The Capitol Riot Was Never Going To Succeed
The intruders created plenty of mayhem, but it was a farcical coup attempt doomed from the start.

I grew up near the Delaware River, a few miles from Washington's Crossing, named after—you guessed it—the spot where George Washington's Continental Army crossed the icy river in small boats. Upon arriving in Trenton, N.J., they launched a surprise attack on the Hessians: German mercenaries the Brits had hired to help quell the Revolution.
The nation's first president was a serious and principled man. In his 1789 Inaugural Address to Congress, Washington hoped the "rights of freemen, and a regard for the public harmony, will sufficiently influence your deliberations on the question how far the former can be more impregnably fortified, or the latter be safely and advantageously promoted." He refused any pay for his efforts.
I also lived near the Manassas, Va., battlefield where Southern victories ended hope for a quick Civil War. The Confederates, of course, primarily were fighting to defend an evil institution. "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery," explained Mississippi's declaration for secession. Nevertheless, they were serious men and principled in a misbegotten way.
Sorry for the history lesson, but the House committee's proceedings into the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack by Donald Trump's supporters often draw historical parallels. It's indeed hard to wrap our heads around what happened, given our belief in the solidity of our nation's institutions. But this much is certain: The perpetrators were not serious people. It might have been an attempted coup—of the sort attempted by idiots.
That's not to say our nation never faced any danger. The truth is so hard to bear that Trump's most-devoted acolytes still refuse to grapple with it, lest they must (perhaps) face their own complicity. I had never been a fan of U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney, (R–Wyo.), but she nailed it in her address to the committee, referencing a legal decision by Orange County federal Judge David O. Carter:
"President Trump's efforts to pressure Vice President Pence to act illegally by refusing to count electoral votes likely violated two federal criminal statutes," Cheney said. "(I)f Dr. (John) Eastman and President Trump's plan had worked, it would have permanently ended the peaceful transition of power, undermining American democracy and the Constitution."
A president refused to concede power after dozens of courts examined and rejected his fanciful election theories. His aides and GOP lawmakers were so terrified of him that they allowed him to push our democracy to the breaking point, something that left our republic rather brittle. Aides championed a blueprint that would have destroyed our democracy. No one seems the slightest bit sorry.
No adults were in charge, even as our nation came within a whisker of becoming like any garden-variety tin-pot regime. Even the wife of a Supreme Court justice lobbied to overturn the election—an almost inconceivable breach of democratic norms that has received a collective shrug among conservatives.
The same Republicans who denied the obvious now say that it's old news. Nothing to see here. The attempted coup, or hissy fit or whatever it was, really was the work of left-wing Antifa, or was an FBI false flag operation. It's hard to keep track of the evolving claims. It was "legitimate political discourse," as the Republican Party put it last February. We've known these details for months, but my main takeaway is not just that Trump incited a riot and did so for base purposes (his ego), but that the entire effort was an eye-rolling farce.
The most recognizable Capitol intruder is a bare-chested, spear-carrying man wearing a fuzzy, horned hat seemingly lifted from Fred Flintstone's Loyal Order of the Water Buffaloes. The intruders weren't able to "Hang Mike Pence," but they managed to create plenty of mayhem. But to what end remains unclear.
"The problem I have with the coverage of January 6 is that nobody is capturing the comedic value of the events leading up to that day and the pathetic half-assed, angry-boomer insurrection," Tweeted attorney Doug McCullough. Yep. Americans should be mocking the snowflakes who stormed the Capitol, some who portray their resulting wrist-slaps as gulag-like injustices.
They're like spoiled teen-agers screaming about some inchoate unfairness. This is from conservative filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza: "While many politicians bewail the plight of political prisoners abroad, like Navalny in Russia, they ignore the startling reality that America now has its own political prisoners." At least the Right is finally embracing the cause of justice reform, albeit on an ad-hoc basis.
The latest news, per the Washington Post: "Trump and his allies wielded the stolen election lie to raise up to $250 million"—yet the defense fund doesn't appear to exist and the committee thinks "much of that money" went "to political outfits run by top Trump allies." Too funny, but no one would accuse Trump nor his Capitol-invading minions of being serious people.
This column was first published in The Orange County Register.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
More than not succeed the insurrection did just the opposite. It made leaders including Senator McConnell determined to get the job finished and the EC voted counted. A few Congressional members dropped their opposite and voted to accept the results. It also opened the door to expose the former Presidents attempts to stay in power. I would also add that this likely ended the former President's option to run again in 2024.
Most of the rioters were lard asses with grey hair who could barely run up the stairs. Contrast these with the young Yale law school grads who tossed Molotov cocktails. Add as well the leftist latte-drinking punks living in their parents basement who paraded during the nights for most of 2020, barricading police in buildings, setting these on fire, terrorizing innocent Americans in their homes, driving upwards violent crime which persist today, and billions of dollars in damages. Then there is looting and businesses closing therein.
Justice will not be served until every DOJ member and local, state and federally elected Democrat who protected these ANTIFA BLM Anarchists are tried for sedition, conspiracy and any other infraction of the US Code, and punishment executed to the letter of the law.
I did not vote for Trump, and was a lifelong Democrat up until Dec 2020 when I changed to NPA. Modern day Democrats are the enemy of the nation.
-------
18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
CHAZ/CHOP Seattle.
They took over a couple of city blocks *and the people living there*.
Ironically, they put up barricades and placed guards on their borders.
I grew up near the Delaware River
Articles that start like this really are not promising.
( https://reason.com/2020/05/31/i-got-tear-gassed-at-baltimores-city-hall/ )
Guess he'd be happy with the current state of affairs in the Democratic Republic of NJ.
Steven Greenhut's continued existence is farcical.
Literally cancer
Even more farcical than a farcical aquatic ceremony.
I was born a small black child, but died a small white child. - Michael Jackson
Aides championed a blueprint that would have destroyed our democracy. No one seems the slightest bit sorry.
No adults were in charge, even as our nation came within a whisker of becoming like any garden-variety tin-pot regime.
You clutch those pearls! You clutch them really hard. Trump came within a hairs-breadth of ending the Republic! He nearly destroyed Democracy! He nearly overthrew the free world!
I'll give him credit. If Donnie's really an authoritarian dictator, he's the least capable one that ever lived.
So inept at Hitlering that most of what he did resulted in greater peace and freedom.
What kind of bumblefuck fascist doesn't manage to invade anyone or accidentally makes peace between Arabs and Jews. Totally inept.
Incompetence is not a defence - whether to being an authoritarian or to attempting a coup.
You didn't actually read my comment, did you Shrike.
"Incompetence is not a defence..."
Neither is stupidity, stupid TDS-addled shit-pile
I'll give him credit. If Donnie's really an authoritarian dictator, he's the least capable one that ever lived.
Yep. He could have used the pandemic to institute all sorts of restrictions. See Canada, Australia, England, France, and Germany for examples. Instead he was against lock-downs. Against restrictions. Promoted continuing your life normally.
Or California...
True. Just ask any Democrat.
"There's no limit to what he could do. He could destroy the Earth."—Klaatu
"Trump came within a hairs-breadth of ending the Republic!"
It's pretty amazing that the Republic has lasted 250 years considering that it could so easily be overthrown by a few hundred unarmed rioters.
Do these morons really think if they got Pelosi’s gavel from her, that it would somehow transfer power to the trespassers?
The morons are the ones claiming that getting Pelosi's gavel would destroy democracy.
It is leftist fantasizing, that a revolutionary assault on the Capitol would result in a new government.
Leftist projection is what we see from the likes of those claiming the protest, that got out of hand, was in any way an attempt to overthrow the government.
Americans should be mocking the snowflakes who stormed the Capitol, some who portray their resulting wrist-slaps as gulag-like injustices.
People who committed no violent acts who had to spend 10 months in confinement without bail and then got year plus sentences are absolutely victims of a politicized criminal justice system. Saying it's not as bad as the gulags is like saying the Japanese should shut up about the internment camps because at least there was no Holocaust.
So libertarian. You're a snowflake if you desire civil rights. Now do Saint Floyd.
Average plea deal for non violent protestors has been 52 months.
Precisely this. What the hell has happened to this publication?
Sure, there are legitimate concerns about the events of the day and the potential outcomes (none of which really happened). But FFS libertarians ought to be completely outraged by the subsequent incarceration and treatment of these people. It's beyond astonishing that Reason would actually suggest they deserve public derision instead.
They’re not allowed to like Trump. The left viciously threatens and attacks anyone who praises, works for, Ally’s with Trump for any reason. They want to isolate him through intimidation and threats. J6 is a thing because they want to make sure he can’t run for office again.
They are victims of an overwhelmed criminal justice system in the DC Circuit Court. That court saw its caseload double within the span of just a few months. Sure it is possible that there is some evil mustache-twirler in the Justice Department saying "keep those seditionists in the dungeon for as long as it takes!", but a more likely explanation is that the wheels of justice are turning slowly from a huge backlog of cases.
That's not right, the government should devote more resources to make sure each defendant gets a speedy trial, but it is different than some purposeful political desire to keep certain prisoners locked up.
You can see the unseriousness of the comment/er by noting how he underhandedly converts the issue of double standards to a conspiracy theory. No one claimed the matter requires an evil mustache, but he claims it to delegitimize the obvious double standard because his only mission is protecting the left.
In reality leftist bureaucrats are sympathetic to other leftists as we saw when the Molotov cocktail perps had their sentences reduced even after they accepted the plea deal. Activists, media, and leftist commenters support this by overstating (an insurrection!) or understating (mostly peaceful!) what happened to prime the emotions of the decision makers and public. The in-group treats itself differently than it treats the out-group. This is why the left worked so hard to control our institutions.
He's the Democrats "attack poodle" for the comments.
And Jeff again shows his argumentation from ignorance. He has ignored that rights of the trial process have been violated many times. One Texas man not being indicted or seeing a court for 10 months. The DoJ rushed put new charges to keep the arrest and jailing active instead of making his violation of rights whole through dismissal.
This is not an issue of backlog. It doesn't take months to see a judge initially. A backlog doesn't cause detail of bail when they do see judges. A backlog doesn't cause the protestors to be put on the worst wings of D.C. jails.
This is jeff rationalizing the abhorrent treatment of his political opponents.
One Texas man not being indicted or seeing a court for 10 months. The DoJ rushed put new charges to keep the arrest and jailing active instead of making his violation of rights whole through dismissal.
Knowing Jesse, this is most likely a lie, or a heavily distorted version of the truth.
Knowing Jesse, this is most likely a lie, or a heavily distorted version of the truth.
Note how Jeffey can rationalize any outcome just by refusing to admit contradictory evidence exists. He'd make a perfect Title IX investigator.
If this was true, they would have moved the cases to other courts with freer dockets. Also, defense attorneys would have been demanding venue changes to get a speedy trial as required by the Constitution.
They actually have been using transport extensions to keep these prisoners from seeing judges for longer periods than required by law.
Absolute bollocks. I've seen private lawyers state when commenting on the J6 situation that any municipal court would regularly chew through that caseload in a few months or less.
It's not evil mustache twirling. It's actual hatred keeping them from being objective. They HATE these people so they don't see them as protestors, or even rioters. They're too biased to actually have authority over the people they have to issue rulings on.
And it's the same with the Gulags. Stalin thought he was protecting the country by exiling subversives. He wasn't fluffing his big mustache and laughing over how evil he was. Now he did enjoy watching the interrogations because he believed THEY were evil. He took pleasure at delivering justice upon evil people. It's the same with these jurors and courts-they believe all of these people are evil, making it difficult for them to receive justice.
It's fear too. The junta was absolutely terrified of what the people will do if everything came out and are trying to create as many chilling effects as possible.
It's actual hatred keeping them from being objective. They HATE these people so they don't see them as protestors, or even rioters. They're too biased to actually have authority over the people they have to issue rulings on.
Sure. Whatevs. You know, if your argument relies on your opponents acting as if they were caricatures of cartoon villains, your argument is probably false. Because real people are not comic book characters.
Jesus, ATM just fucking denied describing them as cartoon villains ("It's not evil mustache twirling"), explaining that they view the rioters as evil and therefore are incapable of treating the rioters justly.
Yet there you go lecturing him about how real people are not comic book characters...
Held without bail for Al,sot. Year and a half……….
"People who committed no violent acts who had to spend 10 months in confinement without bail and then got year plus sentences are absolutely victims of a politicized criminal justice system"
Reason refers to this as a "wrist slap"
No amount of imprisonment is a "wrist slap". "Wrist slap" would be how they normally deal with mass civil disobedience. Arrest a bunch of people, release them pretty much right away and drop most charges.
Make them pay fines, as well, to help recoup the cost of the damage to the building. That's very libertarian. And even if you didn't damage the building, you should be fined for trespassing since your trespass was a follow-up to the building damage. You spread the costs over 500+ people and you've got plenty of money to cover repairs and renovations.
Only partially correct. Two different entrances for east vs west. One side they were waived in by police, see Straka video. It was the side with the tunnels where there was vandalism.
Look at Kalief Browder: about two years in solitary confinement after being accused of stealing a backpack, and after all that time awaiting trial, the prosecution dropped the case because they recognized they couldn't prove it. This is a badly broken system that middle aged white dudes have been 100% behind ("Back the Blue!" "don't drop the soap in the prison showers ha ha!") until they were looking down its barrel. Then, suddenly, it's unfair.
Newsflash: it's been a problem forever, you just didn't give a fuck.
Newsflash: it's been a problem forever, you just didn't give a fuck.
Yup.
I have no problem believing that some of the defendants are not being treated well, or staying in jail for undue periods of time. But that is not (most likely) particular hatred against THEM, that is just how the system has always worked.
But that is not (most likely) particular hatred against THEM, that is just how the system has always worked.
This is demonstrably false since literally none of the antifa / BLM rioters were similarly treated, even those who threw Molotov cocktails or endangered people's lives by committing arson on occupied buildings. The truth is that Jeffey will defend any punishment directed against his political enemies no matter how extreme or illegitimate.
Wasn't a coup attempt. Reason writers still carrying water for the Dems.
attempting to get greivences heard is now equal to a coup
At least the Right is finally embracing the cause of justice reform, albeit on an ad-hoc basis.
Let's ignore 2020, when Republicans were fully on board with it and Democrats in the House refused to let Republicans have input on a House bill, and also refused to table anything coming from the Republican-controlled Senate (which did pass a Criminal Justice reform bill).
Like, holy fuck. This article really wants to cast aspersions on Republicans without an ounce of self-awareness.
Let's also ignore that Rand Paul put forth a bill to end no-knock raids and it couldn't overcome a filibuster because Democrats refused any legislation that wasn't authored by a Democrat.
Then he got “say her name!”’d on the streets of DC by roving mobs of clueless activist goons.
Republicans don't support criminal justice reform because they know that with Dems administering it the result is a disaster as we currently see in various places around the country. Maybe if libertarians spent more time publicizing intelligent reform rather demonizing Republicans as racist for opposing this we would be more successful.
I think this is the core Mises Caucus / left-libertarian conflict. Left libertarians oppose anything other than calling Republicans racist. If that means we don't get criminal justice reform they're ok with that trade.
Is thsi article satire? At no point was the guy with the horns going to be in charge. The plan was to challenge the election as was done in 1887. Look it up. It's not unprecedented.
Nobody was getting killed , there were no weapons. If you want to look at a successful coup look at about the same time the Taliban coup. Hint, they came with weapons.
Expect Mike to try to gaslight you on the no weapons claim by posting an arrest for a weapon that occurred almost 6 or 7 hours after the riots were over, after curfew was implemented.
The one where the weapon was in the car?
No. This is a Maryland resident who was wandering near the barriers, cop felt an object in his jacket, guy ran, cops found a weapon. But he had no known connection to the riots. It happened after Bowser issued curfew.
But TRUMP!
The plan was to challenge the election as was done in 1887.
There was no federal election in 1887.
You're such a dipshit. the 1876 election was disputed in 1877 just like Jan 6 2017 was a dispute of the 1876 election.
Correction J6 was a dispute of the 2016 election
You said 1887.
Furthermore, if you are referring to 1877, then you are in a sense right - but not in the way that you think. You see, in 1877, there were genuinely disputed slates of electors from three states that Congress had to figure out how to resolve. So the plan this time around, in 2021, was to PRETEND that the same type of scenario was taking place today, but with completely fake sets of electors. Furthermore, in the intervening time period, the Electoral Count Act was passed to deal with controversies of this type. So Pence was supposed to ignore the Electoral Count Act and pretend that fake electors were just as legitimate as certified electors. Is that really what you are advocating for?
That's all you've got left, huh? Pettifogging about a mistyped digit in a date when the inference was obvious.
Damn, you’re tedious.
I had never been a fan of U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney, (R–Wyo.), but she nailed it in her address to the committee, referencing a legal decision by Orange County federal Judge David O. Carter:
"President Trump's efforts to pressure Vice President Pence to act illegally by refusing to count electoral votes likely violated two federal criminal statutes," Cheney said. "(I)f Dr. (John) Eastman and President Trump's plan had worked, it would have permanently ended the peaceful transition of power, undermining American democracy and the Constitution."
So Judge Carter is the ultimate arbiter of electoral law?
"likely violated" Wow, says who. If that's true why is there a move afoot to change the Electoral Count Act? Seems it is not quite clear.
Yea, those are some stout allegations. If the accuser can't accuse someone of actually violating the law, do you think they even believe it?
If Congress is legally empowered to vote on something, then obviously they are empowered to vote no. Duh.
Congress is not legally empowered to vote on the electoral vote. They simply observe the Vice President’s opening and tallying of the votes. Read the Constitution.
Peaceful transition of power ended when Obama/Bush era holdovers actively conspired to take down the incoming administration.
"President Trump's efforts to pressure Vice President Pence to act illegally by refusing to count electoral votes likely violated two federal criminal statutes," Cheney said. "(I)f Dr. (John) Eastman and President Trump's plan had worked, it would have permanently ended the peaceful transition of power, undermining American democracy and the Constitution."
It's revealing such language was never applied to the Democrats efforts to overturn the 2000 Bush election or to refuse to certify Trump's 2016 election. One way to distinguish between libertarians and leftists posing as libertarians is testing to see if the judge applies their standards to the left as well as the right. Another failure.
It's revealing that the committee has already said there won't be any criminal referrals.
It's revealing that Trump "likely violated" federal criminal statutes and all they can come up with is railroading a bunch of trespassers and some fake show trials for "sedition" by non-government actors.
It's revealing that this issue is so urgent, such a threat to democracy, that they have to postpone it to a later date- closer to the election because it's not getting any traction. It's not even wiggling the needle.
It's revealing that Liz Cheney is running ads telling WY democrats how to change their registration and vote in the primary because she's got no chance otherwise.
What it's revealing is that this is just campaigning from the House floor, which is also a violation of federal criminal statutes.
It's revealing that the committee has already said there won't be any criminal referrals.
So if there aren't going to be any criminal referrals, then the committee can't be a "show trial", can it?
They have already given criminal referrals to the doj you retarded fuck.
See the contempt referrals.
On top of that the DoJ has admitted to using materials from the J6 committee to go after various actors such as the lawyer yesterday as well as the Nevada GOP, multiple members.
What it's revealing is that this is just campaigning from the House floor, which is also a violation of federal criminal statutes.
Yes yes of course. All those other times when House committees were investigating matters with an eye towards influencing electoral outcomes, those were totally fine. It's just THIS committee that is a "violation of federal criminal statutes". Isn't that right?
Where was your outrage when Republicans launched their Benghazi investigation just a few months before the 2014 midterms? Hmm? Don't you think they had some electoral motivations behind the timing of their little stunt?
And by the way, I am absolutely willing to concede that the timing of these Jan. 6 committee hearings are designed in part to influence the upcoming midterm elections. No doubt. But that is par for the course, not unique to Democrats in this particular case. Republicans do the exact same thing when they are in charge. When are you going to call them out for it?
Do we need to go through how benghazi was an investigation into actual executive actions as required by law vs the investigation into citizens and political opponents for a non executive action again? Sure both had political intents, but the latter has no actual oversight nexus to even give the appearance of validity. Likewise the gop didn't deny seats to democrats om the benghazi committee.
But keep defending these abuses jeff. Makes you look totally non partisan.
Yup typical Jesse - "when Republicans do it, it's totally justifiable, but when Democrats do it, it's totally awful"
Keep proving to everyone here that you are nothing but a Team Red shill
Which words confused you in my statements? I'm not the one arguing below the 2016 attempt to change elector votes is different because the VP wasn't asked to do it.
Fucking dumbass hypocrite.
You just can't do it. You cannot bring yourself to criticize Republicans even when they do the exact same fucking thing as Democrats.
Also revealing:
https://twitter.com/YossiGestetner/status/1540164107395125248?t=_x92wXPnQIIm4FzBegwPQw&s=19
Who knew that the politically-motivated prosecution of @DineshDSouza for a FEC irregularity would be small potatoes to where things stand today.
Thread:
"signed paperwork signaling their support for former President Donald Trump in a symbolic ceremony devoid of any legal merit."
But this isn't Russia so a PR/trolling stunt can get you in trouble with the government.
"Free speech."
Did the Feds seize phones/bust doors from all those who pushed a fake dossier and false stories about Russians banks that which helped drive a fake federal investigation? No, because the Feds were willing accomplices in that corrupt scheme to take a political opponent out.
The Fake Electors were a PR stunt to get a point across with no consequential impact on the federal government. The Russia Hoax however did help fuel many months of federal government action in 2016. Yet how many were later harassed by the Feds for it?
But NAVALNY!
Criminalizing someone's complaints about the elections which led to a rally which led to a few dozen people to pop off and to criminalize a PR stunt about electors are escalations of the Russia hoax which was an attempt by the sitting government to take a political opponent out.
Russia is laughing all the way to the bank from their enhanced trade with China, India, etc -- countries who think the US is corruptly in a double standard about Russia's war and treatment of NAVALNY.
"The West" lives in their own bubble. A large bubble but still just a bubble.
The US Duma (Congress) has a committee to harass their political opponents who had an opinion about the 2020 outcome and/or who organized a rally about it. The Feds charged a few of those dissidents for not appearing at the committee.
Feds also subpoenaed the Coms of an attorney who is representing one of those political dissidents. Steve Bannon's attorney!
The "sacred" "client-attorney privilege" is privileged until the Feds decide otherwise.
When Feds interviewed HRC at the comfort of her home in 2016 just days before Comey announced that there will be no charges (interview was a formality, Hillary's attorney who was likely involved in the illegal deletion of emails sat in on the meeting after having gotten immunity!
Trump's attorney Giuliani gets raided.
Bannon's attorney gets subpoenaed for attorney-client material or simply to harass him.
Meanwhile, Hillary's attorney got immunity for her potential involvement in a broad illegal conspiracy and sat in to coach her co-conspirator client.
Feds raided the home of Jeffrey Clark; acting number 3 official in the Trump DOJ who was willing to investigate allegations of 2020 voter fraud.
With this standard, the Barr DOJ should have stormed doors of every official who investigated what they knew was a hoax: Collusion!
The Gartland/Biden DOJ are persecuting and prosecuting political opponents/dissidents of all levels -- From selfie holding grandmas to former senior aides to a POTUS; their attorneys and former senior officials. The current admin has literally no standing to whine about NAVALNY.
The isn't to about "double standards." That's for "small" stuff such as an official holding a party during lockdowns. This is a targeted purge and crushing of a past and potentially future political opponent by use of the most powerful civilian arms of the US government!
The frauds on CNN/MSNBC who clutched pearls in near-collapse for democracy's future when a POTUS trolled a reporter, are not only NOT opposing all this: They are cheering it on! They are egging on this ruthless takedown of dissidents! Of course, most Cons/GOPs are silent.
[Continued]
"My rant here won't move leading GOPs/Cons to speak up. It won't shame alleged reporters into holding government accountable (a 180 from their current role). But the FA is the first because without the ability and courage to speak up when gov runs amok, all other "rights" are a 0!
Con/GOP clowns talk about Trump 2024 without taking notice that the Biden DOJ is crushing Trump's inner circle and/or may even target him directly!
Nobody sane would work for his admin even if he runs and wins.
They would do ZERO once in out of fear of persecution by 2030!
You are not a "principled conservative" by piling onto Trump. You simply echo the stance of 95% of media output. You are either a useful idiot or a self-serving brat who wants points from the authoritarians. Speak out against this brazen, blatant abusive corruption; chicken-????'s!
There is an IMPOTENT point here: Complaining about election outcomes; demanding investigations of claims (including knowingly fake once such as collusion), organizing rallies and then some rally goers popping off, were all part of regular politics in the US the last 20 years.
To criminalize it now is not because (as Never Trampers always claim) "Trump brought into onto himsel because he had every right and reason to yse the same rethoric, tools and tactics that were always used INCLUDING AGAINST HIM! He was treated as illegitimate for 4 years!
Useful idiotic Never/Non-Trampers blame Trump's actions for causing abuses by his tormentors even when they persecute him for things that his political opponents did a day earlier without anyone thinking it's a problem. Trump opponents change the rules, and idiot Cons nod along!
Cons who blame Trump for the corrupt abuses that he faces, forgot that the Obama/Biden Government served as a political tool in 2012 before Trump ran. The whole IC lied about the Benghazi video; IRS targeted conservatives, and the Mueller FBI gave the IRS a pass.
A stupid line about Trump by small Lib accounts get more Twitter engagement than my threads no matter how much journalism or history are in it. But if it pains, you scream. It's the least I can do until I fully wake up that this is not Russia so speaking up here comes with risk.
The authoritarian Biden DOJ moves up the level of whom in the Trump Orbit they target and they move down the level of claimed wrong doing by those whom they target.
2012 abuses were child's play to where we are now.
Wow.
A Dem House Committee is working hand-in-hand with a Dem DOJ to take out a former Republican POTUS who worked hand-in-hand with a GOP DOJ to ascertain the integrity of the elections.
For NAVALNY they at least put on a show trial. Here it's done without excuses.
"Big story" that GOP lawmakers who rejected electors asked Trump for a pardon.
Many @HouseDemocrats rejected electors post 2004/2016 but didn't ask for pardons because it never crossed their mind that their politics will be criminalized when the other party will be in power.
The pardon requests looks bad on Biden/Garland; not on @mattgaetz et al who wanted protection from an abusive law enforcement entity who would unleash hell on political opponents for once-accepted steps. @January6thCmte Chair Johnson voted against OH's electors post '04."
Many elected officials "likely violated" federal laws. They just haven't been caught yet.
'....No adults were in charge, even as our nation came within a whisker of becoming like any garden-variety tin-pot regime. Even the wife of a Supreme Court justice lobbied to overturn the election—an almost inconceivable breach of democratic norms that has received a collective shrug among conservatives. ...' Liz Cheney, writing under a pen name?
Imagine the spouse of an official doing something the official shouldn't! The HORROR!
Guess they didn't follow the Puerto Rican Nationalist plan.
The 1954 United States Capitol shooting was an attack on March 1, 1954, by four Puerto Rican nationalists who sought to promote the cause of Puerto Rico's independence from US rule. They fired 30 rounds from semi-automatic pistols onto the legislative floor from the Ladies' Gallery (a balcony for visitors) of the House of Representatives chamber within the United States Capitol.
From Wikipedia.
Fuck you you weevil marxist cunt. One day you should read the Constitution and ask yourself what an unarmed group of people going to the capital could be doing in a situation like that, and it sure as fuck isn't a coup, that would be the repeated assaults on the capitol by the Democrats including one that required the evacuation of the President and injured over 100 police.
It wasn't a 'coup attempt'.
It was an attempt to STOP the coup that was in process.
It failed. And the illegitimate government that took power immediately began trying to eradicate it's opposition instead of taking care of the job they'd stolen.
And here we are. In a nation barreling headlong towards a cliff, with the people driving too occupied with getting the people screaming about that cliff to shut up to see the cliff.
That's the key point. The protesters were not seeking to "Take over", as a coup would indicate. They were seeking to protect the state.
You're right, the morons in the Capitol building were never seriously going to overthrow the US government. Although, they could have done much more damage than they did. They came scarily close to nabbing Pence and hauling him off to the gallows. But yeah they were idiots cosplaying soldier.
The more serious and concerning plot, though, was what Eastman and his crowd were planning. The plan was to generate slates of fake electors, submit them to Congress pretending to be a contested official slates, then have Pence declare "I can't tell which is the real one" and set them aside, in violation of the Electoral Count Act. That way, based on the remaining uncontested electoral votes, Trump wins; or, the election is thrown to the House of Representatives, per the Twelfth Amendment, and Trump wins again. What this crew was planning was way closer to 'sedition' than the cosplaying morons in the Capitol. The Jan. 6 committee needs to spend more time on this plot rather than focus so much attention on Trump.
How dare they use the rules to, checks notes, win!
I'm sure the crowd, that had no weapons, were actually going to take Pence to the gallows. You are truly a special kind of stupid, Jeffy. Please don't change.
"I'm sure the crowd, that had no weapons, were actually going to take Pence to the gallows."
It's really tiresome that they keep bringing up the "Hang Mike Pence" thing as if it were unprecedented and a bridge-to-far. They bring it up with such regularity that I think they actually believe that there was going to be some frontier justice that day and it wasn't just a political statement.
They don't discuss the pink hats saying blow up the white house in 2017?
No, any time violence was suggested from the left it is just political speech. When suggested by the right, it's steely eyed resolve apparently.
And for you it is the opposite. Rioters who chant HANG MIKE PENCE *while committing acts of violence breaking into the Capitol* are to be treated as 'legitimate political discourse', while Schumer saying Kavanaugh will "reap the whirlwind" is clearly making a direct violent threat against a SCOTUS judge. Right?
How are you not just a mirror image of the Team Blue morons that you loathe?
Lol. Do you want all the violent threats against Trump dummy? Can you cite any actual gallows around the Capitol to make it a true threat?
Keep flailing you authoritarian leftist shit.
As I said. Violent rhetoric from Republicans *while in the process of committing actual acts of violence* are to be interpreted in the most favorable light and dutifully ignored. Barely suggestive rhetoric like "reap the whirlwind" from Democrats are to be interpreted in the worst possible light to make it seem far worse than it really is.
That is why you are just a shill for Team Red - running cover for Republicans
So you believe in disparate rules based on party. I am talking about threats made such as the night Trump was rushed to a bunker sea lion. Or was that a non violent act?
So you believe in disparate rules based on party.
No, that's you Jesse.
If we are supposed to ignore a mob chanting HANG MIKE PENCE while in the process of committing violent acts to break into the Capitol, then can you seriously claim that Schumer's statements on Kavanaugh "reaping the whirlwind" and "paying a price" constituted a violent threat against Kavanaugh's life?
But we know the answer, you are going to run cover for Team Red.
Jeff, you're tu quoque is quite laughable.
I have denounced both attempts repeatedly. You continue to defend the j6 committee and the 2016 attempts.
How delusional are you?
Your "denouncement" is "oh, somebody did something bad, now let's spend the rest of the time blaming Democrats".
Jeffy, we all immediately cam out against J6. The difference is, we’re not calling it an ‘insurrection’, because it wasn’t. Whereas as you have given cover to the left’s far broader and more serious violent acts.
How are you not just a mirror image of the Team Red morons that you loathe?
It's interesting he can never apply his own standards to himself.
I guess you've never seen Trump or other officials hung in effigy. This is how casually the left sees lynching.
"And for you it is the opposite. Rioters who chant HANG MIKE PENCE *while committing acts of violence breaking into the Capitol* are to be treated as 'legitimate political discourse', while Schumer saying Kavanaugh will "reap the whirlwind" is clearly making a direct violent threat against a SCOTUS judge. Right?"
We are holding Schumer to the same standard you're holding conservative protesters to.
Sure they did. Don’t you remember how much trouble Madonna got in for saying that?
Oh, wait…..
So I should believe that the people who were chanting HANG MIKE PENCE, *while in the process of committing violence to break into the Capitol*, didn't really mean it.
Once again, Republicans get the benefit of the doubt.
"So I should believe that the people who were chanting HANG MIKE PENCE, *while in the process of committing violence to break into the Capitol*, didn't really mean it."
I don't care what you believe.
But you want everyone else to believe that the Republicans were just pretending. Maybe you think they were just "tourists" engaging in "legitimate political discourse"?
Some were trespassers. It turns out some were let in.so,e committed acts of vandalism. Some did not. But it was on,y a few hundred people in one incident. Not constant, ongoing acts of serious violence, including dozens of murders. Committed for years, across the US by tens of thousands of leftist rioters.
Once again, Republicans get the benefit of the doubt.
This is the level of analysis we expect from the left. We criticize the left for what they did: vandalism and violence. The left criticizes the right not for what they did, a riot, but elevates the assertion to claim "The Republic Was at Risk".
In the leftist mind these are the same thing.
When BLM had a gallows at the capitol riots teh media claimed it was purely symbolic. I wouldn't have wanted to test that theory. When republican protesters had a gallows it was for realz man they were there to kill. Yea right
The forms that were never signed by the correct officials making the documents official? Lol. Wow jeff. You continue to impress. They knew the firms weren't official. They had not been signed by proper state officials.
The outcome of the attempt is the same as what the intended outcome was by Democrats in 2000, 2004. And 2016. You keep claiming this is different but only on the grounds your a leftist shit who defends all leftist actions.
Politico story from 2016 about democrats attempting to block Trumps win by invalidating electors.
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/democrats-electoral-college-faithless-trump-231731
But but but you will cry to try to not be a hypocrite.
At least a half-dozen Democratic electors have signed onto an attempt to block Donald Trump from winning an Electoral College majority, an effort designed not only to deny Trump the presidency but also to undermine the legitimacy of the institution.
The presidential electors, mostly former Bernie Sanders supporters who hail from Washington state and Colorado, are now lobbying their Republican counterparts in other states to reject their oaths — and in some cases, state law — to vote against Trump when the Electoral College meets on Dec. 19.
And another article where Hillary and her campaign manager worked to push the conscientious objector strategy by pushing Russian election hacking claims.
And a group of about 80 electors (including one Republican) signed on to a letter to National Intelligence Director James Clapper asking for a briefing on the role Russian hacks may have played in the election before the vote. (That request, supported by Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair John Podesta, will not be granted, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said.)
Activists, meanwhile, have taken up the cause. A petition aimed at "conscientious electors" has garnered nearly 5 million signatures. The West Wing’s fictitious president, Martin Sheen, and a slew of actors released a YouTube appeal pleading with electors to give the election to Clinton, or anyone other than Trump.
Yes. Democrats pushed for electors to vote against the results of their state elections jeff. You are aware of this right?
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/drama-filled-electoral-college-vote-fitting-ending-2016-election-n697521
Thanks for bringing up this article. You are right, many people (not just Democrats, and not even primarily political leaders) wanted electors to violate their oaths and in some cases break state law to vote for someone other than Trump. It's not right to advocate to break state law. I completely agree. I will also note, however, that this campaign was qualitatively different than Eastman's campaign, because in 2016, the idea was for the Electoral College to act according to its original roots, as a deliberative body to choose the next President using the popular vote as a guide only. We don't follow that model now, for many good reasons, but AT LEAST what these activists were advocating not only had historical precedent, but also was consistent with the Constitution. By contrast, what Eastman was planning had ZERO basis in historical precedent - there is zero justification for the claim that the VP alone gets to decide which electors are legitimate or not and unilaterally decide on the next President - it was also grossly unconstitutional.
So even in the worst example you can find of Democrats behaving badly, it is still not as bad as the Eastman plot. Good job there Jesse.
Lol. It results in the same thing. Overturning an election.
Please continue to call others partisan as you keep rationalizing why what democrats did is just fine.
This is the tactic that you often try to take. You deflect from Republican bad behavior by trying to make the conversation about personality rather than the issue, and by bringing up whataboutisms. THAT is why you are a Team Red shill. You have yet to condemn or denounce anything that Eastman did even when given ample opportunity to do so. You instead talk about Hillary or Democrats or any fucking other subject rather than actually confront what Team Red tried to do under our noses on Jan. 6.
That is why you are an apologist for the riots and the subversion of the electoral process. You give only the tiniest slap on the wrist to anyone who did anything bad on that day and spend 99.99% of your time bitching about Democrats, when it was Republicans alone who perpetrated the disaster of that day.
You’re an apologist for far more serious, and violent riots.
"That is why you are an apologist for the riots"
If BLM riots were identical to 1/6 --- we'd have had billions less in damage and dozens fewer dead.
Once again, Jesse. No one doubts that Democrats challenged electoral votes in 2000, 2004, and 2016. The difference is, they did not concoct a scheme wherein the VP would ignore the law and the Constitution and simply declare the Democrat the winner. Your attempt to both-sides this is very tiresome and is just more evidence that you are running cover for Team Red, that you will defend what they did by trying to minimize the sedition that they were plotting.
Hey fucking retard. From the article.
and in some cases, state law
The difference is, they did not concoct a scheme wherein the VP would ignore the law and the Constitution and simply declare the Democrat the winner.
Again. You find the one difference and focus on that despite the results of both acts being the same. This call this dishonest argumention.
That one difference is the FUCKING IMPORTANT PART.
Straight up, Jesse: was it wrong for Eastman & co. to concoct the fake elector scheme to try to justify breaking the law and the Constitution and install Trump as president? Yes or no?
Can you answer that question without referring to Democrats?
The difference is, they did not concoct a scheme wherein the VP would ignore the law
This is a partisan misrepresentation. Leftists claim the law was ignored but in reality Trump officials tried to use the law to challenge results just as Al Gore did in 2000. The other difference is that leftists automatically conclude any effort to overturn their victory is illegitimate thus their irrational hyperventilating. It would be better if Trump had not done this, but Dems set the stage by challenging every election they've lost since 2000. As usual leftists attack the right adopting the left's tactics because their desire is to cement a double standard to their benefit. This is why they spend all their effort controlling our institutions.
This is similar to their legitimizing riots for 6 months and then falling apart when the other side has their own for 3 hours. They aren't interested in or capable of reasoned judgement.
They literally invented a story that DJT was colluding with the Kremlin, sold it to the FBI as genuine, and spent the next 4 years trying to oust him from office in that fake story. And nearly succeeded.
Contrast that with a group of yokels milling about the capital, throwing some papers and breaking some furniture.
Which was more dangerous to our "Democracy"?
They literally invented a story that DJT was colluding with the Kremlin,
Sure. It was invented out of whole cloth. No semblance of truth to it at all.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/31/politics/trump-tower-meeting-timeline/index.html
Goddamn you’re sad and pathetic. This is exactly why we know you’re a prog.
Holy shit, you're defending the credibility of Russiagate?
"They came scarily close to nabbing Pence and hauling him off to the gallows."
L. O. fucking L dude.
Turn off the MSM and stop browsing the DailyBeast man. It is rotting your brain. Apparently getting dunked on so much yesterday is further degrading your ability to grapple with reality
The rioters came within 40 feet of grabbing Pence.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-16/jan-6-panel-presents-chilling-details-of-pence-escape-from-mob
they came within 40 feet of getting completely ventilated by secret service?
They came within 40 feet of grabbing Mike Pence. True or False?
And I note that you mentioned nothing about Eastman's plans to subvert the law and the Constitution in the service of Trump. Why is that, precisely?
Why are you running cover for the people who purposefully and willfully tried to get Pence to break the law in order to declare Trump the winner?
you haven't met the burden of proof for what you are claiming. Very far from it
Here you go. There's maps and timelines and everything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOpVXqdesMM&ab_channel=LiveNOWfromFOX
Without weapons vs SS armed agents?
Jeff. Are you even going to pretend you're not a statist shit today? Congrats if true.
Are you going to stop pretending not to be a Team Red shill?
Lol. I'm far more libertarian than you ever pretended to be jeff.
If "libertarian" meant "shilling for Team Red", then yes you are right.
And you above dismiss Hillary and the electors plans in 2016.
Apparently you haven't been dunked on enough?
Apparently the narrative around here is "run cover for Republicans behaving badly".
The only one defending government abuses is you defending the democrats here.
Everyone else here has said the riots were bad. But the reaction from the left is far more abusive to average citizens. And the use of it to go after political opponents is far worse.
You pushing the narratives to justify it is you defending abuses.
And here you are, trying to BOWF SIZES an attempt to subvert the Constitution against the will of the people and portraying the rioters as POLITICAL PRISONERS for the *real crimes* that they committed.
If you genuinely want us to believe that you sincerely believe Republicans were in the wrong here, you would:
- stop saying that people accused and/or convicted of legitimate crimes are "political prisoners" - they are not
- stop saying that the Jan. 6 hearings are a "show trial" when there is no trial, no charges, no punishment from this trial at all
- stop minimizing the role of the fake electors in the scheme to subvert the Constitution
- start to condemn Eastman and everyone else in his band of ringleaders who concocted this scheme to purposefully ignore the law and the Constitution in the service of Trump
But you don't do any of that, you offer half-hearted insincere slaps-on-the-wrist while condemning anyone trying to hold the rioters and the plotters accountable for their actions.
So they're actually being charged with glorified trespassing (obstructing a government function)for the most part. The same fucking thing the Kavanaugh protestors did by the way.
So stop making shit up. Should a glorified trespasser be held without bail? Should a glorified trespasser have a right to a speedy trial? Does the accused politics factor into whether they get bail or whether they get a speedy triial. Should they have to recant their views or back to the gulag for you?
Should a glorified trespasser be held without bail?
I think it depends on the individual situation. In some cases it might be warranted, in other cases it might not be. For example, if the accused person is unrepentant and has a history of making violent threats, I can see the case for a much higher bail setting than an accused person who is contrite and was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Don't you?
Should a glorified trespasser have a right to a speedy trial?
Absolutely, and if there is anything that the justice system ought to be criticized for, it is this.
Does the accused politics factor into whether they get bail or whether they get a speedy triial.
The evidence for this claim is weak. A much more plausible explanation is that the wheels of justice are turning slowly in the DC Circuit Court because their caseload almost doubled within the span of just a few months.
Should they have to recant their views or back to the gulag for you?
To my understanding, an accused person offering an apology as a part of a plea deal is a standard practice. Why should Jan. 6 rioters be any different?
Almost none of those charged have no criminal history dummy. Yet no bail. Delayed trials. Solitary. 52 month plea agreements.
Again. Abuses you are defending.
Yup, you are running cover for what the rioters did by criticizing any attempt to hold them accountable.
Why don't you bring up a *specific case* of a rioter that you thought was treated unfairly and argue specifically why you think it is unfair.
Oh wait you can't, that is not what Fox News or Tucker Carlson told you.
To my understanding, an accused person offering an apology as a part of a plea deal is a standard practice.
Except the offense is ostensibly supposed to be about behavior, not belief or motivation. Otherwise, the only logical conclusion is that the belief or motivation is the crime. Saying that the accused should recant their belief or motivation is indicating precisely that it's the belief that is being prosecuted.
Jeff supports the Spanish inquisition.
Except the offense is ostensibly supposed to be about behavior, not belief or motivation. Otherwise, the only logical conclusion is that the belief or motivation is the crime. Saying that the accused should recant their belief or motivation is indicating precisely that it's the belief that is being prosecuted.
So what is the *specific case* that you are referring to, where someone was told to recant their *belief* as opposed to apologize for *behavior*? All we have is Jesse's claim that this is happening and I don't trust Jesse to tell the truth.
I mean jeff thinks they were allowed to receive Capital punishment.
chemjeff radical individualist
February.9.2021 at 8:56 am
Flag Comment Mute User
What is there to talk about?
From a libertarian perspective, Ashli Babbett was trespassing, and the officers were totally justified to shoot trespassers. Again from a libertarian perspective, the officers would have been justified in shooting every single trespasser. That would not have been wise or prudent, of course.
They were all trespassers trying to be where they weren't supposed to be.
Yup there we go. You want to pretend to be opposed to what the rioters did, while deflecting and criticizing anyone who actually opposes what they did.
Again from a libertarian perspective, the officers would have been justified in shooting every single trespasser.
And that's a standard you'd be willing to stand by universally going forward, chemjeff? Because I seem to remember a few years ago people saying that shooting a guy in the head for trespassing was wildly outside the scope of acceptable responses. If I find some vagrant has wandered into my yard, I get to shoot them in the head?
Jeff. How does saying the shooting of an unarmed woman support the riots?
Lol.
Shooting is bad*
Lol. This isn't both sides. The doj didn't go after democrats over their attempts to overturn an election through electors.
Right. You want the privilege of the *image of being opposed to the Jan. 6 riots, while doing absolutely nothing to actually condemn what they did.
The doj didn't go after democrats over their attempts to overturn an election through electors.
You mean, the DOJ didn't go after "faithless electors" which didn't even materialize, and even if they had, it would have been possibly violations of STATE law, not federal law?
And no electors were changed this time either. Do you think before posting jeff?
What crime do you allege occurred in 2016 with regards to the electors? Hmm?
You admit it was a violation of state law above you dishonest lying fuck.
God damn man.
How is signing a form that does not have the proper signatures required for submittal a crime and not just a protest?
It WOULD HAVE BEEN a violation of STATE law in *some* states if the electors had not voted for the candidate to whom they had been pledged. It is not a Department of Justice matter. So complaining that the DOJ "isn't going after them" is absurd.
How is signing a form that does not have the proper signatures required for submittal a crime and not just a protest?
The clear intent was to have those fake elector slates treated as if they were genuine. It is a type of fraud.
- stop saying that people accused and/or convicted of legitimate crimes are "political prisoners" - they are not
Of course they are political prisoners. No antifa / BLM rioter has been held indefinitely without bail as the Jan 6th rioters have been. It's amusing that people pretending to be libertarians would make such a silly mistake. Apparently leftists believe one party doing something wrong means the other can do no wrong. Note these same people also refer to others as LEO bootlickers. They have no principles at all.
Apparently the narrative around here is "run cover for Republicans behaving badly".
This is how mythmakers describe people distinguishing between reality and fantasy. They don't care about the difference so they denigrate anyone who does.
You mean the prosecution with zero contrasting voices at all --- stated that they came within 40 ft of him?
Mind you, I will not believe anything this kangaroo court says...but even if I did, they did not come that close to grabbing him.
The more serious and concerning plot, though, was what Eastman and his crowd were planning. The plan was to generate slates of fake electors,
No.
They certified alternate electors so that they would be ready before the deadline.
This has been done before. Democrats have done this as well.
It means you have the proper electors certified for whatever outcome in close or disputed races.
The electors were certified so that if the court cases got heard, they would be ready. To date, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that the changes made to the election process were unconstitutional. One down, four to go. But this is the purpose of what the left (and by 'left', of course I include you) is calling 'fake' electors.
then have Pence declare "I can't tell which is the real one"
Again, no.
They wanted Pence to declare that it was impossible to adequately verify the ballots from the disputed states.
The electors would have no part after this. Because, if they only counted uncontested electors, NEITHER would have 270. So the issue would go to the House.
And you are correct, if this still disputed election ever gets thrown to the House, Trump will win.
Trump doesn't want to win this way.
Trump wants to win by proving fraud. Because proving fraud, to him, is a much more permanent victory.
That wouldn't have worked and everyone knows it. In fact, the idea is so silly I can't possibly comprehend that you would believe it.
Electors are named and identified. Most states have less than 10. If there was a question about which of two sets of ballots were real, then confirming the votes would be a trivial matter of using a telephone. No one would have supported ignoring the ballots.
I don't believe for one moment that that was the plan because while they might be dishonest politicians, they aren't stupid, and that is too stupid for a children's cartoon.
"Although, they could..."
We do not punish on possibilities.
"The plan was to generate slates of fake electors, submit them to Congress pretending to be a contested official slates"
States SUBMITTED them. Eastman did not.
"The Jan. 6 committee needs to spend more time on this plot rather than focus so much attention on Trump."
In January 2023, the committee needs to be investigated harshly.
So then why do you give a fuck?
Why all the Strum und Drang? Why all the ink that's been spilled? Why put tv cameras to a show trial masquerading as a congressional hearing?
It's because you hate that real people said this election was bullshit. And you refuse to take them seriously. Well I've got some bad news for you: They aren't going anywhere.
Democrats would say it worked. It gave democrats the ability to arrest non violent actors but pretend they were a national threat. It lets them have a one sided show trial that has gone after gop party members not even at the riots. It has given them troves of internal emails from their political enemies. It gave then a means to try to sue to get political opposition off of ballots. It gave them a means to increase the d.c. police state and make political opponents fearful. Early morning raids and arrests while boarding airplanes for non violent actors will do that.
Democrats would say it worked out very well for them.
it is honestly the best gift they could have given the democrats. It was a dumb move
Agree here. Note that it gave to the Democrats and to Republicans. The events of January 6th and the Congressional hearings will strength the hands of Republicans to move Trump to the sidelines.
Ahh yes. The approval of so called libertarians of political abuses to go after unworthy candidates. Iran has the same process. So does Venezuela.
So does Russia. Actually so does Ukraine now.
Is this new to the US? Wasn't that what the Benghazi hearing were all about?
When did they try to force Hillary off a ballot? Are you Jeff's sock? Would make sense given the levels of stupidity.
And nobody is forcing Trump off the ballot. What is happen is he is being shown as less desirable. This will result in his losing the nomination should he run.
People are forced off the ballot all the time. Incumbents use war chests to scare of challengers. Parties withhold support from some candidates. Major parties use election rules to squelch minor party candidates. Don't pretend this never happens.
That's the thing. It wasn't a move. There was no coordination. There was no plan. This wasn't caused by the GOP leadership in any way. If it was, they would have stopped it because the result is so predictable.
The only official action that took place during the riot itself was the curious act of some police removing barricades and allowing people in the capitol. This is why there are so many conspiracy theories about Pelosi deliberately letting it get out of control.
It also gave them a reason to erect those huge walls/fencing around the capitol. Which is strange, because I am pretty sure the same people were going on for years about how walls/fences don't stop people at all and are a waste of money.
And this is why DNC propagandists like Greenhut lie about the purpose of the protest and the aftermath pursued by the Stalinist party.
Can we just stop with the hyperbolic silliness?
It wasn't a coup attempt. This group of people had a very high likelihood of being gun owners / enthusiasts. And they all came without weapons. You can fucking guarantee someone that has firearms isnt going to attempt to overthrow the government but that is the day they decided to leave their glock at home. Just give me a break already.
This is a bunch of people who got out of control but in the end when they did swarm the capitol...they took selfies, tromped around, and the only people that got killed or received gunfire were the UNARMED protestors themselves. Not a single hair on a beloved congress critters head was harmed.
Just stop with this, and be thankful it was definitely NOT a coup, as that would have been a truly bad scene for all involved.
The cosplaying morons rioting in the Capitol had no chance of overthrowing anything.
The much more serious attempt to conduct a coup was happening with fake electors and Eastman's machinations. Did you read his memos?
Which is why jeff supports all the government abuses since j6.
Notice Jeff has shifted away from "Trump incited the riot"- which was bullshit- to the new "fake electors plot" narrative, which is also bullshit.
The much more serious attempt to stop the coup was happening with alternate electors and Eastman's machinations. Did you read his memos?
FTFY
With the trained seals vigorously clapping over the Patriot Front arrest in ID, I have to ask are we now into thought crimes?
Of course thinking of disrupting a gay parade is a crime?
But f course the BLM/ANTIFA mob armed to the teeth and publicly calling for violence and then of course being violent is a no biggy.
You would think a libertarian rag may question what crime did the Patriot Front guys commit?
Did ENB at least entertain the idea that arrest could have been a false flag?
I mean, she is famous for giving these sorts of things the benefit of the doubt...oh wait that wouldn't be helping pro-abortion activists commit acts of domestic terror, nevermind.
I completely agree that the crime of "conspiring to riot" or whatever the Patriot Front guys were charged with, is bullshit. They hadn't done anything to violate anyone's rights by driving around in a U-Haul van. I loathe what they stand for but they shouldn't have been arrested.
Are you going to post the propublica article again that gave no direct quotes or statements again?
Well none that provide evidence over what the article claimed.
How about the Patriot Front's own manifesto? Will you believe that?
Or maybe you think that's a false flag operation too?
https://patriotfront.us/manifesto/
Those of foreign birth may occupy civil status within the lands occupied by the state, and they may even be dutiful citizens, yet they may not be American. Membership within the American nation is inherited through blood, not ink. Even those born in America may yet be foreign. Nationhood cannot be bestowed upon those who are not of the founding stock of our people, and those who do not share the common spirit that permeates our greater civilization, and the European diaspora.
Our people must learn to internalize their natural identities and come to connect that re-emerging identity with their homeland. Americans are descendants of Europeans, but at the same time they are not European. This nation is unique in its newly realized pan-European identity which has allowed it to succeed. A nation without its people realizing a common identity is no nation at all.
Is that 'white nationalist' enough for you?
Where is the white supremacy in that statement?
Oh wait. Jeff thinks Europeans are all white and no minorities live there.
They mean white when they say 'European'.
That's how leftists think people on the right dog-whistle to let everyone know that the racism is going on. That's why Patriot Front sounds the way they do.
Patriot Front is as glowie as Chernobyl under UV light.
Is anyone defending J6 violence? I haven't heard it.
After J6 did we get relentless quoting of MLK "riots are the voice of the unheard" or that the violence was justified based on the cause?
I haven't seen that defense for J6. But you know what violence was justified in that manner in regard to BLM/ANTIFA.
And even then, folks can have a right to their wrong opinion but justice shall be equal right? I mean you can't punish someone for their viewpoint. Smashing a window and assault doesn't matter whether you're protesting Floyd's death or the election results, right?
It's not equal. J6 defendants are being treated entirely different than BLM/ANTIFA.
THAT IS THE ISSUE!
You would think a libertarian rag would be on this.
Not to mention that, no matter the charges, the right of non-violent protesters to a speedy trial, denial of bail, and protection against cruel and unusual punishment has been violated.
This is a constitutional issue; hopefully, this will make it up to SCOTUS.
"After J6 did we get relentless quoting of MLK "riots are the voice of the unheard" or that the violence was justified based on the cause?"
Well, the Jan 6 people took their voices to the people that they had direct grievance with to make sure their voices were heard instead of retail stores and car dealerships, so I guess it would have been redundant to bring it up.
It was only a "coup" in the same sense thst the attempt to burn down the Mark O. Hatfoeld Courthouse in Portland was "coup".
That attempt was prolonged, non-spontaneous, organized, and brought weapons and implements to theoretically succeed in their plot.
The January sixth was spontaneous, unarmed, and had neither plan nor leader.
Several of the 2020 incidents could arguably be called insurrections, far more than the 1/6 rioters.
It's spelled "protest", TDS-addled pile of shit.
What would happen if Pence was assassinated on Jan. 6th, or even if he fell in the shower that morning and had to be put into a medically induced coma for a month? Would Trump remain president or would the electoral votes been opened and counted anyway? Article II, Sec.1 provides the remedy in case of the death or inability of the Vice President to fulfil his duties: Congress would declare a new Vice President, who would then open the electoral votes. Anyone thinking this was going to be a successful "coup" or that "we are teetering on the brink of losing our democracy" is delusional or fabricating political theater.
What if something that was completely outside the realm of possibility happened?
If they were organized and violent enough to actually kill the vice president, then yes I might agree with you. If they had assaulted the capitol in an organized manner, cutting down the police and guards, I might agree with you. If they had detonated a nuke in the building, killing everyone, I would agree with you.
However, none of these things happened or had a chance of happening. The last of my three suggestions is barely more fictional than the first two.
According to Reason the Summer of Love was a collection of mostly peaceful protests against police brutality, and CHOP/CHAZ was an exercise in self-governance.
But some people entering the Capitol and taking selfies was an existential that to the Republic.
Got it.
Got it.
"Americans should be mocking the snowflakes who stormed the Capitol, some who portray their resulting wrist-slaps as gulag-like injustices."
They're getting significant jail time for the crime of.... being in or near the Capitol building when a riot happened. Nice to know that a "libertarian" considers that justice.
"wrist slap" - reason
A lot of you ask "What happened to Reason?"
Look in the mirror. You guys will run this article up to 300-400+ comments when you should have just IGNORED IT.
Writers who are regularly ignored have to do something else for a living.
"but it was a . . . coup attempt"
Let me stop you right there, hoss.
I'd like to reiterate my challenge to Greenhut and the rest of the Reason gang - identify the specific behaviors that you believe constituted "insurrection" on Trump's part or on the part of the January 6 protesters. And agree that those standards will become the universal norm going forward. My wager is you won't and you can't. Because, when the rhetoric is wiped away, no one claiming to be a libertarian would ever support such standards.
Donald Trump broke you guys. He caused you to take any pretense of libertarianism you once had and throw it in the dustbin. You've shown you'll dispense with the presumption of innocence, due process, the right to protest, skepticism of the national security state, or pretty much any other libertarian principle or value if it gives you the opportunity to strike a blow against a political candidate who is insufficiently cosmopolitan and urbane.
At this point, Reason should just close up shop and the writers and editors should look for jobs over at Vox.
If Pence had gone along with Donnie Fatso, the 147 GOP House members, and 6 GOP Senators it would not have been a farce. Trump was attempting a coup and was in charge of all of those except Pence.
He says with no evidence that Trump was, in fact, "in charge" of the rioters or that Trump wasn't responding to what he believed was a stealing of the election.
You are misrepresenting what happened. Most of the GOP representatives simply wanted Congress to make a commitment to look at election integrity and then certify the electors.
Furthermore, it makes no sense to claim simultaneously that Trump was using the protesters as part of a "coup" while at the same time claiming that Trump wanted the Senate to vote in his favor.
In fact, what you are really saying is that Trump wanted the protesters to protest at the Capitol to influence GOP legislators to vote his way. That's not a coup, that's democracy.
And, to be sure, Trump's position was politically unwise and legally questionable. But that doesn't make it a coup either.
Election integrity is a red herring. The election was studied up and down. The fact that every crazy theory on the internet was not investigated does not mean that the election was not thoroughly checked.
The lawmakers were looking to throw out the person voted in and install the former President in a position he does not deserve.
It's funny how Democrats insisted that any questioning of the election results was tantamount to "insurrection" and worked so hard to prevent election audits. It's almost like they were afraid something they didn't like would be discovered. Of course, they were really only concerned at the waste of time and money, which, as we all know, is always an overriding priority for Democrats.
The election was checked up and down and nothing was found. The idea of an audit is merely a talking point because no one really has come up with a plan for doing something different than was already done.
In Wisconsin, the Legislative Audit Bureau did an audit as well as the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty. Each came to the same conclusion President Biden won.
The problem wasn't just with the 2020 election. Elections in the US have been untrustworthy for decades: misuse of technology, bad chain of custody, lack of independent supervision, lack of auditability, lots of opportunities for manipulation of votes and voters, courts refusing to act on blatant violation of state election law due to "standing", lack of clear procedures to deal with election irregularities, etc.
Given the way the US holds elections, audits are meaningless and cannot be used to find most forms of fraud.
US elections are a joke.
Your response say you know little about elections in the US. I would suggest you take some time to study how elections are actually carried out and better yet spend some time on the front line as a poll worker.
To understand whether a process is secure and auditable, you need actual expertise in security, forensics, etc. It also helps to have first hand experience with voting and election procedures in other countries.
The fact that you think that knowing "how elections are carried out" and "working as a poll worker" lets you assert that US selections are secure just shows how deep your ignorance is: you don't even know who the right experts are to make such a determination.
No, election integrity is not a red herring. The way the US holds elections is utterly ridiculous: it's overly expensive, cannot be meaningfully audited, and repeatedly results in fraud.
On top of that, the fact that billionaires with a political agenda can selectively support voting in particular districts, and that news organizations can coordinate the suppression of news stories and support one party over the other is unacceptable.
These issues didn't start in 2020. US elections have been a joke for decades.
Yeah, that's what gullible idiots like you actually believe.
Again, you complain about elections but appear to know little about them. Billionaires can do whatever they want because SCOTUS has said that money is free speech. News organizations were freed from the fairness doctrine in 1987. This change then led to the rise of right-wing radio.
The fact that Zuckerberg could selectively subsidize election-related government institutions in Democratic areas, thereby giving Democrats a massive advantage, has nothing to do with Citizens United.
Furthermore, you obviously don't understand Citizens United. Citizens United was a small, independent non-profit. It made a film criticizing Hillary Clinton and the FEC tried to punish it. Opponents of Citizens United want to monopolize political reporting and editorials in the hands of billionaires by making it impossible for anybody other than big, billionaire controlled news companies to report on, and criticize politicians. That is, under the plans of the Democrats, the WaPo and the NYT could still go out smearing whatever politicians they don't like and be immune from both liability and FEC oversight, while a bunch of citizens pooling their money to criticize Hillary or Biden would be sued into oblivion. That's the world you advocate.
You just keep demonstrating your ignorance.
>>Reason should just close up shop
this comment section supplies my will to make it through weekdays under fluorescent lamps
You're right. The thoguht went through the back of my mind, as well. Maybe turn the magazine over to the commentariat?
Greenhut, a CA writer. Hmm? That’s almost enough to disregard his fear of losing our democracy.
So many assholes in Washington DC had a hand in being stupid or manipulative in this shit show. It’s very hard to take sides, especially with the BS going on with the “committee”.
Can’t wait for the voting fraud in 2022. Get back on track DC. You fucking work for us.
The intruders created plenty of mayhem, but it was a farcical coup attempt doomed from the start.
FFS, it was never a coup attempt. That's just blazingly ridiculous.
Watch the Jan 6 hearings you dumb ass. All Trump appointees laying out his desperation to stay in power.
Trump believed that the election was manipulated. That's not "desperation to stay in power", no matter how much you want to mischaracterize it as such.
And "peacefully and patriotically" marching on the Capitol is the appropriate way of protesting that, the same way Americans do multiple times per year when they disagree with the government.
If he believed that he was a fool or insane, take your pick. All his own experts told him the fraud claim was literally "bullshit". He's a lot of bad things, but that stupid he is not.
Fuck off and die, ignorant piece of lefty shit.
Well, Joe, being a fool is not illegal. You and your namesake should be glad that it isn't.
Many of his experts told him that he didn't have enough proof to change the outcome. And that is correct. But so what? Our legal system is supposed to investigate things when there is suspicion of misconduct; people bringing court cases rarely have enough proof when they start to find the other side guilty. That's why we have subpoenas and other legal procedures to obtain evidence. But courts plainly refused to even hear these cases because they feared the turmoil that would result from holding up the usual election schedule.
At the root of the problem is really the way in which the US conducts elections and handles election disputes: not only are elections effectively not auditable, the fixed schedule on which they are run makes it pretty much impossible to have meaningful legal challenges.
Can anyone see any difference between Joe Friday, an admitted Democrat, and Jeff who claims he isnt one? They use the same exact narratives.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everybody knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
Eat shit and die, Asshole.
It wasn't a "coup attempt", it was a protest by unarmed people who felt they weren't being heard. You know, like we have pretty much every year, usually with far more violence.
One can disagree about the propriety and objectives of the protest, and most conservatives believe that protesters who broke the law should be punished.
But the protest has certainly has succeeded brilliantly: in exposing fake conservatives and fake libertarians, people and organizations who support authoritarian government, support unconstitutional detentions, and spread propaganda.
"people and organizations who support authoritarian government"
Unfortunately, it's looking more and more like this is the majority of voters. The only thing that mitigates this is that it's only if *their* guy is in power.
People have been locked up for nearly two years in solitary confinement, with trials set for 2023, for non-violent misdemeanor trespass charges. You call that a "wrist-slap"?
Not only that, other protesters and trespassers at the capitol and elsewhere are out on bail or not being charged at all.
Yes, people who broke the law should be punished accordingly. But the disparate legal treatment and the pre-trial punishment of the January 6 protesters are a miscarriage of justice.
What has happened to Reason is utterly disgusting.
What has happened to Reason is beyond disgusting. They're not even pretending to Libertarians any more. They are far left progressives carrying water for their masters - the Democrats. Most of the articles here are nearly indistinguishable from propaganda at MSNBC and CNN.
. . .
the Capital Riot was not a riot
Eh, some windows were smashed, I don't have a LOT of trouble calling it a riot. Or at least elements of it were riotous. And to be fair, it was deadly... how many protesters were killed again?
when we tore up Riverport Amphitheatre because Axl Rose was too drunk to finish Rocket Queen ... *that* was a riot.
"the latest news per the Washington Post"
Is this the same Washington post that peddled a false conspiracy theory about Russian Collusion for four years? That Washington Post?
Why, I half expect Nick Gillespie to enthusiastically hire Taylor Lorenz as a regular columninst.
Yeah sure, a whole gd report outlining how they worked together but yeah sure, it was nothing.
The morons here never seem to cease amazing me with their endless depths of ignorance.
That's what I've been saying the entire time. It wasn't an "insurrection." It was a bunch of dumbass yahoos duped by a crybaby wallowing in sour grapes.
That's an insurrection sarcasmic. Incompetence does not make the attempt legal. He tried to overthrow the government - that's a fact.
Joe Asshole is full of shit. Do not engage Asshole, merely tell him to eat shit and die.
Trump did not try to "overthrow the government", no matter how often you lie about it.
It doesn't matter if it was going to or not- an insurrection of any kind deserves to be squashed with the utmost power.
5/29/20 was not and still is not.
Weird.
In fact, clearing out the rioters offended Reason immensely.
“….. an insurrection of any kind deserves to be squashed with the utmost power.”
We’ll check back with you in January of 25 and see if you feel the same.
Haha. What a doosh.
Well it seems clear the author is conflicted. It was either a riot or a coup attempt. It can't be both. Given it had none of the hallmarks of a coup d'Etat it could only have been a riot and in that respect it did succeed because, while nothing went up in flames like other/most recent riots, shit did get broken and some undergarments were allegedly soiled.
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who read the handbook.
To call that a coup attempt is an insult to coup attempts.
I'm guessing a large percentage of people just went in for support, just like people were able to do during Kavenaugh. Nobody had a goal of overthrowing the government.
"...Nobody had a goal of overthrowing the government."
Doesn't matter if they did; they were not capable of doing so.
In order to be charged with the attempt at some crime, you must have a realistic chance of accomplishing that. IF not, you're a fantasist, not a criminal.
This is like charging someone with attempted armed bank robbery where the "arm" is a paper clip in the guy's pocket.
They were all there to stop the certification of the electoral college votes. I realize it must cause cognitive dissonance to see "conservatives" be on the wrong end of the law to such an egregious degree, but I could have told you they were heading this way 20 years ago. All you had to do was listen.
In what way could it have "succeeded"? Since when can a hundred or so losers overthrow a government by breaking into the capitol building? The only thing it accomplished was give Democrats to clutch their pearls over.
Exactly.
Can you imagine a government so fragile that a guy in war paint and some bison horns could somehow cause the demise of institutions more than 200 years old?
If so, it seems it *should* have collapsed to be replaced with something a bit more robust.
The 'performance' has nothing to do with that claim, and everything to do with an attempt to find Trump guilty of something, anything, even a jay-walking charge, dammit!
Six January?
Mayhem? Connected somehow? HOW?
There was many times more mayhem in Portland Oregon, every day for well over one full year, or even in Kenosha Wisconsin during their riots. Yet the coppers stood back, INCLUDING fed officers in Portland 'protcting" Federal government buildings being attacked, burned, busted into, destroyed. Six Jan was a mild tame peaceful church picnic compared to those events. And I did not even mention Seattl'e little Pity Party up on Cap Hill.....
Get REAL
It was a riot period. The only coup attempt was committed by the Democrats. It was a bloodless coup attempt to remove the sitting President Trump with what Hilary Clinton, the DNC, FBI and Congressional leaders Schumer, Pelosi and Schiff all knew was fake information, the Steele Dossier that Hilary Clinton bought from the Russians.
Why does no one talk about that? Why doesn't Reason recognize it for what it was, a Bloodless coup attempt? Hopefully the Republicans can recapture the House and Senate and prosecute th guilty.
It wasn't a coup attempt.
Over excited nitwits, stimulated by a butt hurt universe-sized ego, played right into the hands of scheming power hungry ideologues dead set on stereotyping the opposition party as violent white supremists.
"It wasn't a coup attempt."
It was a failed coup attempt. Pence remains unhung and Trump now lives in Florida. It's the result you'd expect when the perpetrators poseurs who don't take themselves or their aims seriously.
Before you give any credence to the bullshit poste by this TDFS-addled pile of shit, remember:
"mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
Spouting nonsense is an end in itself."
Stupid, smug, and proud of it.
apparently any right-wing protest that gets a little out of hand is a "coup attempt"
but not if the left burns down half the country or tries to off the GOP leadership at a softball game or wants to assassinate SCOTUS
Storming the Winter Palace in 1917 was a successful coup attempt. They were organized, brought weapons and were playing for keeps. The Jan 6th crowd had none of that.
They were partially organized by white supremacist groups in contact with Trump people, and they were armed, such as the moose guy with his flagpole sword.
These things always need a trial run.
"hey were partially organized by white supremacist groups in contact with Trump people"
But the Trump people were every bit as disorganized and unserious as the rest of them.
Every time one of you dickwads said "we're not a democracy," I knew what you were doing. Like Republican politicians, you know that Republicans can't get elected outside of cousin-fucking hollers anymore, so rather than Republicans moderating themselves to try to appeal to more people, they change the rules so they win anyway. The coup attempt was simply their normal course of action Trumpified.
Trump must be a real pain in the ass to the older guard. They were sophisticated in their fascism. Never be too ostentatious about it. Do it slowly with judges and gerrymandering. Make it seem natural for 30% of the people to rule the other 70% because yada yada constitution.
I knew the inmates would take over the asylum. I did not know the head inmate would be Donald Trump. In the end, maybe his ridiculousness was what we needed. They've been planning this for years. They never intend to let Democrats win the presidency again. And most of you are just fine with that.
"They never intend to let Democrats win the presidency again."
LOL, you say that as though democrats want to let republicans win the presidency again. Do you know how stupid that sounds since neither side wants their opponents to win ever again. Come now, you know it's true. Authoritarians only want token opponents to rail against, not actually compete against. It makes no difference what the gang colors are.
Haha. Coming from the guy who wailed “people will die” cuz of a stand up comedian on a streaming service, you’ll pardon us if nobody (except maybe joe Friday) takes any of your paranoid delusions seriously.
EVERYTHING IS SO TERRIBLE AND UNFAIR!!!! - tony, the poster boy.
A lefturd whines about changing the rules. You really can't make this stuff up.
-jcr
Describing an unarmed protest as a "coup attempt" is beyond asinine.
-jcr
You're missing the point. Asinine is an apt description for those who would attempt a coup without arms, planning or determination..
Asinine is an apt description for those who would attempt a coup without arms,
Asinine would be someone claiming that the NY Yankees were trying to violently overturn the legitimate government of Florida by stealing home on a suicide squeeze.
That's pretty much how those who see a coup attempt think.
"Riot." "Coup." "Mayhem." Now THAT'S an example of what begging the question really means. This is how we know 'reason' is really a bunch of lefties -- why would libertarians object to someone protesting government?
It wasn't a coup attempt...
Coup attempt? Get a grip.
You're still lying about the intentions and identity of the demonstrators.
There is absolutely no scenario which would have yielded Trump being the president today. Pence, phony electors, guys wearing horns, just no path to the demise of democracy.
To do that takes guns, even if they aren't always used. It happened in Russia. It happened in Venezuela. It happened because people went along rather than die.
It didn't happen because of a riot by unarmed people. It couldn
Sure it succeeded at what every demonstration / riot intends to. Create awareness.
The sitting president of the nation was canceled, erased, banned and censored for identifying concerns about election fraud, along with every citizen who shared those concerns.
Patriots would riot.
Regime sponsored cocktail parties and goodie bags
This is not it. Left libertarians are generally cultural leftists meaning they accept the left's framing of political conflict, they just aren't quite stupid enough to believe centrally planned economies work. So ultimately they believe, as leftists do, everyone to their right is racist / sexist / homophobic and therefore principles of evidence and decorum don't apply.
"government agency wanting to portray this as violent insurrection/coup found an anonymous source that said really dangerous stuff totes happened"
Well, now that we have some hard evidence I'll have to rethink my position
Can't you read it more carefully? That statement was made by a CONFIDENT informant. Who are you to question their delusions?
Capitol Police officer also said he was scared for his life and it was a good shoot. Despite 3 officers in the same hallways as babbitt not thinking her a threat.
Jeff is doing whatever he can to defend this charade that would make even Hugo Chavez blush.
Which do you suppose came first, listening to their parents, teachers, and media call any deviation from leftist orthodoxy racist or going to cocktail parties? I think your theory misses how deeply left libertarians accept the "everyone to my right is a racist" principle. It's not something they are pushed to, they believe it just as deeply and stupidly as any leftist.
It's true that money pushes people left, but your theory implies they really believe something else deep down. This is not true as I think the Reason articles and leftist commenters routinely demonstrate.
I'm still hoping for an amicable divorce.
You are of course conflating two different claim, attacking the weaker one in order to defend the less-defensible stronger one.
The two claims are:
- Rioters got within 40 feet of Mike Pence
- Rioters were definitely going to murder him, given the chance
The first one is indisputably true. There's video evidence.
The second one is debatable, yes. We don't know what would have actually happened had they actually grabbed Pence. I DO think they would have committed violence against him, not based on some FBI informant, but based on the fact that they were a MOB which was chanting HANG MIKE PENCE all afternoon while committing acts of violence breaking into the Capitol building.
But of course you, since the second claim is weaker than the first claim, will attack only the second, and leave readers with the sly impression that both claims are false.
Can you cite the video?
The two claims are:
- Rioters got within 40 feet of Mike Pence
- Rioters were definitely going to murder him, given the chance
This is a lie. The claim is not just that the rioters were within 40 feet, but also would be able to "nab" him if they were to come in contact. This presumes Pence's security would not intervene, a stupid presumption once acknowledged. The crowd had no ability or interest in confronting armed force as proven when the rioters around Ashli Babbitt did not attack the officer who shot her.
You are of course conflating two different claim, attacking the weaker one in order to defend the less-defensible stronger one.
It's pretty interesting watching him use this tactic even as he criticizes it. Standards for thee, none for me is his only principle.
Yes, it's flagrant how "progressives" give "POCs" a pass on not liking fags. Anti-gay expressed sentiment is much more prevalent from Black Americans than whites, and the progs' beloved Muslims actually kill gays.
See below.
Yup, here's Jesse trying to change the subject to deflect on behalf of the rioters.
"Ignore the chants of HANG MIKE PENCE, think of St. Ashli Babbitt!"
Either way, they're pure fucking evil and deserve to be held physically accountable
No. It is pointing out your political biases you are using to defend abuses by the left dumbass.
Sure. That is a common tactic for you. Change the subject and try to make it all about personality instead of about issues. Yet another way you are deflecting and merely pretending to be opposed to what Team Red did here.
So, you're a racist fascist who thinks that political opponents should be murdered? Because that's what I think you are.
Unlike you, I don't think political opponents should be murdered.
So, you're a racist fascist who thinks that political opponents should be murdered? Because that's what I think you are.
People who think it's absurd to claim Pence was in danger support murder?
This is the sort of nonsense the left reveals when you push a little on their precious shibboleths. What fools.
Lol. Totally not a leftist jeff throws in racist in a comment where no race is mentioned.
Jesse, maybe you should actually read some of GG's writings before knee-jerk attacking me.
Just what the fuck are you going to do?
I'm going to call you out for the racist fascist asshole that you are.
He is a known hypocrite.
This also presumes that no other protesters would have intervened. I suppose this is understandable since no one on the left would dare to intervene if someone else on the left was committing a violent crime against a third party. They would either keep silent or cheer them on.
"- Rioters were definitely going to murder him, given the chance"
They were gonna tickle him to death!!
It created awareness that many Trump supporters are ignorant and violent clowns who couldn't tolerate the prospect of Trump losing and who were therefore ripe to be lied to by him and others.
"Identifying concerns about election fraud" lol nice
The Redcoats are coming the Redcoats are coming !!
Kill an overpaid cop -- Join the Tea Party.
They dont call them PIGS for nothing;
first to the trough.
After the Revolution read your Whiskey Rebellion history,
where GW & Alexander(central bank)Hamilton
slammed a federal excise tax on the poor corn farmers
& backed it up personally with the military force !They are not patriots they are revolutionaries.
As was the case the first time , this time also the Tea Party will lead to the destruction of the nation.
Though both the latter & the present were not against their mother country they naively thought
that they could have a revolution without separation, killing bloodshed, violence, war.
If you do not know history it will repeat itself.
NO THE TEA PARTY DOES NOT LIKE AMERIKA It is a sick bird; AN ILL EAGLE !!!
But Reason denies protest was the purpose.
They're pushing the Big State Lie that it was a Coup attempt and supporting the arrest and imprisonment of political dissidents.
They're just such vermin these days.
Like the "clowns" who have protested every Democrat loss since at least 2000?
The trespassers only represented about .000004% of the crowd present in DC that day. So that percentage are idiot cretins versus 35-40% of democrats.
That makes sense.
It created an awareness that TDS-addled shit-piles like SRG are entirely too stupid to tie their own shoe laces.
Eat shit and dies. asshole.
If they were violent they’d have been strapped.
Must be kinda like when the dems were "verifying reports of election interference" LMFAOOOOOO
Those were elite D Clowns. Went to Clown College.
Home income solution to enable everyone to work online and receive weekly payments to bank acct. Earn over $500 every day and get payouts every week straight to account bank. My last month of income was $30,390 and all I do is work up to 4 hours a day on my computer. Easy work and steady income are great with this job.
.
More information. >> https://dollarscash12.blogspot.com/
What we haven’t seen is a collation of trumps actual statements during the demonstration/ riots.
Not just clips, but a full 30 seconds of complete dialogue before and after each statement where he allegedly incited insurrection.
If we did, we would clearly see if he was inciting a riot and insurrection or speaking to patriots about election fraud.
Then maybe there would be a real investigation and after the dust settles we would be less willing to trust the establishment ruling elite.
I'll remind you not to speak of Princeton that way.
No Jeffy,it’s just that you’re intrinsically disingenuous.
Fuck off and die, Nazi scum.
Beg and whine, waste of skin.
Fuck off and die, Nazi scum.
How’s that working for you fuckwit?