man, than that would close this loophole.
Now if you say, but isn’t this a whole wink, wink, from the Administration to the protest? The answer is that is this discussion. The racial protests also looked like a wink, wink, to many people. Especially the Jan 6 crowd.
Jam 6 could have been a lot worse – the barricades held up until better equipped forces showed up and cleared the Capitol. Had they not, Pelosi and other members of Congress are probably dead. They might have found Pence and had him hung. The building may have been completely sacked. And there would have been hundreds of casualties among the rioters when the Armed Forces shows up too late. In short real civil war.
The anti police riots never got out of control – the riots were contained to small areas, they almost never threaten the larger area. It wasn’t like the anti police riots in years past that gripped the whole city. Even though there was lawlessness over whole city blocks, this was the police strategy to keep the protest centered on themselves and cut off from the rest of the city.
No-one in the government planned or supported the anti police riots – while some officials, especially chiefs of police openly supported the protests, none of them said to burn and loot property.
Constitutional crisis – in regular times that could just mean that the Constitution is being tested to see if the government system set up by the Constitution really works as it is intended too. Or can it be subverted. It can also be called a test on the limits of the Constitution. A basic example could be court packing.
1/6 was a constitutional crisis – meaning that the idea of having a liberal democracy that really works for the people, was at risk of being lost. Or maybe even, it has been lost.
Note – who really knows?
There have not been reports of arms – this is paraphrasing the FBI that they did not recover any guns in the Capitol.
Armed insurrection – the Metropolitan Police made two arrests for bringing guns into the Capitol. One rioter attacked the police with a metal flag pole. Fifteen of the rioters charged with violent crime had weapons. Not to mention the many that were there and never detained.
@N0 mesorah
The problem with the term “mostly peaceful protest” is that it belies the reality most people were experiencing.When you’re scared to go outside because of the violence, when v you’re not allowed to go outside because the city issued a curfew, when the stores around you are looted, destroyed and torched, then you do care about the 90% of protests which were peaceful.
I guarantee you- had the government cracked down on those violent protests (or at least strongly condemned them), and had the msm acknowledged them and called them out, and they would have stopped; then no one would be bothered by the majority of the peaceful ones.
But when surrounded by violence, being bombarded by messaging about how peaceful “most” of it is, is pure gaslighting.
And condemning republicans who supported the rally (though not the riots) on Jan 6th, without condemning the Democrats who supported the rioting- including actively raising bail for them!- is tremendous hypocrisy.
Dear Gefilte,
I hear you. But using the national guard on the riots was a last report. It makes it worse. The best method, is good policing right away. But policing was the problem to begin with. Mayors were caught in a bind without a solution.
First of all, it a false equivalence. Two separate incidents with two separate causes.
Those who want to equate it, do so to minimize the magnitude of the Jan 6th insurrection. Titling this thread “BLM Riots VS Jan 6 PROTEST” already skews the answer: (‘They” rioted, we only “protested”.)A major difference is in intent, and by who. The BLM riots where the looting and burning occured was driven by thugs taking advantage of the lawlessness to grab another pair of sneakers. Pure greed, orchestrated by no one. The Jan 6th insurrection was prompted by Trump and his aides (Giuliani: “Trial by combat”) who were purposely trying to disrupt the election process. “Hang Mike Pence” was a cry that Trump winked at in agreement. The Proud Boys (anti-Semitic group) had planned this for weeks. Trump wanted to overturn the election process, fueled the crowd, and did not call them off until hours later. The intent was criminal by the highest office holder in the land.
Don’t get confused by “us” verses “them”: “We own the libtards” etc. We can and should have conservative values, but the cult of personality and the raw grab to undermine the rule of law, an incompetent attempt at fascism, is in a different league than the hoodlums and thugs who burned down our cities for another pair of sneakers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.