According to AP, the leader of Oath Keepers was charged AND arrested but 10 others were also charged with the same thing seditious conspiracy, but not arrested (yet? ) and: https://www.justice.gov/opa...tious-conspiracy-and
"Home » Office of Public Affairs » News SHARE JUSTICE NEWS Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, January 13, 2022 Leader of Oath Keepers and 10 Other Individuals Indicted in Federal Court for Seditious Conspiracy and Other Offenses Related to U.S. Capitol Breach Eight Others Facing Charges in Two Related Cases
Leader of Oath Keepers and 10 Other Individuals Indicted in Federal Court for Seditious Conspiracy and Other Offenses Related to U.S. Capitol Breach Eight Others Facing Charges in Two Related Cases A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned an indictment yesterday, which was unsealed today, charging 11 defendants with seditious conspiracy and other charges for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, which disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress that was in the process of ascertaining and counting the electoral votes related to the presidential election.
According to court documents, Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, 56, of Granbury, Texas, who is the founder and leader of the Oath Keepers; and Edward Vallejo, 63, of Phoenix, Arizona, are being charged for the first time in connection with events leading up to and including Jan. 6. Rhodes was arrested this morning in Little Elm, Texas, and Vallejo was arrested this morning in Phoenix.
In addition to Rhodes and Vallejo, those named in the indictment include nine previously charged defendants: Thomas Caldwell, 67, of Berryville, Virginia; Joseph Hackett, 51, of Sarasota, Florida; Kenneth Harrelson, 41, of Titusville, Florida; Joshua James, 34, of Arab, Alabama; Kelly Meggs, 52, of Dunnellon, Florida; Roberto Minuta, 37, of Prosper, Texas; David Moerschel, 44, of Punta Gorda, Florida; Brian Ulrich, 44, of Guyton, Georgia and Jessica Watkins, 39, of Woodstock, Ohio. In addition to the earlier charges filed against them, they now face additional counts for seditious conspiracy and other offenses.
Eight other individuals affiliated with the Oath Keepers, all previously charged in the investigation, remain as defendants in two related cases. All defendants – except Rhodes and Vallejo – previously were charged in a superseding indictment. The superseding indictment has now effectively been split into three parts: the 11-defendant seditious conspiracy case, a seven-defendant original case, and a third case against one of the previously charged defendants."
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-14-2022).]
Corrected my original post. I read the indictment incorrectly. It lists the charges on the right side then the defendants on the left side with numbers representing which charges are pending.
"Violent online messages before Capitol riot went unshared by DHS, emails show"
quote
The department's [DHS] intelligence office saw "significant chatter" in the 48 hours before Jan. 6 and concluded it was just hyperbole, according to internal emails shared with POLITICO.
I will tee up the first part of this report:
quote
On Jan. 6, 2021, as a mob of Donald Trump supporters began besieging the Capitol, Department of Homeland Security officials reviewed a plea for help.
Rioters had started climbing up scaffolding when, at 2:12 p.m., the Capitol Police requested information from DHS’ intelligence agency. That office monitors public social media chatter for clues on where violence might break out nationwide.
A DHS official, whose name was redacted, outlined the request [from the Capitol Police]: “Are groups talking about taking over the Capital [sic] on social media[?] Are tactics being discussed about taking over the Capital[?] Tactics can include radio frequencies, weapons etc.”
The batch of emails — sent from 2:12 p.m. through 3:12 p.m on Jan. 6, 2021 — show that in the 48 hours leading up to the attack, officials weighed what to share with law enforcement and ultimately proceeded with caution. In some cases, DHS officials worried that reporting violent messages found online could infringe on Americans’ civil liberties.
In the two days before the insurrection, intelligence analysts had found “significant chatter” on an online forum, the emails show, but chose not to report them because they found the comments to be “hyperbole” and therefore protected speech.
The excerpts from previously unreported internal DHS emails, obtained by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington [CREW] through a public records request and shared with POLITICO, illuminate the [Department of Homeland Security's] response to the attack on the Capitol.
After receiving the urgent request from Capitol Police, at 2:12 pm, after the riot at the Capitol Building had already erupted, a full hour passed and DHS staffers were still mulling over whether to share any of their intel about online "chatter" with the Capitol Police. There's no indication in these emails that DHS ever responded in any meaningful way to the Capitol Police. I cannot discern from this reporting whether DHS had anything that would have been helpful to the Capitol Police at this late juncture, with the invasion of the Capitol Building already under way.
I know you think that this is your big GOTCHA! moment.
It isn't.
I'm not sure I have enough time or crayons to explain it to you so that you will understand, but what you keep quacking about is a STATE rule.
As of today 46 out of 50 states have the so-called "felony murder rule".
AS I CORRECTLY POINTED OUT TO YOU BEFORE....FEDERAL LAW DOES NOT have a "felony murder rule"
(See: U.S. Code Title 18 PART I CHAPTER 51 § 1111)
ASHLI BABBITT was murdered on FEDERAL LAND inside of a FEDERAL BUILDING by an incompetent FEDERAL EMPLOYEE
Any charges brought against any of the trespassers would then ONLY BE FEDERAL CHARGES brought by the USDOJ
Once again, Federal law DOES NOThave any "felony murder rule" equivalent to the rule in 46 states.
You remain WRONG "Lionel Hutz".
As I advised you before, stop getting your "legal opinions" from dopey sailing websites or "Democratic Underground" or wherever it is that you dredge up nonsense like that.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-15-2022).]
The batch of emails — sent from 2:12 p.m. through 3:12 p.m on Jan. 6, 2021
The thing about Leftist propaganda is that, like common liars, it invariably contradicts and indicts itself.
While your fleeting attention is focused on your latest bit of trivia, the fact is that the inept Capitol police COMPLETELY IGNORED DAYS OF WARNINGS BEFOREHAND.
The inept Capitol police instead chose to make a panicked inquiry DURING THE RIOT about what was "trending on social media".
Now you expect all of us to join in your Leftist propaganda delusion that some sort of DHS "conspiracy" was afoot.
"...the report said that Capitol Police intelligence “received information from a variety of sources about threats of violence … and the large crowds expected … [but] failed to fully incorporate this information into all of its internal assessments.”
"As Democrats continue to obsess about January 6, there’s talk about building a memorial. Is it for Ashli Babbitt?
She’s the only person who died on January 6. She was shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer, (incompetent) Lt. Michael Byrd.
Armed insurrection it was not. It wasn’t a coup. It wasn’t 9/11 or Pearl Harbor either.
Yet, the Babbitt shooting has fallen by the wayside partially because this is an officer-involved shooting liberal America has endorsed.
The officer was cleared. All is well, right? Uh, not really. There’s an issue with the follow-up interview regarding this shooting, namely that one never took place apparently."
...
The coming civil lawsuit against incompetent Michael Byrd is going to be very revelatory.
..
"The truth always eventually comes out and it is NEVER what the Leftist media originally told you." randye
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-15-2022).]
that one sites the # but the first link said '' federal law recognizes the felony murder rule'' I guess the links are seldom read to the end if opened at all ?
''Felony-murder offenses, of all types, are not mere regulatory offenses. Federal courts do not need to go as far back as common law to interpret these new "if death results" statutes. Federal criminal law already defines felony murder in such a way that the death and "malice aforethought" for the death are elements of the offense. Thus, new extensions of the felony-murder rule statutes are not "new to general law," but merely "adopt[] into federal statutory law a concept of crime already so well defined"67 in federal statutory law''
[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 01-15-2022).]
I know you don't care, or don't know how to care. But you realize that when you start name calling, it's because you have already lost the argument don't you?
You do it constantly, like it's some kind of "gotcha". But all we are seeing is a lot of childish whining.
Nicknames can be fun, but you just try to make everything you don't like sound vulgar in a 9 year old boy kind of way. (really, it's like reading a sixth graders blog.)
I'm not trying to be mean man, but I'm starting to find it offensive.
that one sites the # but the first link said '' federal law recognizes the felony murder rule'' I guess the links are seldom read to the end if opened at all ?
It's obvious now that you don't have clue what you're babbling about.
You're just blindly searching random articles and pasting them without you having any idea whatsoever what they are actually discussing.
In this case you pasted an almost 30 year old paper written by a law school student that doesn't discuss anything even close to the "felony murder rule" as codified by individual state statutes and what you keep squawking about. At this point you are just beclowning yourself more and more.
Since I'm a generous guy though, lets make this simple for you. All you have to do is provide the exact federal statute that lays out a "felony murder rule" as you have described it.
Out of my generosity, I'll also help get you started on your doomed Quixotic quest by providing you with an easy place to start relentlessly and frantically searching:
that one sites the # but the first link said '' federal law recognizes the felony murder rule'' I guess the links are seldom read to the end if opened at all ?
''Felony-murder offenses, of all types, are not mere regulatory offenses. Federal courts do not need to go as far back as common law to interpret these new "if death results" statutes. Federal criminal law already defines felony murder in such a way that the death and "malice aforethought" for the death are elements of the offense. Thus, new extensions of the felony-murder rule statutes are not "new to general law," but merely "adopt[] into federal statutory law a concept of crime already so well defined"67 in federal statutory law''
So are you arguing all the Capitol Police officers present should be charged for her death and not just the one shot her?
It's obvious now that you don't have clue what you're babbling about.
You're just blindly searching random articles and pasting them without you having any idea whatsoever what they are actually discussing.
In this case you pasted an almost 30 year old paper written by a law school student that doesn't discuss anything even close to the "felony murder rule" as codified by individual state statutes and what you keep squawking about. At this point you are just beclowning yourself more and more.
Since I'm a generous guy though, lets make this simple for you. All you have to do is provide the exact federal statute that lays out a "felony murder rule" as you have described it.
Out of my generosity, I'll also help get you started on your doomed Quixotic quest by providing you with an easy place to start relentlessly and frantically searching:
in your link in the basic murder law quote '' or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture against a child or children; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed, is murder in the first degree.''
so if a burglary results in a death even the perpetrator's their crime makes all the involved guilty of first degree murder
again do you ever read the links or just post BS over and over
next want to question the burglary laws ?
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
I know you don't care, or don't know how to care. But you realize that when you start name calling, it's because you have already lost the argument don't you?
You do it constantly, like it's some kind of "gotcha". But all we are seeing is a lot of childish whining.
Nicknames can be fun, but you just try to make everything you don't like sound vulgar in a 9 year old boy kind of way. (really, it's like reading a sixth graders blog.)
I'm not trying to be mean man, but I'm starting to find it offensive.
I find the forum so much easier to read and that it makes much more sense if you just flat pass over any post made by a rinse or a ray b which I literally do. Could not tell you what either one has said in the last two years plus. I just skip them.
I react to untruth when people claim like some do repeatedly that the 1-6-21 was tourists looking around and not a revolt/putsch/rebellion and not a direct threat to our system of government
yes I get upset and react
sorry if you see that as something you do not like one way to avoid that happening is try to verify before posting things that just ain't true support you claim with links hopefully not to nut sites but actual facts and data
and try to be a little bit less of a blind follower of the current talking point by at least check if it is true before posting it here
but if you try to claim a thing did not happen that I saw happen we will have a problem
Originally posted by LitebulbwithaFiero: So are you arguing all the Capitol Police officers present should be charged for her death and not just the one shot her?
well if and only if the cops conspired to try to prevent the valid actions of government and killed her as a direct result of their crime
but that would be the invaders NOT the cops who were the defense
if one could prove cop assisted the invaders THEN one may claim such a charge is valid and proper under current law
Originally posted by LitebulbwithaFiero: Videos posted in the thread you got locked showed the cops opening doors and welcoming "the invaders" in.
Don't put it all on "ray b" that the original thread was locked. I'm sure that's not the case.
How many of the rioters gained access to the Capitol Building through doors that were purposely let open by Capitol Police?
That's a fair question to ask of anyone who wants to make that a talking point--and what are the implications?
"I was let inside the Capitol Building through a door that was opened for me by the Capitol Police." I wonder how that would stand up in court as an argument in defense of any of the suspects? "Oh--didn't you see that other Stop The Steal protesters were bludgeoning the cops and forcing their way into the Capitol Building by smashing through other doors and windows? Did you think that the door that was opened for you was a legitimate invitation to enter the Capitol Building, and an invitation that you could accept without incurring criminal liability upon yourself?"
I dunno. I'm not a lawyer.
I don't think the "I was welcomed inside the Capitol Building by the Capitol Police" narrative, even if true in certain cases, changes the trajectory of the more serious indictments that have been put against individuals by the DOJ--notably, the indictments on the charge of Seditious Conspiracy that were just filed against 11 of the Stop The Steal'ers.
Or changes the trajectory of the House Select Committee on January 6 and what they are eventually going to publish as their final report. Which I think will include recommendations for legislative changes to the Electoral Count Act of 1887. Changes to that law to raise thresholds and reduce the temptation for any future defeated President or Presidential candidate (Rump 2024) to attempt a Green Bay Sweep. And if you don't know about a "Green Bay Sweep", then you are uninformed about one of the most important aspects of what happened at the Capitol Building on January 6.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-16-2022).]
THAT and the fact that you Leftists are so notoriously incapable of evaluating even the most basic data is why you have been WRONG on nearly every single matter and NOTHING of any real consequence has come of any of the things you hoot about endlessly.
It's why you spent 4 YEARS incessantly barking "RUSSIAN COLLUSION !!".
It's why you spent 2 YEARS honking incessantly on this forum about your "Legendary Lawman" and the moribund "Mueller investigation"
It's why you spent 3 YEARS quacking about Lt. General Flynn.
It's why you are now babbling nonsense about a "Green Bay Sweep" and your "January 6 Committee"
You "dunno".
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-18-2022).]
so if a burglary results in a death even the perpetrator's their crime makes all the involved guilty of first degree murder
again do you ever read the links or just post BS over and over
WOW!
I actually GAVE YOU the federal law and you STILL mucked it up.
It's really clear now why Leftists think and believe the incredibly garbled and dumb things that you do.
The old adage of "You can lead a Leftist to knowledge but you can't make him think" really applies here.
Let's look at the ENTIRE WORDING of 18 U.S. Code § 1111 - Murder, para (a) that you barely managed to paste a few words from without ever comprehending the whole it....not even a small part of it.
Let's also break it down into somewhat "digestible chunks" so that even the most "Dunning-Kruger" afflicted Leftie can maybe get a slight glimmer of understanding:
18 U.S. Code § 1111 - Murder
(a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.
Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing;
or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture against a child or children; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed,
is murder in the first degree.
Absolutely NOWHERE in any of that does it specify any equivalent to the analogous "felony-murder rule" as adopted in 46 out of 50 individual states and as you have described it.
I'll repeat it again:
"There is NO federal "felony-murder rule " as codified in various states law.
Having been generous and patient to a fault with you, at this point it's now glaringly apparent that you are completely incapable of grasping even the most rudimentary of things, even when you are given the answers.
Doubtless, like all Leftists, you will now declare some sort of childish "victory" and strut ignorantly about.
I've rarely seen someone as doggedly determined to keep arguing something over and over that he so obviously knows NOTHING about....
... but you Leftists gotta Leftist ....so this particular line of "discussion" with you is OVER.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-17-2022).]
As of today, NOBODY HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH INSURRECTION ( 18 U.S. Code 115 § 2383) as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021
As of today, NOBODY HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH TREASON ( 18 U.S. Code 115 § 2381) as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021
As of today, NOBODY HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH MISPRISION OF TREASON ( 18 U.S. Code 115 § 2382) as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021
As of today, NOBODY HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH ADVOCATING OVERTHROW OF GOVERNMENT (18 U.S. Code 115 § 2385) as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021
As of today, NOBODY HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH THREATENING GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS OF THE UNITED STATES (under 18 U.S.C. § 871 or 18 U.S. Code § 351 or 18 U.S. Code § 115 or any local statute) as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021
As of today, NOBODY HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH TERRORISM (18 U.S. Code CHAPTER 113B § 2331) as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021
As of today, NOBODY HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH RIOT (18 U.S. Code § 2101) as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021
As of today only 650 individuals], (0.05 %) out of the >120,000 people attending the MOSTLY PEACEFUL January 6, 2021 rally in DC have been charged with a crime
As of today only 36 individuals, (<0.03 %) out of the >120,000 people attending the MOSTLY PEACEFUL January 6, 2021 rally in DC have been charged with "conspiracy".
As of today only 11 individuals, (0.009 %) out of the >120,000 people attending the MOSTLY PEACEFUL January 6, 2021 rally in DC have been charged with "seditious conspiracy".
As of today only 11 individuals, (1.6 %) out of the 650 people arrested as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021 have been charged with "seditious conspiracy".
As of today only 36 individuals, (5.5 %) out of the 650 people arrested as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021 have been charged with "conspiracy".
As of today only 4 individuals, (0.6 %) out of the 650 people arrested as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021 have pled guilty to "conspiracy".
As of today only 165 individuals, (25 %) out of the 650 people arrested as a result of the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of January 6, 2021 have pled guilty to any charges.
As of today only 165 individuals, (0.13 %) out of the >120,000 people attending the MOSTLY PEACEFUL January 6, 2021 rally in DC have pled guilty to any charges
As of today only 18 individuals, (0.01 %) out of the >120,000 people attending the MOSTLY PEACEFUL January 6, 2021 rally in DC alleged to be members of the "Oath Keepers" group have been charged with a crime.
As of today only 12 individuals, (<0.01 %) out of the >120,000 people attending the MOSTLY PEACEFUL January 6, 2021 rally in DC alleged to be members of the "Proud Boys" group have been charged with a crime.
As of today only 1 needless homicide happened at the MOSTLY PEACEFUL January 6, 2021 rally in DC and it was committed by a Demorat with a documented history of mishandling his firearm.
As of today 1 unopened LEGO toy has been seized by the Biden administration as "evidence of a conspiracy" related to the MOSTLY PEACEFUL January 6, 2021 rally in DC
As of today the FBI has officially determined that THERE WAS NO INSURRECTION and that THERE WAS NO LARGE ORGANIZED CONSPIRACY BY ANY "RIGHT WING" GROUPS and that NEITHER FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP NOR ANY OF HIS ASSOCIATES OR ADVISORS WERE INVOLVED IN ANY PLANNING OF A RIOT OR VIOLENCE arising from the MOSTLY PEACEFUL events of the January 6, 2021 rally in DC.
As of today the Leftist Congress is trying to soak the American taxpayers for HALF A BILLION DOLLARS in "damages" after telling the DOJ and the federal courts that the capitol building sustained $1.5 million in damages.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-17-2022).]
Originally posted by randye: What it really is, is a deleted double post I made. I then decided it was also a convenient "place holder" for an additional comment later.
The post after it is proof positive that I have a Leftist troll shadowing me after every post that I make in this and other threads.
Who is this "we" that you (randye) keep saying, as if you represent more than just yourself on this forum?
I see you just did it again, on the " 2022 CONGRESSIONAL MIDTERM ELECTIONS" thread.
Is it some social media network that you are part of, and the other ones never show up here to confirm that they want you to speak for them on this forum?
I can't imagine that it improves your standing with any of the other forum members--and that's a relative few--whose messages I enjoy seeing and reading in this Totally O/T section.
There aren't that many forum members that do O/T on a regular basis. You are the only one that I go out of my way to barricade from getting in front of my eyes (for the most part.)
I'm aware that you said something else before, where you made something of the word "lawyer" that I used. But I have no idea what you said, other than the word "lawyer". I don't want to. You have no interest in civil discourse, and I have no interest in anyone who has no interest in civil discourse.
"And that's the name of that tune..."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-17-2022).]
I react to untruth when people claim like some do repeatedly that the 1-6-21 was tourists looking around and not a revolt/putsch/rebellion and not a direct threat to our system of government
The mostly peaceful trespassers were practically escorted around and given a guided tour of the place. There is video evidence of it. It is also true that there was no "direct" threat or any indirect threat "revolt/putsch/rebellion against the system of government. They were protesting voter fraud, NOT the Government. Your anger is misguided, much like the trespassers
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 01-17-2022).]
Is there any difference between what Ray Epps was saying, and what President Trump said, in front of the White House at the Stop The Steal rally on January 6?
In (some) contrast to Ray Epps, Trump didn't say (explicitly) that anyone should go "into" the Capitol Building. He did say we're going to walk from here. at the White House, to the Capitol Building. He said that he would be with the people as they walked to the Capitol Building--which he wasn't. He said the word "fight"--a lot. He told the people that they had to "fight like hell" if they were going to have a country. Or some such words. "Fight like hell"...I don't think I have to look at a transcript to confirm that.
And then he told them to be "peaceful." As a way to cover his ass. "Incitement to violence? What you talkin' 'bout? I said 'be peaceful.' Hey, I dindu nuffin."
But all that--that's just prologue. Here's the gist of this message:
"FACT FOCUS: Federal agents didn’t orchestrate Jan. 6"
Unless you consider the former President a "federal agent."
The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection poked another hole in the pro-Trump conspiracy theory that federal agents orchestrated the attack, confirming on Tuesday that a man at the center of the claims said he’d never been an FBI informant.
Ray Epps, an Arizona man who was filmed encouraging others to enter the U.S. Capitol, testified that he wasn’t “employed by, working with, or acting at the direction of any law enforcement agency on Jan. 5th or 6th or at any other time,” the committee tweeted on Tuesday.
The committee issued its statement after numerous Republican lawmakers highlighted the fringe theory in recent weeks, including Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday. Pressed by Cruz, a Justice Department official said she couldn’t say whether FBI agents participated in the insurrection because she couldn’t discuss “the specifics of sources and methods” of the FBI.
Meanwhile, the evidence indicates the mob that invaded the Capitol on Jan. 6 was overwhelmingly made up of Trump supporters who wanted to help the then-president.
Here’s a closer look at the facts:
CLAIM: Ray Epps, who was filmed on Jan. 5 and 6 urging rioters toward the U.S. Capitol, is a federal agent who helped to orchestrate the insurrection.
THE FACTS: There’s no evidence to support that Epps — who has not been arrested or charged in connection with the Jan. 6 riot — was anything but a disgruntled supporter of former President Donald Trump, like thousands of others who descended on the Capitol that day.
The Jan. 6 committee says Epps testified that he wasn’t working for law enforcement, and at this point, no convincing evidence has been provided linking him to federal agents.
That's about 40 percent of the complete report. Use the link I just provided if you want the other 60 percent that follows.
I've had my fun.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-18-2022).]
The mostly peaceful trespassers were practically escorted around and given a guided tour of the place. There is video evidence of it. It is also true that there was no "direct" threat or any indirect threat "revolt/putsch/rebellion against the system of government. They were protesting voter fraud, NOT the Government. Your anger is misguided, much like the trespassers
which fraud 2000 when gore won by 500k national but lost 5v4 in court 2016 when she who the right hates won by millions but where some voters lived made them more important then other voters votes 2020 when not even the nuttiest of the con's will claim an out right more votes win as they know 7 million is far too much despite that they still believe and repeat of 2016 is their god given right where they get just the minimum number needed in the right places to squeak out a cheep cheat repeat of the 2016 farce
and yes that is a revolt by revolting people trying to subvert our government in a putsch
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
The thing about Leftist propaganda is that, like common liars, it invariably contradicts and indicts itself.
This does seem to be true, each time one can only hope that too much damage isn't done before that happens, and that the onlookers aren't too brainwashed or bought and paid for to see it when it happens.
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 01-18-2022).]
which fraud 2000 when gore won by 500k national but lost 5v4 in court
Translation: I don't like our legally crafted system.
quote
2016 when she who the right hates won by millions but where some voters lived made them more important then other voters votes
Translation: I don't like our legally crafted system.
quote
2020 when not even the nuttiest of the con's will claim an out right more votes win as they know 7 million is far too much despite that they still believe and repeat of 2016 is their god given right where they get just the minimum number needed in the right places to squeak out a cheep cheat repeat of the 2016 farce
Translation: [word salad; undiscernable]
quote
and yes that is a revolt by revolting people trying to subvert our government in a putsch
Translation: [name calling and personal insults]
The synopsis is a lot of crying, and crying is allowed in politics by establishment left wingers.
This does seem to be true, each time one can only hope that too much damage isn't done before that happens, and that the onlookers aren't too brainwashed or bought and paid for to see it when it happens.
It has been my observation over many years that Leftists don't care at all when their propaganda narratives get whacked by the truth.
They just immediately pop back up with their next lie.
It's literally like playing Whack-A-Mole
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-18-2022).]
which fraud 2000 when gore won by 500k national but lost 5v4 in court 2016 when she who the right hates won by millions but where some voters lived made them more important then other voters votes 2020 when not even the nuttiest of the con's will claim an out right more votes win as they know 7 million is far too much despite that they still believe and repeat of 2016 is their god given right where they get just the minimum number needed in the right places to squeak out a cheep cheat repeat of the 2016 farce
and yes that is a revolt by revolting people trying to subvert our government in a putsch
Ray, your misdirections and insults are futile. The thread title clearly sets the topic and context. The mostly peaceful events that day Jan6 led to a trespassing and a guided tour of the Capital. The peaceful protest against voter fraud on Jan6 culminated in the capital punishment of a mostly peaceful trespasser by a Capital Police Officer which was the only death that day. It has been clearly demonstrated that an FBI agent instigated the peaceful protesters into trespassing on to Capital grounds, probably because he didn't like the fact that the protesters were not violent so he agitated them, instigated them into trespassing. The peaceful protesters came unarmed because they had no intention of taking over the Government or hurting anyone. The peaceful protest against voter fraud was tainted by hate from antifa and FBI who clearly have nefarious political motives, and had orchestrated, devolved the peaceful protest into a mostly peaceful trespassing.
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 01-18-2022).]
