Stockholm DL: Cooper win, Werro 1:53.98!
Watch on Youtube

Please quit calling the Jan. 6 protests an "insurrection." It was not.

Non-Running Politics
Reply
Moderation
1 3 4 5 10
Next

  • it is time,

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:24pm EST
    re: Gayapamaualal

    Gayapamaualal wrote:

    Jan 6Th was a low in the history of our country. Call it whatever you want. Those people stormed the Capitol because Trump summoned them there and told them to March to the Capitol and fight like hell to stop the peaceful transfer of power. That’s really bad.
    on the other hand the BLM riots were also very bad and much was destroyed. Both were bad

    HOWEVER, BLM is not running for President of the USA. Trump is. Y’all are crazy as hell if you still support that freak.

    The insurrection was easily the worst I've ever felt about our country. I expected people to have difference and argue, but I never expected Republicans to be feral enough to raid the capital.. it's honestly INSANE. Protests happen all the time, but they aren't trying to hurt our elected leaders. Let alone an elected leader THEY VOTED FOR. So imagine what they might do to a leader they didn't vote for.

  • registered

    Just Another Hobby Jogger

    Member since 04/05/2021.

    10,700 posts. Last post 1 day ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:24pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Not ONE of the defendants charged on the DOJ prosecution page is charged with insurrection under 18 U.S.C. 2383. "Insurrection" is a legal term with specific elements.

    Let me repeat - NONE of the defendants is charged with "insurrection." Not one!

    Would you be satisfied if we called it SEDITION? That's what Enrique Tarrio and Stewart Rhodes are convicted of.

  • registered

    Badcompany

    Member since 02/26/2023.

    4,608 posts. Last post 4 months ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:26pm EST
    re: blm riots

    blm riots wrote:

    458777 wrote:

    Killing unarmed blacks with impunity for centuries is murder. No statute of limitations for murder.

    You are the same type of BS MF that called the Southern Christian Leadership Conference rioters and agitators. They were led by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr....who was also murdered.

    STFU!

    So dumb, I don't even know where to start.

    White liberals are eternally stuck in the 1960s Deep South.

  • registered

    Sally Vix

    Member since 02/01/2019.

    17,940 posts. Last post 1 month ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:29pm EST
    re: Just Another Hobby Jogger

    Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Not ONE of the defendants charged on the DOJ prosecution page is charged with insurrection under 18 U.S.C. 2383. "Insurrection" is a legal term with specific elements.

    Let me repeat - NONE of the defendants is charged with "insurrection." Not one!

    Would you be satisfied if we called it SEDITION? That's what Enrique Tarrio and Stewart Rhodes are convicted of.

    If there was no insurrection, then by Flagpole's legal doctrines, no sedition.

  • Commode Flusher

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:30pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Not ONE of the defendants charged on the DOJ prosecution page is charged with insurrection under 18 U.S.C. 2383. "Insurrection" is a legal term with specific elements.

    Let me repeat - NONE of the defendants is charged with "insurrection." Not one!

    In the Colorado and Maine ballot cases, Trump basically admitted the events at the Capitol were an insurrection (although he argues he had nothing to do with it).

    If the Supreme Court goes near this, they are going to agree there was an insurrection under pretty much any definition of the word. Of course it was an insurrection. Think about it. A violent riot for purposes of fvcking up an important government function related to transfer of power. What else would you call it? Peaceful protest? Tailgate party?

  • registered

    mamameea

    Member since 02/02/2024.

    54 posts. Last post 5 months ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:31pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Not ONE of the defendants charged on the DOJ prosecution page is charged with insurrection under 18 U.S.C. 2383. "Insurrection" is a legal term with specific elements.

    Let me repeat - NONE of the defendants is charged with "insurrection." Not one!

    It speaks volumes that you and your Klansfolk have to parse through technicalities in the law and English language to do the mental gymnastics necessary to sleep at night knowing you DIRECTLY facilitated the deaths of law enforcement members at the Capitol that day.

  • registered

    Sally Vix

    Member since 02/01/2019.

    17,940 posts. Last post 1 month ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:31pm EST
    re: Commode Flusher

    Commode Flusher wrote:

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Not ONE of the defendants charged on the DOJ prosecution page is charged with insurrection under 18 U.S.C. 2383. "Insurrection" is a legal term with specific elements.

    Let me repeat - NONE of the defendants is charged with "insurrection." Not one!

    In the Colorado and Maine ballot cases, Trump basically admitted the events at the Capitol were an insurrection (although he argues he had nothing to do with it).

    If the Supreme Court goes near this, they are going to agree there was an insurrection under pretty much any definition of the word. Of course it was an insurrection. Think about it. A violent riot for purposes of fvcking up an important government function related to transfer of power. What else would you call it? Peaceful protest? Tailgate party?

    You are missing the main point - if the DOJ has ruled it NOT an insurrection, how can it be considered an insurrection???

  • Residential

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:32pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Whether or not charged with a specific crime, there are video recordings of the Capitol rioters unlawfully entering the United States Capitol in search of the Vice President while chanting things like "hang Mike Pence.”

  • Well, ok then

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:35pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Commode Flusher wrote:

    In the Colorado and Maine ballot cases, Trump basically admitted the events at the Capitol were an insurrection (although he argues he had nothing to do with it).

    If the Supreme Court goes near this, they are going to agree there was an insurrection under pretty much any definition of the word. Of course it was an insurrection. Think about it. A violent riot for purposes of fvcking up an important government function related to transfer of power. What else would you call it? Peaceful protest? Tailgate party?

    You are missing the main point - if the DOJ has ruled it NOT an insurrection, how can it be considered an insurrection???

    Consider the possibility that people understand your argument perfectly well and just tired of your crap.

  • the circus animals have deserted you

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:38pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Sally Vix wrote:

    the beagle wrote:

    Dont call him a hillbilly the DOJ hasn’t charged him with hillbilliness.

    He rides a tractor all day and them spends his nights reading Yeats. So, yes - not a hillbilly. A closeted intellectual.

    And so we may consider the observation that not all intellectuals are intelligent (nor are all of the intelligent intellectuals). And you may well call to mind any aspects of Yeats that you find compelling and instructive. I’d say you’re about at the level of Yeats going full Blavatsky.

    Others might strongly contend that you’ve really missed quite a bit. You can see a lot in Yeays’s work and its development a great deal of what gives one genuine attachment to a cause (and among both Yeats and his fellow travelers, the social forces that might give the more privileged actual common cause with the lower classes rather than the mere wish to exploit them). Maybe it’s true that the best lack all conviction. Even if not, you’ve chosen the side of “the worst” and their “passionate intensity.”

    (fwiw, I wouldn’t put even near a majority of the J6 crowd as among “the worst,” regardless of their level of intensity).

  • registered

    agip

    Member since 12/12/2010.

    40,907 posts. Last post 1 year ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:39pm EST
    re: Well, ok then

    Stop excusing them Sally. They called for the termination of the Constitution and tried to kill the VP and Speaker of the House.

    “Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

    - Donald J Trump, leader of the Republican Party and then President of the United States

    This post was edited 22 seconds after it was posted.

  • LRisfullofLosers

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:42pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Commode Flusher wrote:

    In the Colorado and Maine ballot cases, Trump basically admitted the events at the Capitol were an insurrection (although he argues he had nothing to do with it).

    If the Supreme Court goes near this, they are going to agree there was an insurrection under pretty much any definition of the word. Of course it was an insurrection. Think about it. A violent riot for purposes of fvcking up an important government function related to transfer of power. What else would you call it? Peaceful protest? Tailgate party?

    You are missing the main point - if the DOJ has ruled it NOT an insurrection, how can it be considered an insurrection???

    Attempted Insurrectionists - attempted because like everything else they do GQP'ers and Trumpers are failures.

  • Commode Flusher

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:48pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Commode Flusher wrote:

    In the Colorado and Maine ballot cases, Trump basically admitted the events at the Capitol were an insurrection (although he argues he had nothing to do with it).

    If the Supreme Court goes near this, they are going to agree there was an insurrection under pretty much any definition of the word. Of course it was an insurrection. Think about it. A violent riot for purposes of fvcking up an important government function related to transfer of power. What else would you call it? Peaceful protest? Tailgate party?

    You are missing the main point - if the DOJ has ruled it NOT an insurrection, how can it be considered an insurrection???

    Quite easily, because I understand how basic things work and you do not. The DOJ doesn't "rule" anything. They decide who to prosecute and under what charges. It is absolutely irrelevant that they have not charged anyone under 18 USC 2383 as to whether there was an insurrection under the 14th Amendment language.

    And YOU seem to be missing the REAL main point -- Trump essentially admitted there was an insurrection (although he disclaims involvement in it). Two courts so far agree with Trump that there was an insurrection. The SCOTUS will too (my prediction) if they go near this.

    Semantic loop logic like you're trying out is fun (I do it all the time), but it eventually breaks down. Your argument has FAILED.

  • registered

    Tristan Da Cunha

    Member since 11/08/2023.

    295 posts. Last post 1 year ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:53pm EST
    re: FDT

    FDT wrote:

    Cry more, little Sally...

    in·sur·rec·tion
    /ˌinsəˈrekSH(ə)n/

    noun
    a violent uprising against an authority or government.

    This is a case of people like Sally not wanting to admit ugly truth about the insurrection. There are two things that haven't occurred to Sally or other insurrection deniers.

    (1) The legal system often charges some one with a lesser crime because its easier to convict. It in now way means they didn't commit the more serious crime.

    (2) There is a difference between legal and colloquial definitions (both of which can be valid). No sane person can doubt that the purpose of this attack was to overturn the results of an election so that Trump could remain president. And that friends is an insurrection not a goal of tourists.

    (And please these criminals are not hostages)

  • registered

    Sally Vix

    Member since 02/01/2019.

    17,940 posts. Last post 1 month ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:54pm EST
    re: LRisfullofLosers

    LRisfullofLosers wrote:

    Sally Vix wrote:

    You are missing the main point - if the DOJ has ruled it NOT an insurrection, how can it be considered an insurrection???

    Attempted Insurrectionists - attempted because like everything else they do GQP'ers and Trumpers are failures.

    You are forgetting the presumption of innocence.

  • registered

    Sally Vix

    Member since 02/01/2019.

    17,940 posts. Last post 1 month ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:55pm EST
    re: Tristan Da Cunha

    Tristan Da Cunha wrote:

    FDT wrote:

    Cry more, little Sally...

    in·sur·rec·tion
    /ˌinsəˈrekSH(ə)n/

    noun
    a violent uprising against an authority or government.

    This is a case of people like Sally not wanting to admit ugly truth about the insurrection. There are two things that haven't occurred to Sally or other insurrection deniers.

    (1) The legal system often charges some one with a lesser crime because its easier to convict. It in now way means they didn't commit the more serious crime.

    (2) There is a difference between legal and colloquial definitions (both of which can be valid). No sane person can doubt that the purpose of this attack was to overturn the results of an election so that Trump could remain president. And that friends is an insurrection not a goal of tourists.

    (And please these criminals are not hostages)

    YOU are forgetting the presumption of innocence.

  • registered

    Sally Vix

    Member since 02/01/2019.

    17,940 posts. Last post 1 month ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 12:55pm EST
    re: Commode Flusher

    Commode Flusher wrote:

    Sally Vix wrote:

    You are missing the main point - if the DOJ has ruled it NOT an insurrection, how can it be considered an insurrection???

    Quite easily, because I understand how basic things work and you do not. The DOJ doesn't "rule" anything. They decide who to prosecute and under what charges. It is absolutely irrelevant that they have not charged anyone under 18 USC 2383 as to whether there was an insurrection under the 14th Amendment language.

    And YOU seem to be missing the REAL main point -- Trump essentially admitted there was an insurrection (although he disclaims involvement in it). Two courts so far agree with Trump that there was an insurrection. The SCOTUS will too (my prediction) if they go near this.

    Semantic loop logic like you're trying out is fun (I do it all the time), but it eventually breaks down. Your argument has FAILED.

    Presumption of innocence. Look it up!

  • merriam-webster

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 1:05pm EST
    re: LRisfullofLosers

    Words matter. Definitions arent all that difficult to understand. Why half the population keeps trying to bend definitions of more than just a few words continues to be baffling. Just to bring it back to simple folks...hey, there;s a race down the block advertising a a 42km marathon. Oh I ran 42km too. But did you run 42.2km? No why would I, they say a marathon is 42km. Its on all the handouts, websites, etc. Wait, I though a marathon was 42.195km. So, go out, run 42.195km and then have your buddy run 42.0km and be sure to compare the both. Who knows, maybe 2hrs has been broken by dozens of folks already.

  • Commode Flusher

    Anonymous Poster

    2 years ago 02/29/2024 1:07pm EST
    re: Sally Vix

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Commode Flusher wrote:

    Quite easily, because I understand how basic things work and you do not. The DOJ doesn't "rule" anything. They decide who to prosecute and under what charges. It is absolutely irrelevant that they have not charged anyone under 18 USC 2383 as to whether there was an insurrection under the 14th Amendment language.

    And YOU seem to be missing the REAL main point -- Trump essentially admitted there was an insurrection (although he disclaims involvement in it). Two courts so far agree with Trump that there was an insurrection. The SCOTUS will too (my prediction) if they go near this.

    Semantic loop logic like you're trying out is fun (I do it all the time), but it eventually breaks down. Your argument has FAILED.

    Presumption of innocence. Look it up!

    Done. I looked up presumption of innocence. What does that have to do with anything you or I have posted previously in this thread regarding insurrection? Tangents and deflections are lame, Sally. They are the kind of things that nitwits like Newman and AdultintheRoom use in desperation. Do you really want to be in their category of poster? I suspect you don't.

  • registered

    Sally Vix

    Member since 02/01/2019.

    17,940 posts. Last post 1 month ago.
    2 years ago 02/29/2024 1:08pm EST
    re: Commode Flusher

    Commode Flusher wrote:

    Sally Vix wrote:

    Presumption of innocence. Look it up!

    Done. I looked up presumption of innocence. What does that have to do with anything you or I have posted previously in this thread regarding insurrection? Tangents and deflections are lame, Sally. They are the kind of things that nitwits like Newman and AdultintheRoom use in desperation. Do you really want to be in their category of poster? I suspect you don't.

    So, you would agree that Trump and his followers are innocent of insurrection, yes?

1 3 4 5 10

Jump To A Page

Next Last
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.
New Forum Moderation Information & Rules Search Troubleshooting

This thread has already been deleted.

Note: We review 100% of reports submitted. Visit our moderation dashboard to view statistics on our moderating activity. If you have a question or concern, email us at letsrun@letsrun.com or call us at our toll-free phone number:

1-844-LETSRUN (1-844-538-7786).

Author
Body
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?

View our Terms Of Service for a complete description of our forum policies.

Provide context for this post report if relevant.

Reply Replying to

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview
By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Message Board