Reuters: It Wasn't an Insurrection After All- Just a "Mostly Peaceful Protest (1 Viewer)

[code1211]

The fact that someone in a state legislature introduces a bill makes you think its a real issue that must be addressed? Have you seen some of the crazy shit that regularly gets introduced in bills at the state level?

28 of the states have actually passed the laws changing what they consider to be abuses and that will be govern the election practices observed in 2022.

Without revision, they will also be observed in 2024.

Leftists say that the new laws promote restrictive voting laws. Sane people say that the attempt by Nancy and her gang of thugs to hijack the states rights' to run elections is un-Constitutional.

2022 will be interesting.

Fact-check: Biden’s statement about 28 new voting laws

As President Joe Biden seeks to enact national voting rights legislation, he has turned his attention to attacking new s

www.politifact.com

 

[Nickyjo]

So, Liberal Nicky,
Can't disagree with you.
You got what you asked for. The riot failed to stop the democratic processes in play.
Hundreds were arrested. You still hate Trump. Lots of rioters going to jail.
You should be happy for all of that.
Yet your TDS can't allow you to get beyond Trump as the main bogeyman.

Actually, I admire the symmetry of the two bookends of Trump's time in office, chaos at airports January 2017; chaos at the Capitol January 2021. The man is impressive. But as to me, maybe my TDS is brought on by the fact that he referred to my immigrant father and relatives as poisonous snakes. Or it could be remembering my wife on election night 2016 saying, "does this mean men can grab my *****?" Perhaps it was suggesting that my Muslim friends should be banned or their mosques placed under surveillance. I dunno, it could be that I worked with victims of torture and Trump praised the practice, that I worked with survivors of massacres by other countries' military and Trump suggested that OUR military commit similar war crimes. It even might be that he suggested breaking the law and ignoring US treaty obligations with respect to asylum seekers with whom I worked for years, or that he made up shit about Syrian refugee processing. Or his casual racism in saying that Judge Curiel couldn't be objective in weighing a completely different legal issue, because after all, the judge is of Mexican descent and no doubt lost any objectivity due to resentment over the wall. This syndrome is puzzling. Maybe you can dispel my concerns listed above. Meanwhile I have memories of dancing in the streets at his defeat, and look towards the up coming civil and perhaps criminal court cases concerning our departed Dear Leader.

As to Trump being my main bogeyman, it's that he's a bogeyman to many GOP politicians so afraid of him that they can't bring themselves to call him out for what he is. They perhaps could apply for a scholarship grant from the Trump Foundation to take a course on all this at Trump University. One could argue that the "deranged" are those who can't see through an obvious crook. What's the latest total of documented Trump lies?

 

[dncc]

28 of the states have actually passed the laws changing what they consider to be abuses and that will be govern the election practices observed in 2022.

Without revision, they will also be observed in 2024.

Leftists say that the new laws promote restrictive voting laws. Sane people say that the attempt by Nancy and her gang of thugs to hijack the states rights' to run elections is un-Constitutional.

2022 will be interesting.

Fact-check: Biden’s statement about 28 new voting laws

As President Joe Biden seeks to enact national voting rights legislation, he has turned his attention to attacking new s

www.politifact.com

What will be interesting is that when the GOP does well, there is no fraud. When the GOP does poorly...there is massive fraud. Like, somehow, the Democrats forget how to rig an election every other cycle.

You guys are unbelievable.

 

[Nickyjo]

NYT is paywalled for me. I will not pay to be propagandized.

I have never met or heard of or seen a politician that is not a lying thief. Perhaps you could name the example you imagine. IF he used party funding to run his election campaign, THEN he's a lying thief. It only gets worse from there.

You're right. Invoking Hitler is a losing tactic. In this case, the demonstration was to help inspire the lying thieves to follow legally defined, legally mandated duties. There is no similarity between J6 and anything about Hitler.

The demonstrators were 30,000 strong.

The damages did not reflect any of the looting, fire bombs, arson, shooting, beatings, murders and so forth from the Summer riots that were called "mostly peaceful" by those invoking the word "insurrection" for the J6 events.

I have a high regard for police of all types. Even security folks at basketball games who are not actually police. Tough jobs and unpredictable dangers.

That said, I saw a Capitol Police officer interviewed on TV who was complaining that he got called names on J6. Then he shot Ashley Babbitt who was unarmed and quite obviously NOT threatening anyone at the moment she was shot.

The cop that shot Babbitt was exonerated. Interesting. Cops killing people seemed to demand a different reaction by authority during the summer.

The injuries suffered by the Capitol Police officers seem to be secrets. You say 170 were injured. I would like to know what the nature of the injuries were. This does not seem to be forthcoming.

The lying thieves we elect have not outfitted the Capitol Police with body cams because they don't want to be exposed as the lying thieves that they are.

So don't believe the NY Times, I also posted a link from the Wall Street Journal. Fair and balanced am I. And of course I am sure you could find some links from diverse outlets yourself.

I suppose you could ask for the medical records of the cops who were injured, tho there may be some ethical questions. A news article from the suspect NY Times said injuries included concussions, rib fractures and burns. Police union says one officer lost an eye.

 

[jaypatriot]

Actually, I admire the symmetry of the two bookends of Trump's time in office, chaos at airports January 2017; chaos at the Capitol January 2021. The man is impressive. But as to me, maybe my TDS is brought on by the fact that he referred to my immigrant father and relatives as poisonous snakes. Or it could be remembering my wife on election night 2016 saying, "does this mean men can grab my *****?" Perhaps it was suggesting that my Muslim friends should be banned or their mosques placed under surveillance. I dunno, it could be that I worked with victims of torture and Trump praised the practice, that I worked with survivors of massacres by other countries' military and Trump suggested that OUR military commit similar war crimes. It even might be that he suggested breaking the law and ignoring US treaty obligations with respect to asylum seekers with whom I worked for years, or that he made up shit about Syrian refugee processing. Or his casual racism in saying that Judge Curiel couldn't be objective in weighing a completely different legal issue, because after all, the judge is of Mexican descent and no doubt lost any objectivity due to resentment over the wall. This syndrome is puzzling. Maybe you can dispel my concerns listed above. Meanwhile I have memories of dancing in the streets at his defeat, and look towards the up coming civil and perhaps criminal court cases concerning our departed Dear Leader.

As to Trump being my main bogeyman, it's that he's a bogeyman to many GOP politicians so afraid of him that they can't bring themselves to call him out for what he is. They perhaps could apply for a scholarship grant from the Trump Foundation to take a course on all this at Trump University. One could argue that the "deranged" are those who can't see through an obvious crook. What's the latest total of documented Trump lies?

You certainly are eloquent and thorough in your denunciation of Trump.
I hope Trump does not run again.
What is more interesting than Trump is the way Republican hopefuls will work toward attracting Trump supporter in 2024.
DeSantis, Abbott, and Noems (SD) all have a shot at winning over Trump followers.
Politics can be fun. But I never wanted Trump to be president and still don't.
And don't think I voted for Senile Joe and his Check-all-the-boxes running mate.
Joe and Kamala do not have a reasonable chance in 2024.

 

[fact checker]

Trump's continuous babble of "we won, we won big" These comments on social media is what caused some of America's underbelly to react to Trump's lies that he won. HE did NOT! He told his base to meet him Jan. 6th in D.C. "It's gonna be wild". In Trump's speech, he said "You have fight, fight like hell, or you won't get you country back" Peaceful? The Republicans have constantly tried to make the insurrection as a "walk in the Park" Bullshit!

 

[Nickyjo]

You certainly are eloquent and thorough in your denunciation of Trump.
I hope Trump does not run again.
What is more interesting than Trump is the way Republican hopefuls will work toward attracting Trump supporter in 2024.
DeSantis, Abbott, and Noems (SD) all have a shot at winning over Trump followers.
Politics can be fun. But I never wanted Trump to be president and still don't.
And don't think I voted for Senile Joe and his Check-all-the-boxes running mate.
Joe and Kamala do not have a reasonable chance in 2024.

The thing is, I believe that Trump tapped into some valid concerns of parts of the electorate who may have felt left behind or disparaged by the civil rights movement and the women’s movement. But I think that Biden’s policies are a better fix for those issues, and his proposed legislation may have a beneficial effect in a couple years if passed. In addition, it may be that recent fires and weather events may serve as a national wake up call on the climate. I wouldn’t count Biden out just yet.

 

[Wiggen]

The Right do love them some Russian news sources, don't they. It's almost as though they really wish we were more like Russia - like we used to be when Putin's stooge President Pumpkin Head was in the White House. Keep drinking the Kool Aid, folks. And keep taking that Horse De-worming medicine. And whatever you do, don't get vaccinated. Nothing owns the libs more than dying from Covid.

 

[Wiggen]

The thing is, I believe that Trump tapped into some valid concerns of parts of the electorate who may have felt left behind or disparaged by the civil rights movement and the women’s movement. But I think that Biden’s policies are a better fix for those issues, and his proposed legislation may have a beneficial effect in a couple years if passed. In addition, it may be that recent fires and weather events may serve as a national wake up call on the climate. I wouldn’t count Biden out just yet.

There is no doubt that Trump had a massive appeal to the Racists, the Misogynists, the Neo-Fascists, and all of the other losers in the country. And we've always had a lot of these folks. Hell, there are a lot of them on this forum.

 

[Nickyjo]

There is no doubt that Trump had a massive appeal to the Racists, the Misogynists, the Neo-Fascists, and all of the other losers in the country. And we've always had a lot of these folks. Hell, there are a lot of them on this forum.

I wouldn’t be so extreme in defining Trump’s support. His MAGA motto was a call for a return to sepia-hued times in the memories of his supporters, to their sense that something good in the US had been lost, to those who saw and were offended by, for example, Hollywood’s portrayal of working class whites as Archie Bunker types. But Trump took a legitimate notion of past “greatness,” never specifying when or how America stopped being great, and made his message “Make America Hate Again,” resurrecting and taking to a new, higher level Joe McCarthy’s demagoguery, George Wallace’s message of white resentment, and Richard Nixon’s paranoia. His style was fascistic, creating enemies and the notion of himself as a Superman, insulting just about every group in the US but white males. His supporters chose to ignore the divisive ugliness of his message and focus on their grievances and sense of loss which he promised to address.

 

[Colin Norris]

Mostly peaceful protest?

Let's see now .... 5 dead, 144 police injured, $1.5 million in Capitol damages, and 540 arrests (more to come).

Your view of "peaceful" is very different than the view of most Americans.

Come on comrade. It was just a bit if fun.
Checking the temperature of future fascist control. Didn't work. Lol

 

[code1211]

Someone is alleging that five officers died? News to me. I am aware of Brian Sicknick (sp?) dying the day after. Please provide a link to your fantasy.

You seem to not know much about what happened at the 1/6 attack and are working overtime to try to create some fantasy that police were not assaulted or that the assaults were somehow not so bad.

Micheal Brown was shot and killed by a police officer in suburban St. Louis.. The officer didn't seem to have suffered any debilitating physical injuries. Rayshard Brooks was killed by a police officer in Atlanta...the same officer he got into a scuffle with moments before he was shot and killed by said officer. Both shootings, along with that of Ms. Babbitt were justified. You can't assault officers. You guys are lucky that there wasn't dozens of bodies laying all around the capitol. I'm expect that there will be next time.

Sorry. My mistake. I guess even an amateur Debate Politics poster can be as wrong as the New York Times. I did it without an editorial board. I'll try not to be as unprofessional in the future.

I feel that in the cases of both Brown and Brooks, the shooting victims posed a direct threat to the officers.

In the case of Babbitt's death, she happened to be the one that was hit, but did not pose a direct and immediate threat to the officer. That said, though, she should not have been there.

The first two seem to be roughly comparable as the officers in both cases were being directly attacked.

The Babbitt shooting seems different from them as the officer was not attacked directly and the deceased was not near a weapon or armed.

Killing of Michael Brown - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

<snip>
On August 9, 2014, Michael Brown Jr., an 18-year-old black man, was fatally shot by 28-year-old white Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson in the city of Ferguson, Missouri, a suburb of St. Louis.[2] Brown was accompanied by his 22-year-old friend Dorian Johnson.[3] Wilson said that an altercation ensued when Brown attacked Wilson in his police vehicle for control of Wilson's gun until it was fired.[4]
<snip>

Killing of Rayshard Brooks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

<snip>
APD officer Devin Brosnan was responding to a complaint that a man (Brooks) was asleep in a car blocking a Wendy's restaurant drive-through lane. At the scene, Brosnan radioed for assistance, and Rolfe arrived some minutes later. Rolfe conducted a breathalyzer exam which indicated that Brooks's blood-alcohol content was above the legal limit for driving.

Rolfe and Brosnan began to handcuff Brooks, and Brooks grabbed Brosnan's taser and attempted to run away. Rolfe pursued Brooks on foot, and Brooks turned and fired the taser toward Rolfe's head. Rolfe then fired his weapon three times at Brooks, hitting him twice. A third shot struck an occupied car. Brooks died after surgery.
<snip>

 

[code1211]

LOL...

Nope... I pegged you 100%. In any other scenario under the sun you'd be cheering the security guard blowing away someone coming through a window during a riot. Not here because you agree with her politics.

You could save some face and just admit that is true instead of this charade you're putting on as to "well, she didn't break the window of the barricade door so obviously she just thought it was fine and dandy with the guy on the other side if she crawled through it...despite the silver pistol being pointed at her".

Really, you're embarrassing yourself; time and again.

You are arguing with the thoughts echoing around in your own head, not with anything I posted.

Why are you quoting my posts while you're doing this?

 

[code1211]

Actually, I admire the symmetry of the two bookends of Trump's time in office, chaos at airports January 2017; chaos at the Capitol January 2021. The man is impressive. But as to me, maybe my TDS is brought on by the fact that he referred to my immigrant father and relatives as poisonous snakes. Or it could be remembering my wife on election night 2016 saying, "does this mean men can grab my *****?" Perhaps it was suggesting that my Muslim friends should be banned or their mosques placed under surveillance. I dunno, it could be that I worked with victims of torture and Trump praised the practice, that I worked with survivors of massacres by other countries' military and Trump suggested that OUR military commit similar war crimes. It even might be that he suggested breaking the law and ignoring US treaty obligations with respect to asylum seekers with whom I worked for years, or that he made up shit about Syrian refugee processing. Or his casual racism in saying that Judge Curiel couldn't be objective in weighing a completely different legal issue, because after all, the judge is of Mexican descent and no doubt lost any objectivity due to resentment over the wall. This syndrome is puzzling. Maybe you can dispel my concerns listed above. Meanwhile I have memories of dancing in the streets at his defeat, and look towards the up coming civil and perhaps criminal court cases concerning our departed Dear Leader.

As to Trump being my main bogeyman, it's that he's a bogeyman to many GOP politicians so afraid of him that they can't bring themselves to call him out for what he is. They perhaps could apply for a scholarship grant from the Trump Foundation to take a course on all this at Trump University. One could argue that the "deranged" are those who can't see through an obvious crook. What's the latest total of documented Trump lies?

This is what being victimized by propagandists produces.

Can you link to and then cut and paste the quote from Trump referring to your "immigrant father and relatives as poisonous snakes"?

 

[code1211]

What will be interesting is that when the GOP does well, there is no fraud. When the GOP does poorly...there is massive fraud. Like, somehow, the Democrats forget how to rig an election every other cycle.

You guys are unbelievable.

You really are simply engaged in a fantasy fest of hate and deception in your own head, aren't you.

Can you reel yourself back in and engage in a reasonable exchange of ideas?

Is there a quote from me that indicates that I believe the Republican Party is any less dishonest than the Democrats?

Why do you quote my posts and then drift away into your bile and deceit?

 

[code1211]

So don't believe the NY Times, I also posted a link from the Wall Street Journal. Fair and balanced am I. And of course I am sure you could find some links from diverse outlets yourself.

I suppose you could ask for the medical records of the cops who were injured, tho there may be some ethical questions. A news article from the suspect NY Times said injuries included concussions, rib fractures and burns. Police union says one officer lost an eye.

Medical reports would be good.

Vague and general inclusions of broad and indistinct "reports" are, I have found, usually useless in establishing facts. Especially useless when reported by America's Media regardless of political lean.

I can find references saying that a cop will lose an eye. Did the cop lose his eye? I can't find that reporting.

 

[Geoist]

FBI reveals now that the January 6 "mostly peaceful protest" was actually a "mostly peaceful protest".

There might have been 40 of the 30,000 or so folks in attendance who communicated with each other for anything beyond car pooling and hotel arrangements.

There were no plans for any coordinated actions planned to occur if they actually got inside the Capitol Building.

If history is our guide in this review, it is very likely that of the 40 or so folks who did plan to do some mischief, about half were imbedded FBI agents working undercover promoting or actually creating the plans.

The propagandists in our media are once again shown to be lying propagandists pushing agendas rather than REPORTING facts.

The weak minded taken in by the efforts to deceive are once again shown to be nothing more or less than "the weak minded".

In passing, in my quick search, I could not find a reference to this reported by NBC, CBS, ABC, MSN or CNN. No real surprise that their "reporting" was lacking in this.

The propagandist misinformation campaign moves onward suppressing information and creating lies out of thin air as the goals of their masters demand. Why do their masters hold the goals they hold?

We must all ask one question as the deceptions and lies continue: "If this is true, what else must be true?". It is the only way left to us to separate the lies from the facts.

Exclusive: FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was coordinated - sources

The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

www.reuters.com

So, to you, there is no such thing as an uncoordinated attack? Uncoordinated violence? You think most mob violence is coordinated?

 

[code1211]

What do last summers riots have to do with crazy Trumpers on Jan 6?

They are linked in various ways. Among those ways they are linked are these three:

1. Real world damages were committed to life and property by actual people.
2. The actions were reported and characterized by our media.
3. The legal and political systems reacted to and responded to the persons who committed the actions.

Comparing the reactions from the media and the legal folks and the political folks speaks volumes in revealing the lies and deceit to which we are subjected daily.

As such, these are very useful tools to exploit to to understand the motivations of those that lie to deceive and mislead on a daily basis.

There are many who STILL think that there are good guys and bad guys in political parties. Can you imagine the level of gullibility required for this belief to exist?

 

[Geoist]

Bullshit.

Nancy has impeached a President...twice...over a "report of a report".

We literally have the audio of Trump abusing his position as president to strongarm dirt from foreigners on his political rival. That is as good of an impeachable act as any I've seen in American history. Definitely more so than lying about a blowjob.

 

[Mycroft]

We literally have the audio of Trump abusing his position as president to strongarm dirt from foreigners on his political rival. That is as good of an impeachable act as any I've seen in American history. Definitely more so than lying about a blowjob.

You would only think that's what happened if you believe Nancy's twisted spin. If you actually read the transcript, you'll see that's not what he did at all.

And it's not like he ever went to events and gloated about telling Ukraine, You do what I say or you can kiss that money goodbye.

 

[dncc]

Sorry. My mistake. I guess even an amateur Debate Politics poster can be as wrong as the New York Times.

Its okay...you haven't known what you're talking about since the word "go".... Unlike the NYT.

I did it without an editorial board. I'll try not to be as unprofessional in the future.

You should also research the topics you're trying desperately to debate.

I feel that in the cases of both Brown and Brooks, the shooting victims posed a direct threat to the officers.

Of course you do. They're black men.

In the case of Babbitt's death, she happened to be the one that was hit, but did not pose a direct and immediate threat to the officer. That said, though, she should not have been there.

Of course you do. She's a white woman.

The first two seem to be roughly comparable as the officers in both cases were being directly attacked.

All 3 people who got shot and killed...deserved to get shot and killed.

The Babbitt shooting seems different from them as the officer was not attacked directly and the deceased was not near a weapon or armed.

140 cops had been injured...nobody can blame Mr. Byrd for not wanting to become number 141.

 

[dncc]

You are arguing with the thoughts echoing around in your own head, not with anything I posted.

Why are you quoting my posts while you're doing this?

Why are you denying that you only think Ms. Babbitt shouldn't have been shot because you agree with her politics?

 

[Geoist]

You would only think that's what happened if you believe Nancy's twisted spin. If you actually read the transcript, you'll see that's not what he did at all.

I listened to the tape myself. Nancy has nothing to do with it.

And it's not like he ever went to events and gloated about telling Ukraine, You do what I say or you can kiss that money goodbye.

Right, because mobsters and other criminals are always that direct with their threats. Get real.

 

[jaypatriot]

The thing is, I believe that Trump tapped into some valid concerns of parts of the electorate who may have felt left behind or disparaged by the civil rights movement and the women’s movement. But I think that Biden’s policies are a better fix for those issues, and his proposed legislation may have a beneficial effect in a couple years if passed. In addition, it may be that recent fires and weather events may serve as a national wake up call on the climate. I wouldn’t count Biden out just yet.

You may be right. A lot of Americans think this is a racist and oppressive society.
But, at the same time, every American knows a Black American (not a descendant of slaves) WAS ELECTED TWICE! How did that ever happen when so many believe this is such a racist country?
People don't want to think about $4.5 trillion of social programs as being harmful for our national economy. And idiots want to believe Bernie Sanders when he says "the rich must pay their fair share". There aren't enough billionaires to go around to pay for all of those social programs the Democrats are proposing. I only hope Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema don't lose their courage or their Senate seats.
So, your comments above when it comes to those who are eating up all of the spun cotton candy coming out of Biden about the ignominious pull-out from Afghanistan will be accepted by the devoted Biden lovers. Why? Because they want to and there is no one else except Conservative pundits telling the other side of the story.
Biden has the major news channels on his side. The NY Times and the Washington Post are still his friends. And the narrative about Fox News lying is still very much alive on the 'woke' side of our society.

 

[dncc]

You may be right. A lot of Americans think this is a racist and oppressive society.
But, at the same time, every American knows a Black American (not a descendant of slaves) WAS ELECTED TWICE! How did that ever happen when so many believe this is such a racist country?
People don't want to think about $4.5 trillion of social programs as being harmful for our national economy. And idiots want to believe Bernie Sanders when he says "the rich must pay their fair share". There aren't enough billionaires to go around to pay for all of those social programs the Democrats are proposing. I only hope Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema don't lose their courage or their Senate seats.
So, your comments above when it comes to those who are eating up all of the spun cotton candy coming out of Biden about the ignominious pull-out from Afghanistan will be accepted by the devoted Biden lovers. Why? Because they want to and there is no one else except Conservative pundits telling the other side of the story.
Biden has the major news channels on his side. The NY Times and the Washington Post are still his friends. And the narrative about Fox News lying is still very much alive on the 'woke' side of our society.

Well...how about this then:

Myself (and likely everyone reading this) pays a % of our paycheck into Social Security from January 1 every year to December 31 of the same year. We never get a break. IF you make over something like $170,000 a year, once you've made $170,000, you stop paying into Social Security. So if you make $340,000 a year (170 X 2) you don't pay into SS for 1/2 of the year.

Lets change that to where, just like nearly every one else, those making $170 pay a % into SS on every dollar they earn.