FBI has become politicized, corrupt and way outside their swim lane since F Obama took office. Complicit while bogus investigation while alledging false Trump Russian collusion for 4 freaking years and nothing was ever proven. Interesting this "investigation" statement regarding Jan. 6 was released late on a Friday during Biden Afhanistan **** storm... anyone else notice this BS!? FBI: Hey media, American people don't notice this or ask us any questions. Move along, nothing to see here!
It sorta depends on what we mean by "insurrection" or "coup." Does that require coordination and premeditation, or is a bunch of riled-up ****-kickers storming the Capitol to try to stop the counting of the electoral votes enough?
I don't know of any insurrection that was done at the spur of the moment. Disrupting the counting of the votes is hardly an insurrection/coup.
What will you do? I think all rioters should be punished but anybody who thinks what happened on Jan 6th is worse than what BLM/Antifa have been doing hasn't been paying attention.
Irrelevant. You are looking for an absolutist position in the matter when all you need is a relative position, such as when Dems leave the state to stop the legislature, or the teacher’s union protest at the Wisconsin capitol, or the protest and rioting at Trump’s inauguration, or (the list is endless). sometimes I wonder if you have a brain.
Okay I play. Coup can be political or military. An insurrection requires a military or armed force of some kind.
Even Jeffery “zoom’in on my tube’in” thinks trump is innocent: CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin says "no basis to prosecute" Donald Trump
That's my point. How we define the terms makes a difference. Webster defines an insurrection as "an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government." It doesn't require military or an armed force. Basically, if people get physical and revolt against the government, it can be an insurrection. That would apply to the January 6 rioters as well as the BLM rioters during the summer. That's a separate issue, and I've stated this from the beginning. There is no basis to charge Trump criminally on any of this. What someone does can be bad and damaging without being illegal.
That you couch your argument on definitions, e.g., “Webster defines an insurrection as "an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government." Definitions are a useless construct in a political debate.
I think when you publicly pressure your VP and fire up your goons to go change his mind you’re flirting with these things. Mother scratcher should have read Washington’s address back in November and the gop would still have the senate.
They are a construct, but not only are they useful, they are essential to communication or debate. You can do neither without them. The funny thing here is that I haven't really even made an argument yet. You're just trying to preemptively shut it down by saying the meanings of words don't matter. It's comical in a way. I don't think I've ever seen anyone dumb himself down harder just to short circuit an argument. And you're competing with Switzer.
I think beating the Capitol police with US flags, trying to impale them with fencing materials, etc. would meet the standard.
Defining a word that isn't relevant to the discussion doesn't prove anything. Furthermore, the fact that the Left screws with the definition of a term for political purposes doesn't mean we do the same thing. Personally, I'm better than that, and I assumed that you are better than that. But apparently I was wrong.
I thought you were smarter than that. The civil authority was protecting the government that was being assaulted. But, you knew that. checks notes. [am I doing the cool trick right?]
