1.) Revolt is part of the definition of insurrection, which is why insurrection is not the appropriate term.
2.) It was a protest.
3.) It was an illegal protest
4.) which involved criminal trespass
5.) but there is no way to stretch the term insurrection to fit.
6.) Insurrection is not factual, but using the term is definitely drama queen worthy. You go, girl.
It wasn't an armed insurrection. No firearms were taken from those arrested, adn the only person killed was by Capital police security. Those who stormed the capital didn't have the means to overthrow the government. The current security measures are unnecessary adn are only for a propaganda message that the demcorats want to sell to the public.The shameless revisionism of the Capitol attack cannot be allowed to take root
And the sad truth is that Republicans DO NOT want an honest accounting of the events leading up to and including the Trump Insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6th.
We all know what we all saw. The Republican's are terrified of the unvarnished January 6 truth because many of them were simpatico with Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 election via violence at the Capitol.
You're funny guy. This is hilarious.1.) nope, its not needed but even if it was needed that definition is factually met too, so it doesnt matter, hence why insurrection is appropriate here
2.) yep part of it was
3.) yep that too
4.) among other things yep
5.) except facts and definitions say it does
6.) again see #5
7.) nope just factual no matter how much you stomp your feet lie and say nuh huh
These facts wont change based on your feelings, facts dont care about your feelings or mine and the fact is insurrection is 100% appropriate, let me know if theres any other mistakes I can help you with. you're welcome!
Insurrection
Oxford
A violent uprising against an authority or government.
Websters
an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established governmentDefinition of INSURRECTION
an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government… See the full definitionwww.merriam-webster.com
Macmillian
an attempt by a large group of people to take control of their country by force
Revolt
Oxford
Refuse to acknowledge someone or something as having authority.Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words
The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!www.lexico.com
Webster
to renounce allegiance or subjection (as to a government)Definition of REVOLT
to renounce allegiance or subjection (as to a government) : rebel; to experience disgust or shock; to turn away with disgust… See the full definitionwww.merriam-webster.com
Macmillian
to say that you will not accept someone’s authority or leadership
3 months? Most forget keg parties (mostly peaceful but got out of hand) with togas optional soon as the hangover is slept off.The shameless revisionism of the Capitol attack cannot be allowed to take root
And the sad truth is that Republicans DO NOT want an honest accounting of the events leading up to and including the Trump Insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6th.
We all know what we all saw. The Republican's are terrified of the unvarnished January 6 truth because many of them were simpatico with Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 election via violence at the Capitol.
Amen!The single greatest weapon that tyrants have over their evil history is covering it up.
We must never forget 1/06/2021, the day we came very close to losing our democracy. We must never let the fascists silence the truth.
1.) You're funny guy. This is hilarious.
2.) Violent, force, revolt are words in your own definitions. It's what is missing from the 6 January protests. They were unarmed. They did not try to overthrow the government. it was not an insurrection. Still you are missing the point.
Everyone knows that it was not violent, that the deaths were coincidental. One was the police shooting an unarmed, non-resisting woman. There have never been charges in the death of Office Sicknick. It's so overstated that the characterization is a cliché, eg storm in a teapot, a mountain from a molehill, much ado about nothing. That is the fact you cannot evade.
Judging by your post, you have become totally detached from reality.What happened on the sixth was that patriots engaged in a mostly peaceful protest against their government, only to be gunned down in cold blood.
Do you have a dictionary which describes weapons as being necessary for insurrection? Do you have another that says a flagpole can't be a weapon?Aren't weapons normally required for an insurrection? Flagpoles don't really count.
Leftwingers are actually starting to believe their own made-up nonsense.
Revolt is part of the definition of insurrection, which is why insurrection is not the appropriate term.
Your denials mean nothing. History is already correctly recording otherwise.What happened on the sixth was that patriots engaged in a mostly peaceful protest against their government, only to be gunned down in cold blood.
An attempted insurrection or a mob of deluded traitors, take your pick. Either way, Trump and his followers betrayed their own country by attacking the Houses of Congress in a treasonous attempt to stop/interfere with elected officials carrying out their Constitutional duty.You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. The facts say it was not an insurrection, no matter how far you stretch the definition.
Calling it insurrection may well be projection. you would have to ask yourself about that.
Flat out disgraceful lie.I take it you mean the unarmed, unresisting woman shot by the cop.
I never supported the illegal trespass of the Capital building on 6 January. It's even a federal offense. Those who did it should be charged and tried.
I simply object to you making it into something it is not. One thing it is not is an insurrection.
No, he wouldn’t.If the Vice-President and the Speaker of the House would have been killed, Trump would still be President.
I heard somewhere that in our country there is no such thing as a charge of domestic terrorism. That's why a lot of these insurrectionists are being charged with nothing more serious than trespass.I don't know why some folk keep trying to insist it wasn't 'insurrection' (presumably on the grounds, as argued by Trump's lawyers, that those directly involved had no clear transition plan)... when the next most obvious description therefore would be 'terrorism.' Maybe that's a better word?
Tell that to Billy Evans' daughters.It wasn't an armed insurrection. No firearms were taken from those arrested, adn the only person killed was by Capital police security. Those who stormed the capital didn't have the means to overthrow the government. The current security measures are unnecessary adn are only for a propaganda message that the demcorats want to sell to the public.
But history books are now a fairly ineffective tool. A single reader at a time interacts with a history book.The shameless revisionism of the Capitol attack cannot be allowed to take root
History books around the world will assure it does not.
If you mean that it was not an insurrection, you are correct. If history had recorded otherwise, there would be no thread.Your denials mean nothing. History is already correctly recording otherwise.
An attempted insurrection or a mob of deluded traitors, take your pick. Either way, Trump and his followers betrayed their own country by attacking the Houses of Congress in a treasonous attempt to stop/interfere with elected officials carrying out their Constitutional duty.
Flat out disgraceful lie.
Babbitt was responsible for her own death. The sympathy in that event belongs with officer forced to kill her.
You do go on. Your problem is that there simply was not enough violence to keep maintaining the pretense.No, he wouldn’t.
No way, after Trump sent the mob to the Capital Building, would Americans stand by and allow him to remain in office. Not for another day.
Now you are offering violence. There is an asymmetry there.If it's not then none of you should hesitate to show up again, and maybe even try to up the ante.
The feds have text messages and phone calls between organizers referring to it as an insurrection. You are attempting to defend a losing cause. As always with all Trump supporters, you won't believe your own God given eyes. Good luck with that when some of the sentences start coming down. There is what you believe, and then there's reality.You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. The facts say it was not an insurrection, no matter how far you stretch the definition.
Calling it insurrection may well be projection. you would have to ask yourself about that.
If a baseball bat is used to kill someone, one would say that a deadly weapon was used. They were armed with many deadly weapons.It wasn't an armed insurrection. No firearms were taken from those arrested, adn the only person killed was by Capital police security. Those who stormed the capital didn't have the means to overthrow the government. The current security measures are unnecessary adn are only for a propaganda message that the demcorats want to sell to the public.
Imagine that, it was an organized protest.The feds have text messages and phone calls between organizers referring to it as an insurrection. You are attempting to defend a losing cause. As always with all Trump supporters, you won't believe your own God given eyes. Good luck with that when some of the sentences start coming down. There is what you believe, and then there's reality.
What happened on the sixth was that patriots engaged in a mostly peaceful protest against their government, only to be gunned down in cold blood.
Now you are offering violence. There is an asymmetry there.
You accuse of what you do, even where the other side is not doing it. The technical term is projection.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?