Just a reminder of how barbaric the insurrection on Jan 6th really was.

Towerwatchman

Well-known member
I don't believe those are requirements for a charge of having instigated a violent insurrection. You're welcome to point me to case law that says/rules otherwise, though...
That is true. But note, my post is an answer to another post which states that the Republicans are directly responsible for the capital demonstration. That would require evidence. I pointed out that I have not seen any direct evidence or sufficient circumstantial evidence. I welcome any.
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
Your comparison to the negative of burning looting and murder was the stopping of the count. The count would have continued regardless if the Capitol was occupied or not. 2 billion dollars in damages are irriversible. You cannot compare the two.
More than mere occupation could have occurred, and that "more" could have stopped the count. What if sufficient members of the Congress were kidnapped, resulting in a lack of a quorum? There are all kinds of scenarios possible
That's all hypothetical. Pence was not hung, no one was carrying automatic weapons, nor any weapon that could be used to sucessfully overthrow the government. But let's say pence was hung, the count would have continued. It's in the founding documents Pence would have been replaced.
It takes more than Pence to certify the votes of the electoral college. It takes the Congress (or is it just the Senate?) being in session.

It's not hypothetical that the goal of some of those inside the Capitol was to stop the steal, that is, to stop the counting of the electoral college votes. No one can say that they were destined to fail.
Again all you have to do is move the Congressional body to another location and account continues
And if sufficient members of Congress are being held captive?

If we had copies then that equates the originals are somewhere else. The count continues.
I don't know that the "copy" that the Congress had is replaceable, are the originals, or not. For some reason, staffers made great pains to remember to take the documents from the Senate chamber as they fled the mob.

Your claim that everything would have been OK ignores the uncertainty of the future. Anything can happen in politics, as we well know. That's why we have a system of laws surrounding the election, to make sure nothing untoward happens and so that the will of the people is executed.

I agree, we want a peaceful transition of power.
It's not just peaceful, but orderly. That's the crucial part of this.

Every four years we have a revolution, a peaceful transition of power, with no violence. I come from a country where elections is settled with guns. Never want to see that here. But you have a serious problem, half of the people that voted believe that their election was stolen are being ignored.
Agreed.
If I was in Biden's position I would have allowed the investigations to take place, to settle this issue once and for all.
Has he stopped any investigation? Not that I'm aware of.
Think about it if we had allow the investigation to go through and found Trump to be a liar we would not be discussing this today, and Trump's reputation would have been tarnished.
But there has to be a time limit on investigations that might officially change the outcome of an election, and that is already codified into law, and we're well past that time limit. I'm all for legitimate investigations after that time limit in order for the sole purpose of tightening things up for the next election.
Politics is a chess game, if I would have won an election fairly, and my opposition who is still a danger to me claims that I cheated I would expose him as a liar and tarnish him and his political party. If I cheated , I would do everything possible to stop any audit.
Trump has been exposed as a liar from the very beginning of his administration, starting with the size of the inauguration crowd, and literally tens of thousands of lies followed (and I know that all politicians lie), and that has not seemed to change the opinions of Trump's supporters one iota (I exaggerate to make a point).
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
I would not know the answer to that we would have to ask the Republicans. That does not change the fact that the BLM riots were a bigger threat to our country , caused the most property damage and loss of life compared to the Capitol protest . But we could ask Pelosi and the Democrats since their motivation for the capital Riot hearings was the danger to the country , why are there no B L M investigations? Logically the biggest threat should have been addressed.
For the same reason the Republicans didn't investigate it. It wasn't a threat to the country as a unit, as a whole. The summer 2020 riots were a multitude of local events. A burned police car in Minneapolis doesn't affect me (I don't live in Minnesota). But an attack on the Capitol that seeks to stop the legitimate certification of the winner of the presidential election affects *every* *single* *American.*

But as politics goes politicians will side with whoever has the greater number of votes. Politically, it was a bad move to investigate during the riots. Plus that would have added fuel to the fire.

Its intent prior to contact. Pelosi and the Democrats are not investigating the capital riots because it is the biggest Danger since the Civil War, they're using it for political purposes, to hold it against the Republicans and any Republican candidate in the future.
Those two motivations - that Jan 6 was a threat to the democracy, and its political usefulness - are not mutually exclusive.
 

Deist

Active member
The whataboutism from the insurrection apologists just sounds desperate.

If Republicans didn’t want thier violent insurrection used against them in campaign ads, they shouldn’t have done it.
How many guns found at the mostly peaceful protest at the Capitol?
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
Question, why has there not been any Congressional hearings on the BLM riots. The 250 + peaceful riots that resulted in 2 billion dollars in damages. We could listen to the testimony of thousands of police officers as they explained how they felt doing those riots. The riots that were supported by the Democratic Party, the riots that the Democratic Party funded bail money for. This is nothing but Pelosi and the Democrats politicizing a demonstration to their advantage, in order to divert attention from the disastrous way they're running the country.
I think it's more gaslighting than anything. They have the mainstream news outlets show buildings burning, gunfire, people chasing MAGA supporters and killing them, and tell them this is just a peaceful protest. This OP is essentially the same thing. The amazing thing is seeing how many people post here who actually believe it.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
my post is an answer to another post which states that the Republicans are directly responsible for the capital demonstration. That would require evidence. I pointed out that I have not seen any direct evidence or sufficient circumstantial evidence. I welcome any.
You haven't seen video of the Trump rally that took place an hour before the insurrection began? It contains tons of examples: the former white house occupant telling the crowd they have to take their country back with strength, and fight like hell; Giuliani calling for a trial-by-combat, a Republican congressman (or two) said some pretty inflammatory stuff as well.

Don't forget, all of this was in the context of insisting that the election was stolen, and that Dru.m.pf had been building up to the events of that day for more than a month; here's a short timeline of it: https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/jan/11/timeline-what-trump-said-jan-6-capitol-riot/

And then there are reports that he sat and watched while his supporters stormed the Capital building, and did nothing. Other reports said he seemed to be enjoying the spectacle.

---

It's all persuasive evidence that he fomented the insurrection, and proof of this lies in the way congressional republicans are resisting ANY effort to investigate the events leading up to that day. If they were right and BLM was actually responsible for it, they'd want to investigate. Ditto for Anitfa and the FBI. Everything congressional Republicans have said about who actually was responsible for the attack makes a great case for investigating the details.

And yet, they're stonewalling.

Everyone here understands why...
 

Towerwatchman

Well-known member
More than mere occupation could have occurred, and that "more" could have stopped the count. What if sufficient members of the Congress were kidnapped, resulting in a lack of a quorum? There are all kinds of scenarios possible

It takes more than Pence to certify the votes of the electoral college. It takes the Congress (or is it just the Senate?) being in session.

It's not hypothetical that the goal of some of those inside the Capitol was to stop the steal, that is, to stop the counting of the electoral college votes. No one can say that they were destined to fail.

And if sufficient members of Congress are being held captive?


I don't know that the "copy" that the Congress had is replaceable, are the originals, or not. For some reason, staffers made great pains to remember to take the documents from the Senate chamber as they fled the mob.

Your claim that everything would have been OK ignores the uncertainty of the future. Anything can happen in politics, as we well know. That's why we have a system of laws surrounding the election, to make sure nothing untoward happens and so that the will of the people is executed.


It's not just peaceful, but orderly. That's the crucial part of this.


Agreed.

Has he stopped any investigation? Not that I'm aware of.

But there has to be a time limit on investigations that might officially change the outcome of an election, and that is already codified into law, and we're well past that time limit. I'm all for legitimate investigations after that time limit in order for the sole purpose of tightening things up for the next election.

Trump has been exposed as a liar from the very beginning of his administration, starting with the size of the inauguration crowd, and literally tens of thousands of lies followed (and I know that all politicians lie), and that has not seemed to change the opinions of Trump's supporters one iota (I exaggerate to make a point).
Your arguments are purely hypothetical.
Hypothetical is nothing more than imagination wrapped with logic. Your worst case scenario would have been addressed. The count would have continued and we would have had a peaceful an orderly transition of power.

Orderly is subjective.

We should be concerned about the intentions behind These hearing. We have bigger and better problems to solve, the economy, inflation, the Border crisis, Foreign Affairs, Fauci, Etc. Politics is a chess game, if I was doing bad I would do everything possible to get the attention off of that, unto something that benefits me.
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
Nah, your words are what got us here.
Fine. I'm not wedding to "collapse."

Challenges are perfectly legal at any time, y'all challenged Trump for four years, on everything. Even his hand size triggered you snowflakes.
Over 60 lawsuits were filed by him or on his behalf, and they all came to nothing, but Trump can still file any lawsuit he wants at any time. But there's no legal route for those lawsuits to overturn an election once the votes of the electoral college are certified.

Just suck it up man. If the truth is on your side, you'll not act like you have something to hide. Like Nancy.

But you can't admit it's a rank partisan witch hunt, and that's ok, people will point it out to you.
Compare the years the Benghazi investigations took with how long the Jan 6 investigations will take, and then talk to be about a witch hunt.

And, as I said above to another poster, playing an investigation for political points is not mutually exclusive with an otherwise serious investigation into a substantive matter.
 

Towerwatchman

Well-known member
For the same reason the Republicans didn't investigate it. It wasn't a threat to the country as a unit, as a whole. The summer 2020 riots were a multitude of local events. A burned police car in Minneapolis doesn't affect me (I don't live in Minnesota). But an attack on the Capitol that seeks to stop the legitimate certification of the winner of the presidential election affects *every* *single* *American.*


Those two motivations - that Jan 6 was a threat to the democracy, and its political usefulness - are not mutually exclusive.

Yes, it was the biggest threat to democracy since the Civil War. Our country is so fragile that the occupation of one building, would have ended democracy as we know it. That's nothing but fear mongering.
Notice the crowd left the building when they were told to. No one came out kicking and screaming, they weren't dragging out people by the dozen in handcuffs. Now if you wanted to believe the lie, that this is the worst thing since the Civil War I can't help you.
What I see is an event being hijacked for political purposes. since they could not impeach Trump who was a private citizen they're going to use this to their advantage.
Oh by the way if the 250 riots did not affect you, or was a threat to you that is irrelenent, they were a threat to the people who have to live through them. They have value also.
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
Your arguments are purely hypothetical.
Hypothetical is nothing more than imagination wrapped with logic. Your worst case scenario would have been addressed. The count would have continued and we would have had a peaceful an orderly transition of power.
The stated goal of the people who stormed the Capitol was to stop the election from being stolen from Trump. I've outlined scenarios in which that would happen and which would be entirely within the power of those with that goal to achieve them. That's not hypothetical, that's entirely possible.

Orderly is subjective.
It can be, but not in this case. In this case, orderly means following the law. There may be difficult, borderline cases sometimes, but there are plenty of cases in which we can objectively say whether someone broke the law or not.
We should be concerned about the intentions behind These hearing. We have bigger and better problems to solve, the economy, inflation, the Border crisis, Foreign Affairs, Fauci, Etc.
Congress is capable of doing more than one thing at a time. Other committees are working on those other issues.
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
Yes, it was the biggest threat to democracy since the Civil War. Our country is so fragile that the occupation of one building, would have ended democracy as we know it. That's nothing but fear mongering.
Notice the crowd left the building when they were told to. No one came out kicking and screaming, they weren't dragging out people by the dozen in handcuffs. Now if you wanted to believe the lie, that this is the worst thing since the Civil War I can't help you.
I've never said it was the biggest threat since the Civil War, mostly because such a summary judgment is way too general. How is that even measured? It's sufficient to say that it was a threat to democracy in a significant way.
What I see is an event being hijacked for political purposes. since they could not impeach Trump who was a private citizen they're going to use this to their advantage.
How many should I repeat that using something for political purposes, and also having not mutually exclusive?
Oh by the way if the 250 riots did not affect you, or was a threat to you that is irrelenent, they were a threat to the people who have to live through them. They have value also.
I agree that's irrelevant, that's not why I brought up the lack of impact on me. That was only an illustration to the point that these were local events in a way that a presidential election isn't.
 

Towerwatchman

Well-known member
Why only guns? Guns are not the only lethal weapon. A pencil can be a lethal weapon. It all depends on how an object is used.
Yeah I remember that one Revolution where a division of accountants overthrew a government with thier number two pencils
 
Last edited:

Furion

Well-known member
And, as I said above to another poster, playing an investigation for political points is not mutually exclusive with an otherwise serious investigation into a substantive matter.
Well then shoot and score with your political points, if that is what you want.

Few are confused about how Nancy is operating in her sham exam.

Like everything else, we'll let 2022 decide.
 

Towerwatchman

Well-known member
You haven't seen video of the Trump rally that took place an hour before the insurrection began? It contains tons of examples: the former white house occupant telling the crowd they have to take their country back with strength, and fight like hell; Giuliani calling for a trial-by-combat, a Republican congressman (or two) said some pretty inflammatory stuff as well
In the second bogus impeachment it was established that Trump, Giuliani and the others were using hyperboles.
Don't forget, all of this was in the context of insisting that the election was stolen, and that Dru.m.pf had been building up to the events of that day for more than a month; here's a short timeline of it: https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/jan/11/timeline-what-trump-said-jan-6-capitol-riot/
That would hold water if Trump was the only one that believed that the election was stolen. Half of the people that voted believe that the election was stolen, and that is made up of trump and Biden supporters. Should the president stay silent if he believes that his election was stolen? Remember for evil to succeed all you need is for good people to do nothing


And then there are reports that he sat and watched while his supporters stormed the Capital building, and did nothing. Other reports said he seemed to be enjoying the spectacle.
And?
---

It's all persuasive evidence that he fomented the insurrection, and proof of this lies in the way congressional republicans are resisting ANY effort to investigate the events leading up to that day.
Persuasive evidence does not establish truth. It has to be the most reasonable conclusion from the evidence. Not close.
If they were right and BLM was actually responsible for it, they'd want to investigate. Ditto for Anitfa and the FBI. Everything congressional Republicans have said about who actually was responsible for the attack makes a great case for investigating the details.

And yet, they're stonewalling.

Everyone here understands why...

I propose the following. In all fairness investigate the capital demonstration, and then investigate the claimed injustice they were demonstrating against. A stolen election.
Funny how no Democrat wants to do the second.
 

Reepicheep

Well-known member
What was stopped was discussion of objections.
You are mistaken.

1:00pm - joint session begins
1:15pm - joint session adjourned to discuss objection about Arizona
2:15pm - House and Senate evacuated when a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol Building in an unsuccessful attempt to murder Pence, stop the electoral college vote count, and have Trump illegally declared the winner of the Presidential election
5:40pm - after a bloody battle, the Sergeant-at-Arms announced that the attack had been repulsed, and the government was once again in control of the Capitol Building
8:00pm - debate resumes on objection to Arizona vote
10:10pm - Senate rejects Arizona objection
11:08pm - House rejects Arizona objection
11:08pm-12:15am - objections for Georgia, Michigan, and Nevada failed because there was no Senate seconder
12:15am - joint session adjourned to discuss objection about Pennsylvania
3:08am - Senate and House reject Pennsylvania objection
3:40am - objection for Wisconsin failed because there was no Senate seconder
3:44am - electoral vote count completed, session adjourned
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
Yeah I remember that one Revolution where a division of accountants overthrew a government with thier number two pencils
Do you think I'm saying that a revolution can occur by using pencils violently? Or was I taking the extreme example to make a larger point about things other than the extreme example?
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
Well then shoot and score with your political points, if that is what you want.
My first goal is the serious, substantive examination of what happened and why and by whom on Jan 6. Following that, I'd prefer recommendations and a course of action that would help ensure that something like that never happens again.
 
Top