(01-15-2024, 07:23 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(01-15-2024, 07:00 PM)copycat Wrote: Well I can try however your preconceived notions will undermine anything and everything I put forth.  We can start with what actually happened leading up Jan 6 which you moderates and leftists will never acknowledge.

Due to a foreign governments negligence (and I am being generous using that word) a worldwide pandemic was brought upon the globe.   It happened to coincide with an election in the country of the leader of the free world which also lead to a lot of “temporary” changes in our voting laws.  The legality of many of these changes were and are still in question.  

On election night many of these changes appeared to have directly affected the outcome of the election on what no doubt can be described as a Lighting Rod of a sitting president.  When questions arose about perceived irregularities in the opposing parties strongholds the official response from the people in charge was “We looked into it and it was all legit”.  A lack of transparency into those investigations lead to frustration and many were left still questioning the legitimacy of the outcome.  

The aforementioned firebrand of a president, being a narcissist of the absolute extreme refused to accept his defeat along with his staunchest supporters which lead to a protest on the day of the transfer of power.  A few bad apples got out of hand which is typical in a large scale demonstration.

There was no insurrection regardless of what you tell yourself.

Granted that is an oversimplification of the topic at hand but more often than not the simplest answer proves to be most correct.

On a side note, many of the concerns raised after the election are being revisited 3 years later.  I do find it interesting that many of those initial concerns after being legitimately scrutinized appear to be legitimate.

OK, I'm just going to focus on this "few bad apples" thing, and flesh that out.  Please confirm or deny each additional fact I present.

1) The "few bad apples" numbered over 2000 who not only passed the barricades outside but also entered the building.  
You did see the video of DC’s finest pulling barricades and waving people in right?
2) These "few bad apples" got within 100 feet of members of Congress and the Vice President.
And did what?
3) These "few bad apples" intended to reach those officials and intended to harm them or prevent them from doing their jobs.
100% conjecture on your part
4) This was one of only three days of the entire 4 year cycle of our Constitution that required all of those members to be present and sign off on who would be in power for the Constitution to continue.  The other two days like that in the 4 year cycle are New Year's Day of any odd numbered year.
And?
Now questions:

Q1) You insist that none of these 2000 people are insurrectionists.  What does the word insurrection mean? What is an additional act, that if they had done it that day, would make it an insurrection in your mind? That's addressing the contrapositive.  No declaration can be true if the contrapositive is false.
Nope never said that at all.  I’m sure there were a few with ill intent.  That does not make the protest an insurrection something you have declared.  In fact we have observed one individual inciting violence and calling for people to storm the capitol building.  Curiously he got a slap on the wrist for his involvement.
Q2) Do we apply the law equally?  If a Democrat mob had done all of these things above, and left you doubting for 4 hours if the Constitution would remain in effect or not, that would be OK? Those Democrats could all run for office again?
We observed democrats assaulting police, storming police stations, fire bombing buildings, looting, rioting and burning all in the name of protest.  Allegedly some of the leaders of those protests rode their notoriety all the way to elected office.  You tell me, is the law being applied equally?