I don't remember making any definition of anything. You are posting a non sequitur red herring because that's not what I compared.
I'm aware of that. But I do remember your use of the word insurrectionist.
Tedious.
Yeah, whatever.
It's not a gotcha. You compared the rioters in LA to J6. This was a common false equivalence shared with BLM riots. Both had violence but neither had ambitions to reverse the valid results of the 2020 election. So the questions are meant to confront that false equivalence.
Your terms are yours.
21th century conservatives are hellbent to destroy what for 250 years Americans have shed blood for, died for, and for which Americans have and continue to serve in the armed forces of the United States.
That's one hurried post on your part.
And I clearly indicated that I had made the assertion, to which you were unable to respond.
The only proper answer to a stupid and irrelevant question remains, "that's a stupid and irrelevant question."
Dream on, dream on! Dream until your dreams come true!
According to the Code I cited, both J6 and the LA riots can be construed as insurrection.
Putting aside your bad grammar, you are incorrect because the riots were deliberately structured to interfere with the operations of federal agents.
I'm still a Centrist because I can call out Libs or Cons as the spirit moves me. You ought to try thinking outside the Mad Lib box occasionally; you could learn to like it.
Did a White Lib prevent a Black woman from freedom of movement, or did he not?
What was the assertion?
You're only saying that because you won't admit that the answer 'no' to both questions reveals that you posted a false equivalence about J6.Will wonders never cease.
The only proper answer to a stupid and irrelevant question remains, "that's a stupid and irrelevant question."
Name one thing that has gone Trump's way.
Tedious.
Are you starting an argument about definitions? To divert to definitions of insurrection, sedition, rebellion and then divert further by comparing them. You know I mean interference with the EC.
Sorry you can't understand the answer you were given. Seemed pretty clear to me.
The most relevant to this thread is that, despite Mad Libs' attempts to the contrary, the majority of the country still considers it correct to deport all illegals. Mad Libs have a blind spot on this issue because they can't think outside their echo chambers and realize that even legal immigrants may have problems with Karen Bass's statement that California is a "state of immigrants." Whatever the financial or representational advantages of a large illegal population, their living off the grid is a mockery of the efforts legal immigrants went through to become citizens.
And repetitive.
And your criteria still don't define insurrection.
They aren't the same crime but both can be prosecuted as insurrectionary actions, particularly since there's evidence of foreign agents involved in the current riots.
Defying federal laws falls under the explicit definition of insurrection in the Code cited.
They're rioting against the established laws of the nation and so can be put down just like Washington's Whiskey Rebellion.
Whatever.I'm still a Centrist because I can call out Libs or Cons as the spirit moves me. You ought to try thinking outside the Mad Lib box occasionally; you could learn to like it.
"Uniquely American?" So American Fascists have some difference in kind from Italian fascists, Islamic fascists and all the rest? In what does that difference inhere?
Alas, it's another 21st century American conservative posting that's against liberals / progressives only and entirely, without fail or variation. Your posts have for years attacked liberals only and entirely. Your posts give MAGAs a free ride without fail or variation. Your posts are those of a 21st century uniquely American conservative.
