Was the January 6 riot/insurrection defensible?

You made up that nonsense. You spew your hyper-partisan prejudice, but can contrive no actual evidence of police killers having any political affiliation, not like the Trump goons of January 6 who had an obvious political agenda.

 

*LOL*

They were extremely good actors to make themselves look and act just like Trump-humpers,.

 

BLM rioters tried to look like Trump supporters or are you confused and think the BLM riots were the same as the 1/6 silliness?

 

so wanton criminal behavior is less odious to you than those who were upset about political machinations-real or imagined?

 

If that is your spin, good luck with it.

Criminal behavior is criminal behavior, regardless of the pretext.

 

To call something, believed by the majority of people, a "conspiracy theory" is, of course, turning reality on its head. I noticed that you did not supply your source, for which I asked, that so few people take seriously, the events of January 6th. The results of the midterms, might suggest otherwise. But regardless, people not taking something seriously, is not the same as their not believing that it did not occur. Unless you can produce any evidence that most people dispute the validity of the J6 Committee's work, it is clearly your own perspective, that this is all just a frame up, of an innocent Donald Trump, which is (whether or not you can even admit that obvious reality) the conspiracy theory.

 

What do you imagine is the political orientation of most cop killers?

 

*LOL*

 

are you laughing at the claim another made that BLM rioters tried to look like Trump supporters during BLM riots?

 

criminal behavior that burns millions of dollars of property, prevents thousands of Americans access to public property or travel on the public right of ways and murders dozens of people is far worse than the 1/6 riots

 

Oh, OK. So attacking the Capitol with the idea that (a) you're going to stop the peaceful transition of power is worse than a run-of-the-mill riot, and (b) with the goal of murdering the VP and members of Congress.

That's facially absurd. You apparently have no perspective and lack the capacity to grasp the huge gulf of differences between these events.

 

if people really thought that was the goal, why weren't they armed? millions of dollars of businesses destroyed, dozens of people killed. cars burned thousands of motorists prevented from traveling vs what?

your argument is akin to say that if someone is punched in the face due to a racist motive that is worse than another person being killed because the motive was mere robbery

 

All that the kooks were trying to do is interfere with the certification of the EC votes long enough, and effectively enough, to allow the Orange Traitor to invoke martial law to give him a fighting chance to prevent the certification, and remain in office.

Don't tell me that you're not familiar with what John Eastman and Clark advised the Orange Clusterfuck.

 

I suppose this is all "fake news".

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/20/eastman-trump-role-legal-overturn-election-00034023

John Eastman, the attorney who architected Donald Trump’s last-ditch legal strategy to overturn the 2020 election, revealed Friday that he routinely communicated with Trump either directly or via “six conduits” during the chaotic weeks that preceded the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

In a late-night court filing urging a federal judge to maintain the confidentiality of his work for Trump, Eastman provided the clearest insight yet into the blizzard of communications between Trump, his top aides, his campaign lawyers and the army of outside attorneys who were working to help reverse the outcome in a handful of states won by Joe Biden.


The filing also describes the direct role of Trump himself in developing strategy, detailing “two hand-written notes from former President Trump about information that he thought might be useful for the anticipated litigation.” Those notes are among the documents Eastman is seeking to shield via attorney-client privilege. Eastman said he would also speak directly with Trump by phone throughout his legal challenges to the election.

Eastman described these contacts and records as part of an effort to prevent the Jan. 6 select committee from accessing 600 emails that describe his efforts to build Trump’s legal gambit to reverse the 2020 election outcome — and, when that failed, urge state legislatures to simply overturn the results themselves. He argues that the documents are protected by attorney-client and attorney work product privileges that Congress has no business probing, even as the panel investigates the circumstances that led a mob of Trump supporters to attack the Capitol.

Eastman is also urging the judge, U.S. District Court Judge David Carter of California, to shield dozens of contacts with state legislators, some of whom he advised to appoint slates of pro-Trump electors, overriding the certified results of the popular vote in their states.

Eastman provides few details about the White House officials and attorneys with whom he was communicating, leaving their names out of the filing. But several of the attorneys filed declarations supporting Eastman’s descriptions of his work for Trump. Those declarations, filed under seal with the court, include attestations from Kurt Olsen, the lead lawyer in a Supreme Court lawsuit that Trump backed to overturn the election results, as well as Bruce Marks, a Pennsylvania lawyer who worked on Trump’s election litigation.

In making his case to Carter, Eastman provided an overview of the legal apparatus that mobilized to keep Trump in power after the election was called for Biden. He ticked through a series of cases that he worked on and described his contacts with the lawyers involved.

For example, in the Supreme Court case — Texas v. Pennsylvania — Eastman noted that “[t]en of the attorneys included on the communications (in addition to Dr. Eastman) were working on behalf of then-President Trump or his campaign committee directly), and the other three were assisting Dr. Eastman separately.” In addition, “21 of the documents contain work product as well as attorney-client privileged communications … transmitted to then-President Trump through his executive assistant,” Eastman contends.

rallied to the select committee’s cause, repeatedly rejecting Eastman’s attempts to scuttle the panel’s demands. He forced Eastman to undertake a review of all of his emails and turn over tens of thousands of pages. And in a March ruling that continues to resonate, Carter held that Eastman and Trump “more likely than not” engaged in a criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election by obstructing Congress’ ability to count electoral votes. He ruled that Eastman’s efforts to pressure Mike Pence to single-handedly overturn the 2020 election crossed legal lines, particularly as he urged Pence to attempt to avoid getting the courts involved.

reported that Trump first became aware of Eastman after he appeared in a segment on Levin’s show in 2019.
other Fox commentators’ contacts related to Trump’s actions around Jan. 6, revealing communications from hosts Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Brian Kilmeade pleading with then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to get Trump to directly call off the rioters. The committee has previously requested an interview with Hannity but it’s unclear if he has responded.

Eastman is also seeking to shield 50 emails reflecting contacts with state legislators and GOP officials who he said sought out his legal representation.

“Those 50 documents include attorney-client privileged communications with 9 different clients or potential clients who were seeking Dr. Eastman’s legal advice regarding the constitutional authority of state legislatures to deal with election illegality and fraud,” Burnham writes.

“Seven were themselves state legislators; one was a party committeewomen and also agent of one of the legislators; and the last was a citizen coordinating information sessions for state legislators,” according to Eastman’s filing. “Confidential communications between an attorney and his client are protected even if unrelated to litigation.”

Last week, emails from another Eastman account — at University of Colorado-Boulder, where Eastman worked as a visiting professor — revealed direct contacts between Eastman and Pennsylvania lawmaker Russ Diamond. Eastman advised Diamond on crafting a resolution to replace Biden’s electors with Trump’s and to justify it by simply retabulating the popular vote to put Trump on top.

 

---and I maintain that attacking the Capitol with the goal of preventing a legislative function which memorializes and recognizes the outcome of an election is much worse than a mere riot. Why out Trump sycophants can't see that is amazing and puzzling.

 

I know of no comparable political, hyper-partisan act, a violent attempt to prevent Congress from fulfilling its constitutional duty to acknowledge the will of the People.

The "Oh, yeah! Well whaddabout...?" crowd has nothing comparable to point to.

 

"Bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbutwhatabout___________________?"

Just doesn't work here. These people have had their abilities to draw analogies removed.

 

Yes, the sum total of random violent crime in the nation necessarily exceeds the Trump goon attack on Congress intended to prevent the Constitution being respected.

Is that actually your defense of this?

​

 

They persist in straining to contrive the most ludicrous parallels rather than honestly acknowledge the repugnant reality.

Next thing, they'll be insisting that its inciter was not pleasuring himself for hours watching, but was so horrified by the sordid spectacle that he was shocked into paralysis.

 

I don't fantasize, but I strongly suspect that they are, overwhelmingly. apolitical.

If you have credible evidence to refute such a suspicion, rather than just blowing hyper-partisan gas, please provide it.

 

Both can be wrong at the same time. Should we not put armed robbers in prison, because murderers are worse?

 

Duplicate post.

 

what we should do is not waste billions investigating the 1/6 minor league riot well spending far less effort investigating the far more costly and deadly BLM riots

 

Trump bum kissers are upset because most Americans recognized that a direct violent assault upon the democratic process in contravention of the nation's proud history of peaceful transfers of power (1789-2021) merits national attention, Politicians of both political parties agreed.

Republicans Condemn Trump Supporters Storming U.S. Capitol:
"This Is a Coup Attempt!"

Kevin McCarthy Called For Jan. 6 Investigation
Republicans pledge investigation into Jan. 6
Thirty-five House Republicans...
support legislation that would establish an independent commission to investigate
the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol


​

Despite their desperate attempt to contrive a fake equivalency, any violent incidents that occurred around BLM protests had no partisan affiliation, and neither Americans in general nor Republican politicians anywhere have called for a comparable investigation.

 

Your own post shows that Republicans have condemned the riot! The poll in this thread reflects the same. You're working yourself up over nothing.