Insurrectionist removed from office under the 14th amendment.

[ImmortalFlame]

That's entirely a matter of perspective.

Many see themselves as Patriots defending the country's constitution from a political party that regularly attacks it.

Terrorists often see or portray themselves as patriots. It's very rare that extremists don't consider themselves to be on the right side of history. You cannot justify an insurrection attempt on the basis that the people committing the crime thought they were doing the right thing, especially if they only believed that because they failed to exercise proper scepticism of the claims put before them.

Although, personally, I would much rather see the criminal justice system going after the Republican politicians who advanced (or continue to advance) the election fraud conspiracy than going after the insurrectionists themselves. And I would also like to see more calls for the Republican party as an organisation to be removed from the ballot.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I see and those who while in office abused the FISA system for their political gain what of them?

"Doing an insurrection is bad."
"Well, my response to that is... LOOK OVER THERE!"

 

[Truth in love]

Circumstances make intentions more than a mere riot,
eg, intending to hang Pelosi & Pence, Trump's claim of
stolen election.

How many people had that intent. Now I have no doubt many people were unhappy (they rioted). But a few nut jobs or FBI plants does not mean the test were intending murder. There a big gap there

 

[Stevicus]

I have my popcorn ready. All the signs are there: people not trusting the voting system, people not trusting the courts which all ruled that the election was not manipulated, people staging an insurrection, people not trusting the courts which said it was an insurrection, some leaders of the insurrection still not in prison.
You can watch "Rise and Decline of the US Empire" on TV.

Yeah, I guess that may be what it is. What I've noticed is that many people seem obsessed over the word "insurrection." Some people are upset because others are calling it an "insurrection," and there are also those who are upset because others refuse to see it as an "insurrection." Why does that even matter, as long as the criminals involved are charged and punished with some sort of offense?

Personally, I think "insurrection" might be an exaggeration or overstatement, especially since the military had already previously stated that they would follow the Constitution, abide by the court rulings, and uphold the rule of law. The other branches and apparatus of the government remained intact and unthreatened, and they had more than enough force at their disposal to utterly crush whatever motley crew had gathered at the Capitol. The military was right there and all over the Capitol and outlying buildings the next day. The protesters, rioters, insurrectionists (whatever you want to call them) all left and flew home, many of whom weren't arrested until weeks or months later. Not exactly the surrender at Appomattox C.H., eh?

It might have been different if Trump had some sort of positive control over the military (where they'd be loyal to him personally and not the Constitution), but he obviously did not. Once that fact was established, then I knew (and everyone else should have known) that there was absolutely zero chance of any coup or insurrection or overthrow of the government.

Even if we assume the worst case scenario at the Capitol, the government would still remain intact. Even if every member of Congress had been killed, the military still would have gone in and killed/captured the insurrectionists. Then, each state government would make emergency appointments for their replacement senators and representatives and send them out to Washington the next day. The certification of the election would still have happened, just a day later.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Lol So if so can claim that someone wanted to reverse election results that now treason.

[Wanting to reverse the result of an election]

[Unlawfully entering a government building in order to prevent the ratification of an election and calling for the death of specific politicians]

Ah, yes, both completely the same.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

How many people had that intent. Now I have no doubt many people were unhappy (they rioted). But a few nut jobs or FBI plants does not mean the test were intending murder. There a big gap there

Reality isn't a place you live, is it?

 

[Revoltingest]

How many people had that intent.

I didn't count. But surveying the news, the number is plural.
Of course, I recognize that not all would've shared that goal.

Now I have no doubt many people were unhappy (they rioted). But a few nut jobs or FBI plants does not mean the test were intending murder. There a big gap there

I certainly wouldn't consider everyone there guilty of
insurrection. But the event as a whole was exactly that.
Let the courts try each of the accused, & find them guilty
of only the crimes evidenced. This will vary from person
to person.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yeah, I guess that may be what it is. What I've noticed is that many people seem obsessed over the word "insurrection." Some people are upset because others are calling it an "insurrection," and there are also those who are upset because others refuse to see it as an "insurrection." Why does that even matter, as long as the criminals involved are charged and punished with some sort of offense?

Personally, I think "insurrection" might be an exaggeration or overstatement, especially since the military had already previously stated that they would follow the Constitution, abide by the court rulings, and uphold the rule of law. The other branches and apparatus of the government remained intact and unthreatened, and they had more than enough force at their disposal to utterly crush whatever motley crew had gathered at the Capitol. The military was right there and all over the Capitol and outlying buildings the next day. The protesters, rioters, insurrectionists (whatever you want to call them) all left and flew home, many of whom weren't arrested until weeks or months later. Not exactly the surrender at Appomattox C.H., eh?

It might have been different if Trump had some sort of positive control over the military (where they'd be loyal to him personally and not the Constitution), but he obviously did not. Once that fact was established, then I knew (and everyone else should have known) that there was absolutely zero chance of any coup or insurrection or overthrow of the government.

Even if we assume the worst case scenario at the Capitol, the government would still remain intact. Even if every member of Congress had been killed, the military still would have gone in and killed/captured the insurrectionists. Then, each state government would make emergency appointments for their replacement senators and representatives and send them out to Washington the next day. The certification of the election would still have happened, just a day later.

This is kind of like arguing that "attempted murder" is too strong a term if the victim was left with only scratches, despite the fact that the perpetrator was clearly stating their intent to kill the victim. Incompetence does not diminish intent, and the intent of the individuals involved in January 6 was to overturn a democratic election, and the stated intent of the people who illegally entered the capital was to enact violence against politicians specifically for the intention of preventing or delaying the ratification of a democratic election.

I don't think "insurrection" is too strong a term, and I think it does a disservice to democracy to downplay attempts by any political group or party to use violence in an attempt to overturn or delay the consequences of a democratic election. These people weren't there on the specific date of January 6th by accident. They were there specifically because it was the date on which the vote was to be counted and ratified, and because their entering of the capitol building would specifically harm that process because they wanted their specific pick to win, rather than the person who actually won.

You cannot frame this any other way. It was an attempted insurrection. A badly organised and unsuccessful one, but one all the same and deserving of being labelled as such.

And please don't pretend that American democracy is somehow immune from this kind of thing. Organizations like the Republican party thrive on people believing that the checks and balances in place in America render the possibility of an authoritarian takeover basically impossible, but it really does not take that much for the reigns of these checks and balances to fall into the hands of authoritarians. You literally just got rid of a President who has poisoned democracy and convinced many thousands (maybe even millions) of Americans that any democratic vote they don't win has been stolen from them and turned people against your own media, your own intelligence agencies, and cast doubt on all these protections that are supposed to prevent authoritarians from seizing control of the state. You cannot afford to be complacent about this.

 

[Truth in love]

I didn't count. But surveying the news, the number is plural.
Of course, I recognize that not all would've shared that goal.

I certainly wouldn't consider everyone there guilty of
insurrection. But the event as a whole was exactly that.
Let the courts try each of the accused, & find them guilty
of only the crimes evidenced. This will vary from person
to person.

Last I looked only one person is charged with sedition and that was recent. Everyone else is normal rioting charges.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

It was an attempted coup. Those that entered the Capitol on January 6 violated the law and were insurrectionists, pure and simple.

Yes, it was obviously an attempted coup to overturn the presidential election, and in my view, all of the insurrectionists should be held accountable for their participation in the attack on the U.S. Capitol. As far as I'm concerned, they are all traitors to the United States of America and should be treated as such. And I, for one, am pleased that the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice are investigating the violent assault on the U.S. Capitol that was carried out by Trump's radical supporters in an effort to overturn the presidential election in his favor. It is also my opinion that the Department of Justice should do the right thing and file federal charges against Trump if the evidence against him justifies it. I believe he should be held accountable if there is sufficient evidence from the January 6 Panel to prove that he incited the attack on the U.S. Capitol. I hope the "long arm of the law" will eventually catch up to him.

At least 910 people have been charged in the Capitol insurrection so far. This searchable table shows them all.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Terrorists often see or portray themselves as patriots. It's very rare that extremists don't consider themselves to be on the right side of history. You cannot justify an insurrection attempt on the basis that the people committing the crime thought they were doing the right thing, especially if they only believed that because they failed to exercise proper scepticism of the claims put before them.

Although, personally, I would much rather see the criminal justice system going after the Republican politicians who advanced (or continue to advance) the election fraud conspiracy than going after the insurrectionists themselves. And I would also like to see more calls for the Republican party as an organisation to be removed from the ballot.

I remember the oath when I entered the military....

I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I remember the oath when I entered the military....

I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Are you trying to say that, in some way, this violent form of factionalism - where violence can be ideologically justified against any group, provided you are sufficiently convinced that they pose a threat to your particular reading of the constitution - is a kind of endemic issue with the USA?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Last I looked only one person is charged with sedition and that was recent. Everyone else is normal rioting charges.

That's because being charged with "insurrection" isn't really a thing. The term is only broadly defined in law, so when charging people individually involved in an insurrection they are often given more specific charges, such as conspiracy, illegal entry, assault, etc..

Currently, eleven people are being charged with seditious conspiracy, so you may need a little updating.

SOURCES: At least 910 people have been charged in the Capitol insurrection so far. This searchable table shows them all.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...d1c176-e839-11ec-a422-11bbb91db30b_story.html

 

[F1fan]

Where is the evidence that peope were planning in mass to overthrow the federal government?

I doubt you rely on reputable media, so here are some links:

Court document in Proud Boys case laid out plan to occupy Capitol buildings on Jan. 6

Oath Keepers' lawyer arrested in connection with Jan. 6

Proud Boys developed plans to take over government buildings in Washington DC

'1776 Returns': Document in Proud Boys Jan. 6 prosecution reveals plans

So this wasn't a protest that got out of hand, as many conservatives claim. This was a plan that succeeded with the help of the many gullible who showed up believing Trump's lie about election fraud.

 

[Polymath257]

That's entirely a matter of perspective.

Many see themselves as Patriots defending the country's constitution from a political party that regularly attacks it.

By preventing the Congress from doing its duty to certify an election. And they were after members of both political parties

Sorry, that is not a matter of perspective.

They are traitors, pure and simple.

 

[Heyo]

Courts are now perfect?
The courts saying “you have no standing” = “we’ve reviewed the evidence and there is no case”

and you saying the problem?

Courts are not perfect, not even the Supreme Court. But when 60 courts didn't find any fault that should say something. And, except for the SCotUS, there is the possibility of an appeal.
If you love the law, you should accept it or appeal the ruling. But you simply don't like the verdicts and therefore don't accept the rulings. That is not loving the law.

 

[Polymath257]

They were trespassing that is clear.

However I’ve yet to see any evidence that their actions would have resulted in a coup.

They were specifically trying to prevent the certification of the election by Congress, a Constitutional duty. To do that *would* be a coup.

On the other hand we do know that the Obama admin, Clinton campaign and parts of the DOJ did illegal things by a to try to overturn Trumps election. Going to support that being investigated as well a grandma taking an unauthorized tour?

What did they do to overturn Trump's legitimate election in 2020?

 

[Twilight Hue]

By preventing the Congress from doing its duty to certify an election. And they were after members of both political parties

Sorry, that is not a matter of perspective.

They are traitors, pure and simple.

Like I said. It's a matter of perspective.

 

[Polymath257]

Where is the evidence that peope were planning in mass to overthrow the federal government?

Preventing the Congress from certifying an election so their Supreme Leader can remain in power?

That sounds like an overthrow to me. The tactics are even similar to other cases of overthrow of governments.

 

[Polymath257]

Lol So if so can claim that someone wanted to reverse election results that now treason.

Taking active steps to prevent the Congress from carrying out its duty to certify an election so that they could ensure their chosen candidate gets in?

Yes, that is treason.