Pipe Bombs planted, part of Jan6 obvious setup.

[marcusluvsvols]

Idaho sucks!

Its OK in summer i think. I have driven thru a couple times on cross country or Yellowstone trips. Wyoming and Montana are absolutely stunning though in the summer. I hope the Yellowstone TV show doesnt ruin them. I know they are passing new legislation for conservation reasons trying to prevent being overrun with resorts and tourists....for now anyway. The sky at night in those states is like being on a different planet...even than East Tennessee at my folks which gets pretty close to total cave darkness. Theres a reason they call it "big sky country"...you can see the whole Milky Way at night, purple pink and all. The winters up there are also inconceivably brutal to someone from the South. -30 degrees is perfectly normal for them at night sometimes like it gets up in Minnesota. You can get frostbite in as little as 90 seconds on exposed skin at those temperatures. No way humans should live there in the winter IMO. If your car breaks down or you get stranded somewhere you can quickly and easily die. Not my kind of fun. My Pappaw was stationed in Montana, and my Dad lived in Minnesota for a while...both were dying to get back to East Tennessee.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

Its OK in summer i think. I have driven thru a couple times on cross country or Yellowstone trips. Wyoming and Montana are absolutely stunning though in the summer. I hope the Yellowstone TV show doesnt ruin them. I know they are passing new legislation for conservation reasons trying to prevent being overrun with resorts and tourists....for now anyway. The sky at night in those states is like being on a different planet...even than East Tennessee at my folks which gets pretty close to total cave darkness. Theres a reason they call it "big sky country"...you can see the whole Milky Way at night, purple pink and all. The winters up there are also inconceivably brutal to someone from the South. -30 degrees is perfectly normal for them at night sometimes like it gets up in Minnesota. You can get frostbite in as little as 90 seconds on exposed skin at those temperatures. No way humans should live there in the winter IMO. If your car breaks down or you get stranded somewhere you can quickly and easily die. Not my kind of fun. My Pappaw was stationed in Montana, and my Dad lived in Minnesota for a while...both were dying to get back to East Tennessee.

My sister lives in Montana. The pictures are absolutely stunning. Hopefully, someday I’ll take a visit. Can’t say the same for Idaho.

 

[LouderVol]

What is bewildering is how you can admit that there was violence but then about face because the violence doesn't apply due to many not being violent. You keep ducking where your threshold resides, not that it's even needed. More death? More felonies? More mace? More chants for Pence to be hanged? More guys in helmets and body armor? More damage to the building? More looting? More Capitol cops that need beating?

The definition of insurrection doesn't define a threshold that must be met or one that @LouderVol must accept. Insurrection is not defined by the insurrectionists being successful, or using firearms, or ratio of lurkers to rioters, or misdemeanors versus felonies.

Was violence used by a group of people in an attempt to stop Congress from certifying an election? If the answer is yes (and it is, objectively) then no other caveats are needed, you can stop attempting to qualify it.

It's ironic that you state that they didn't engage with Pence as some kind of unassailable bullet point. Was it because he was whisked away to the bowels of Capitol building for safety by the secret service?

Pence's Secret Service detail at Capitol on Jan. 6 were "starting to fear for their own lives" as violence escalated, witness tells select committee

"There were calls to say goodbye to family members," a national security professional who worked at the White House told the House select committee.

www.cbsnews.com

You're whitewashing the events of that day, you don't have to accept that you're doing it - but you are.

I have never whitewashed the violence. I just don't conflate 161 violent cases with the 1500ish otherwise non-violent cases. a distinction you have still yet to make. the fact that you won't even acknowledge that most of the criminal cases didn't involve any violence is completely on your partisan mind and bs being spewed by the MSM.

our US justice system didn't see fit to charge ANY of them with insurrection, not sure why I should, or anyone else should if they don't. these are the people who actually decide how to apply the laws of this nation, and in this cases would have been the "victims" here, and are part of the political party that clearly wants to demonize these people; but yet when it comes to the laws of the land they didn't charge any with insurrection. and you just want to ignore them because you don't like Trump.

Not sure how that works in your mind. you don't like them because you think these people were somehow there to overthrow the government, but then you turn around and ignore the actual laws of said government, and what the relevant parts of the government actually DID in response to this "insurrection". 161 individuals with felonies, no charges of insurrection, 1500+ individuals with misdemeanors. most of them have seen their day in court but that's not good enough for you. Innocent until proven guilty, I don't need any more justification than that no matter how much you or huff don't like it.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Apparently they are when differentiating between peaceful and nonpeaceful protests.

14,000 people were arrested during the Floyd protests.

 

[Septic]

I have never whitewashed the violence. I just don't conflate 161 violent cases with the 1500ish otherwise non-violent cases. a distinction you have still yet to make. the fact that you won't even acknowledge that most of the criminal cases didn't involve any violence is completely on your partisan mind and bs being spewed by the MSM.

our US justice system didn't see fit to charge ANY of them with insurrection, not sure why I should, or anyone else should if they don't. these are the people who actually decide how to apply the laws of this nation, and in this cases would have been the "victims" here, and are part of the political party that clearly wants to demonize these people; but yet when it comes to the laws of the land they didn't charge any with insurrection. and you just want to ignore them because you don't like Trump.

Not sure how that works in your mind. you don't like them because you think these people were somehow there to overthrow the government, but then you turn around and ignore the actual laws of said government, and what the relevant parts of the government actually DID in response to this "insurrection". 161 individuals with felonies, no charges of insurrection, 1500+ individuals with misdemeanors. most of them have seen their day in court but that's not good enough for you. Innocent until proven guilty, I don't need any more justification than that no matter how much you or huff don't like it.

You've continued to duck the question. How much violence is acceptable? What is your threshold on felonies and assaults that have to take place to meet your personal definition of insurrection? You keep suggesting I have to make a distinction. I don't. Violence and rioting intended to stop a required process in the transfer of power checks the box. A percentage of onlookers versus participants isn't a part of the equation, no matter how many times you go to that well.

You're continuing to whitewash the events of that day.

 

[ButchPlz]

This thread is fantastic because it's brought out all the loony leftoids.

 

[Septic]

This thread is fantastic because it's brought out all the loony leftoids.

It's not at all ironic that you don't mention the title of the thread you just posted that in.

"Pipe Bombs planted, part of Jan6 obvious setup."

 

[hog88]

14,000 people were arrested during the Floyd protests.

Convicted and sent to prison?

 

[UT_VOLS13]

14,000 people were arrested during the Floyd protests.

Link?

 

[LouderVol]

You've continued to duck the question. How much violence is acceptable? What is your threshold on felonies and assaults that have to take place to meet your personal definition of insurrection? You keep suggesting I have to make a distinction. I don't. Violence and rioting intended to stop a required process in the transfer of power checks the box. A percentage of onlookers versus participants isn't a part of the equation, no matter how many times you go to that well.

You're continuing to whitewash the events of that day.

no level of violence is acceptable. I have been saying that the whole time. but the presence of violence at a protest doesn't make it an insurrection, even if it happens inside the Capitol building. and apparently the "nearly overthrown" US government agrees with me. you are the one who fails to recognize that and wants to condemn people of crimes worthy of the death penalty.

for me to count it as insurrection the people would actually have to do something that would/could have actually overthrown our government, instead of inconveniencing it for a day. no violence required. not sure where the government's line is but it wasn't 1/6.

 

[RockyTop85]

What is bewildering is how you can admit that there was violence but then about face because the violence doesn't apply due to many not being violent. You keep ducking where your threshold resides, not that it's even needed. More death? More felonies? More mace? More chants for Pence to be hanged? More guys in helmets and body armor? More damage to the building? More looting? More Capitol cops that need beating?

The definition of insurrection doesn't define a threshold that must be met or one that @LouderVol must accept. Insurrection is not defined by the insurrectionists being successful, or using firearms, or ratio of lurkers to rioters, or misdemeanors versus felonies.

Was violence used by a group of people in an attempt to stop Congress from certifying an election? If the answer is yes (and it is, objectively) then no other caveats are needed, you can stop attempting to qualify it.

It's ironic that you state that they didn't engage with Pence as some kind of unassailable bullet point. Was it because he was whisked away to the bowels of Capitol building for safety by the secret service?

Pence's Secret Service detail at Capitol on Jan. 6 were "starting to fear for their own lives" as violence escalated, witness tells select committee

"There were calls to say goodbye to family members," a national security professional who worked at the White House told the House select committee.

www.cbsnews.com

You're whitewashing the events of that day, you don't have to accept that you're doing it - but you are.

At least now he’s admitting there was violence.

A few months ago, he was saying only “four or five people” engaged in violence. Strangely, at that time, the number of people charged with violent crimes didn’t disprove his claim because he had his own definition of assault that applied.

Got to wonder about the people who go out of their way to exclaim that they don’t support Trump but then minimize January 6. It’s like the rhetorical equivalent of putting on deodorant and then failing to wipe your ass.

 

[RockyTop85]

I have never whitewashed the violence.

charge them.

What do you do during the parts of the videos where it clearly shows the guards letting them in and them staying in the roped off portions?

If there was ever a case for a "Mostly peaceful" protest 1/6 was it.

There are about 4 or 5 guilty of violence.
there are a couple dozen guilty of trespassing/destruction of government property.
thats out of a couple hundred that made it into Capitol and did absolutely nothing wrong.
and thats out of 10,000+ who just showed up and did nothing but protest.

and somehow that was worse than 9/11 and Pearl Harbor.

Lol. Wut? Your definition of “never” just mean “in this thread?”

 

[Septic]

no level of violence is acceptable. I have been saying that the whole time. but the presence of violence at a protest doesn't make it an insurrection, even if it happens inside the Capitol building. and apparently the "nearly overthrown" US government agrees with me. you are the one who fails to recognize that and wants to condemn people of crimes worthy of the death penalty.

for me to count it as insurrection the people would actually have to do something that would/could have actually overthrown our government, instead of inconveniencing it for a day. no violence required. not sure where the government's line is but it wasn't 1/6.

Sigh.

You acknowledge there was violence in the most milqetoast of ways, I assume not even you would run from the notion that those committing the violence were there to stop the certification of the election. That makes it more than a "protest". If we can't get past that then there's no sense in continuing.

That the prosecutors aren't seeking the death penalty is a demonstration of the weakness of their will. It wouldn't trouble me to see examples made out of them. FA, FO.

 

[hog88]

Sigh.

You acknowledge there was violence, I assume not even you would run from the notion that those committing the violence were there to stop the certification of the election. That makes it more than a "protest". If we can't get past that then there's no sense in continuing.

That the prosecutors aren't seeking the death penalty is a demonstration of the weakness of their will. It wouldn't trouble me to see examples made out of them. FA, FO.

Don’t most all protests have a political goal?

 

[Septic]

Don’t most all protests have a political goal?

Effecting change through peaceful demonstrations is demonstrably different than storming the Capitol with the goal to stop the certification of a general election by Congress.

I'd assume that even you could draw that distinction and difference.

 

[hog88]

Effecting change through peaceful demonstrations is demonstrably different than storming the Capitol with the goal to stop the certification of a general election by Congress.

I'd assume that even you could draw that distinction and difference.

Don’t move the goalposts past what was asked. Almost all riots begin as peaceful protests with a political agenda. Jan 6th was a peaceful protest with a political agenda until it became a riot.

So by going by your logic every protest is an insurrection and that’s ridiculous.

 

[Septic]

Don’t move the goalposts past what was asked. Almost all riots begin as peaceful protests with a political agenda. Jan 6th was a peaceful protest with a political agenda until it became a riot.

So by going by your logic every protest is an insurrection and that’s ridiculous.

Sure thing.

 

[LouderVol]

Lol. Wut? Your definition of “never” just mean “in this thread?”

you miss the very first thing I said in that quote? "Charge them", I have always acknowledged the violence existed and those who did it should be charged.

~10% of criminal charges per septic were violent, that's few. especially considering that the 1600ish criminal cases didn't include everyone that was there, or anywhere close to even a majority of those involved. it was probably less than 1% of all that were there that were violent.

seems if you were so concerned with the amount of violence you could have posted the break down months ago instead of waiting months for Septic to come and do your homework for you.

 

[LouderVol]

Sigh.

You acknowledge there was violence in the most milqetoast of ways, I assume not even you would run from the notion that those committing the violence were there to stop the certification of the election. That makes it more than a "protest". If we can't get past that then there's no sense in continuing.

That the prosecutors aren't seeking the death penalty is a demonstration of the weakness of their will. It wouldn't trouble me to see examples made out of them. FA, FO.

the milquetoast way of not calling for their deaths just to show some political backbone but having no legal justification for it? dah comrade, you are right, we are at an impasse.

i just want the same standard applied across all future protests. death penalties for anyone who shoves a cop, or topples a barrier, or does something really traitorous like breaking a window. you know to show our prosecutors have a strong will. I am thinking that Congressperson who pulled the fire alarm needs to be shot too, can't have any cracks in the system.

how was the violence that happened that day going to stop the certification from happening? sure violence COULD have stopped it, but not the violence we saw. none of the actions taken were going to invalidate anything our politicians were going to do that day. nothing was even attempted. no creation of a new government, or even a proclamation of it. no forged signatures, no take over or hacking of internal government systems announcing a revote or invalidation of the coming certification. didn't hold any politicians hostage, I don't think they held anyone hostage but I am sure Rocky spent the last 2 months looking for the instance(s) I missed so he can deploy a "gotcha" after completely ignoring the very first thing I said in the post he quoted.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

Sure thing.

What happened to Chuck's eyes here? They look like they'd be too small on an infant?

 

[RockyTop85]

you miss the very first thing I said in that quote? "Charge them", I have always acknowledged the violence existed and those who did it should be charged.

~10% of criminal charges per septic were violent, that's few. especially considering that the 1600ish criminal cases didn't include everyone that was there, or anywhere close to even a majority of those involved. it was probably less than 1% of all that were there that were violent.

seems if you were so concerned with the amount of violence you could have posted the break down months ago instead of waiting months for Septic to come and do your homework for you.

Ah a different meaning of whitewashing. I understand.

 

[LouderVol]

Ah a different meaning of whitewashing. I understand.

I guess I am not willing to line up and shoot my political enemies with no legal justification like some are here.

 

[RockyTop85]

I guess I am not willing to line up and shoot my political enemies with no legal justification like some are here.

Just willing to excuse others for doing it and then claim you never did that as soon as the other thread falls off the front page.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

Strange that none of the libs here that allegedly think the 150 or so unarmed "insurrectionists" were somehow "attempting to overthrow our government" will even acknowledge the actual topic of the thread. They stick their fingers in both ears and scream like 4 year olds refusing to listen to reason. There are 2 clear topics named in both the thread title and the OP that are elephants in the room whether they choose to ignore them or not:

1. There were bombs placed in Washington DC that clearly were not placed by Trump supporters...or the FBI and Dimwits would have never covered their existence up since their agendas regarding Jan6 are 100% against the crowd at the Capitol AND Trump.

2. The DC Chief of Police and the officers stuck down there knew they had been SET UP by the Dimwit leadership as soon as they were forcefully and intentionally DENIED any backup, reinforcement or aid from every federal force and even the National Guard unit stationed locally and at the ready on jan6. The local commanding officers and the men on duty were ready and willing to come reinforce the DC cops but were ordered to "stand down" by the leadership up the chain of command, much to their frustration and anger. The DC Chief put out the distress call immediately, but the 1st help to show up at the Capitol in DC was the New Jersey Highway Patrol....over 2 hours later. The National Guard troops IN TOWN and federal forces at the local level could have arrived within mere minutes. They were actually in DC and at the ready. They were just ordered not to inervene against their wishes and protests. This was a setup. There were at least 200 plain clothes FBI agents PRETENDING to be rioters!! What 1500 people were arrested for jan6 ? So probably 10% of the actual crowd that broke the law or entered the Capitol were FBI agents?? Plus all of the cops that can be seen in the TINY % OF ACTUAL VIDEO that the Dimwits WILL RELEASE from the many cameras inside the building? Seriously?

The testimony from the Chief of DC police, other officers, etc is all on youtube . Be careful though. Because ":Tucker is icky!" Strawmen don't change the facts though.

 

[LouderVol]

Just willing to excuse others for doing it and then claim you never did that as soon as the other thread falls off the front page.

you are always free to tag me.

and you have still yet to explain how me saying to "Charge them" is "excusing them".

I don't think I have even argued that ANY of the 1600+ criminal cases should be considered innocent. I will give you two months to dig up that post though. I am just not charging ~800 trespassers with a crime that could give them the death penalty; and because I won't jump that shark you are assuming I am want every single person involved cleared of any wrongdoings despite clear posting otherwise.