Trump supporters, is it ok to use force against people protesting against trump's actions during his military parade?

NotreDame said:

Sedition for whom? Not Trump. Not for the vast number of those who entered the building 1/6.

So, since the overwhelming majority charged weren’t charged with seditious conspiracy compels pedantry is germane. This isn’t shocking since pedantry is inherent to law, the practice of law and arguing law since, well, in the U.S. the laws are written.

And in perhaps the most conspicuously compelling display of pedantry, federal law defines sedition in relation to seditious conspiracy as, “f two or more persons in [the U.S.], conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.”
18 U.S.C. § 2384

Enrique and a very small number of 1/6ers were charged under this federal statute of seditious conspiracy. However, the breadth of this statute includes more conduct than overthrowing, abolishing, by force, armed force, the federal government.

Rather, some Oath Keepers were charged specifically with seditious conspiracy of “to oppose by force the authority of the government of the United States” or “by force to prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States,” more expressly as “oppose the lawful transfer of presidential power by force.”

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22053672/jan-6-tarrio-et-al-superseding-indictment.pdf

Those charges do not meet the meaning of insurrection I provided and linked to in a prior post. Pedantry supremacy.

Click to expand...

Pedantry in defense of trump pathetic. Go troll someone else who has the patience for your shit. Yes oathkeepers were charged with seditious conspiracy. Have your shitty lastworditis.

bongsaway said:

To think some of our fathers and many of our grandfathers fought fascism during the second world war to protect our right to free speech and to protest. Our current president wants to do harm to any protesters during his parade I'm pretty sure this isn't what our fathers and grandfathers fought for. Trump is trying to turn America into a police state, it won't work, all he is doing is pissing off more and more people.

Click to expand...

Are we talking about protesters or are we talking about people that block up the street I don't think those are the same thing. Protesting is just saying words. If you're blocking up the street that's an act of aggression and you should be arrested for that.

NotreDame said:

Your first two paragraphs beg the question of whether they establish Trump engaged in insurrection. The first two paragraphs rest upon the assumption that is insurrection by Trump, and that begs the question.

Click to expand...

And your opinion is that Trump did not engage in insurrection. Just because he was never formally charged by the Special Counsel doesn’t mean, in the simplest way, that it didn’t happen.

NotreDame said:

Your error to write “to ignore every else” as I never took any such view, express or implied. You erroneously presumed my view regarding insurrection equated to stating no other crimes are applicable to Trump.

Click to expand...

Oh no I didn’t. You were standing on your contention that what happened did not meet a textbook definition of insurrection. That’s all, and if you’re reading something else into it, then you’re mistaken.

NotreDame said:

You hastily jumped to that conclusion and skipped over the preliminary question of whether I am of the view Trump’s conduct constituted as criminal. Too bad for you, as I do believe Trump committed some federal crimes but not insurrection.

Click to expand...

You’re mistaken here, too. I couldn’t care less what you think about Trump or his behavior. You can stand on whatever soapbox you want to where Trump is concerned, but you went to the trouble of quoting three different dictionaries to try to establish what makes an insurrection or not. That’s usually not the end-all when it comes to laws, statutes, or Articles of the Constitution. That’s why we have courts, to sort out the meanings behind terms and more importantly, what happened. We’ll never know for sure where this situation is concerned, so we’re left to our own opinions.

bongsaway said:

Well what about blah, blah, blah.

Click to expand...

Oh all of a sudden you have problems with whatavoutisms.
When did that change because I see you use them all the time.