• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you believe January 6 was an “insurrection”?

I agree. It was a riot and not an insurrection. They only called it an insurrection so they can justify more draconian measures like charging non violent protestors as felonies.

Anyone who committed violence should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
 
It's wasn't an auto coup. If it was can you show any coordination or communication between Trump and the rioters? There wasn't any.
 
Welcome to the discussions.

Yes, it was an insurrection by definition.

Yes, Trump definitely violated the 14th Amendment and should not have been allowed to run and should not be allowed to take office.

The American electorate is a fool to believe Trump will uphold an oath of office after he already violated the first one he took.
 
The rally was titled "Stop the Steal." So by its own definition, it was an insurrection attempt.
 
Didn't the Supreme Court decide that his effort to overturn the election was legal because it was part of his official duties?
 

It's a little complicated. The bulk of the people there were acting like a cult, rioting on demand. It was an insurrection, violently storming the Capitol disrupting the procedure to certify the election, but not a normal insurrection in the sense they didn't really know what they were doing, or why, and 'went home' hours later when trump told them to. They didn't bring guns and try to kill people that way.

However, they were a small part of it. It was definitely an insurrection they didn't understand, by trump and his plotters. trump had a plan to steal the election, by fraudulently having votes rejected in order to invoke the alternative method for deciding the election which he'd win.

He had ringleaders in the militias like the Proud Boys. They anticipated that when trump stole the election, there would be national uprisings, and he wanted to invoked the insurrection act to let him use the US military in cities against the uprisings, and the storming of the Capitol was done to allow him to invoke it.

When it was clear Mike Pence was not willing to throw out the votes and the plan wasn't going to happen, there was no need for the insurrection act and trump told them go home.

So, yes, it was definitely an insurrection, an attempted coup, with trump the most guilty, and it was very right IMO for him to be prevented from holding office for doing it.
 
Didn't the Supreme Court decide that his effort to overturn the election was legal because it was part of his official duties?
It doesn't seem the ruling was about the attack on the Capitol. "The court granted absolute immunity to President Trump’s use of the Justice Department for fraudulent purposes. "
 
Nothing in the 14A requires Congress to determine something is an insurrection. Section 5 merely tells Congress to enact the appropriate laws to implement the previous sections on of which is disallowing people who've committed insurrection from being officers of the US.
 
There were literally millions of Trump supporters all over the country that did not attack the Capitol. Therefore you cannot call it a riot.
Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.
Lewis Carroll
 
Did congress pass the appropiate legisltaion to make 1-6 an insurection? But as ttwtt78640 pointed out there was a law passed back in 1948 which codified insurrection. But no one in the DOJ charged Trump with insurrection. None of the 91 federal indictments dealt with insurrection. No one in government stated Trump had participated or abetted in insurrection. Not the president, not the DOJ, not Homeland Security, not the FBI, not congress etc.

Which left the actions of 1-6 in the riot category. One can think what one will, but what you and I think has no legal standing. Those who had the legal authority to declare 1-6 an insurrection didn’t. Apparently, those who could have charged Trump and or declared 1-6 an insurrection decided it wasn’t. Hence, riot is what it was.
 
I believe it was an insurrection but, like most things associated with Donald Trump, an exceptionally poor example of one given his and his followers' general incompetence. They wanted to overturn the election and decided to confront the world's most inept police department over it, and still couldn't stick the landing.
 
SCOTUS disagrees.
 
You're right no one was charged under the insurrection statute but a number were charged and convicted under the seditious conspiracy statute.

As far as I can tell the difference between seditious conspiracy and insurrection under US law is that the former is the planning and the latter the execution of an attempt to overthrow the government.

Given the convictions and even though no one was charged with insurrection it's pretty clear that at least some people there were insurrectionists.

I personally don't put much stock in the lack of insurrection charges. Just because prosecutors can't build a case that they believe reaches beyond a reasonable doubt it does not follow that it didn't happen.
 

Yep, but Trump is deemed ‘icky’ by many (partisan hacks?) who are willing to assert that Trump is guilty of insurrection despite never having even been charged with that federal crime.
 
Was the point of the riot to delay the counting of electoral votes?

Yes, it was an insurrection and has been found as such by our judicial system.

"The US supreme court declined an appeal on Monday from a former New Mexico county commissioner who was removed from office for his role in the January 6 attack, leaving intact a significant decision that enforced a constitutional ban on insurrectionists holding office."
 
Law and Order!!! Wait oh then yea let em go. But Hunter!!!!!!
What do you mean but Hunter? The guy Biden swore he wouldn't pardon but did so anyway? You might have stepped into something you need to wipe off your feet.
 

Yes. The fact that the people trying to carry it out were incompetent and failed doesn’t change that.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…