What the Left fails to communicate about Jan 6

[Rebound]

12 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Dude, you guys are making an absolutely MASSIVE accusation based on a 3 hr long, completely unarmed riot where the POTUS asked for peace no less than 3 times.

You f'ing maggots cheered on 3 full years worth of violent riots, including the takeover of part of Seattle, a 100-day siege of a federal building in Portland, and an attack on the WH that injured over 60 Secret Service agents.

All the God-damned leftards in the US don't have enough credibility to take out a library book, let alone accuse someone else of trying to overthrow the gov't. 

If someone smashes your head with a fire extinguisher, that’s assault with a deadly weapon. 
If someone spears you with a flagpole tipped with a blade, it’s attempted murder. 
If someone squirts bear spray into your face, it’s assault with a deadly weapon.

So you’re not telling the truth when you say these people were unarmed, and given all their violence, there was no way to tell whether they were going to start firing guns or not.  

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

If someone smashes your head with a fire extinguisher, that’s assault with a deadly weapon. 
If someone spears you with a flagpole tipped with a blade, it’s attempted murder. 
If someone squirts bear spray into your face, it’s assault with a deadly weapon.

You're trying to make the case that it was a planned, armed attack ("insurrection"), but by your own admission people didn't use a single firearm. They had impromptu weapons. What part of that says planned to you, stupid? 

You could charge those people with the same kinds of things that BLM rioters were charged for, but to pretend that it was an "armed insurrection", or a 'planned insurrection', is just stupid, stupid, stupid. 

Quote

So you’re not telling the truth when you say these people were unarmed,

I told the absolute truth, stupid. 

You're talking about a planned insurrection, which was intended to 'overthrow the gov't'. 

FYI when people plan simple things like robbing a bank or some drug dealers, they bring guns. When they plan bigger things, like for exmple overthrowing the gov't, you think that they go empty-handed and then just grab random things like fire extinguishers and sticks??????  

Your stupid little story goes exactly like this: "They planned to overthrow the gov't, so they drove to DC and then just grabbed things like fire extinguishers from their truck, or used the sticks that were holding their protest signs as "weapons" to overrun Capitol Hill". 

That's not "an armed insurrection" stupid. That's a bunch of protesters who turned into rioters in the heat of the moment.

That group of people absolutely do not fit into the category of "armed". At best you could say that "it was an almost entirely unarmed group, but a small percentage of them armed themselves with impromptu bludgeoning instruments at the protest and started rioting". 

Do you categorize the BLM protesters as "armed"? Were they "armed protesters"? They had sticks too. A lot of them turned into rioters later each evening, and used those weapons to kill people. They attacked federal buildings, police stations, police officers, secret service members, innocent civilians, business owners, etc. 

In fact: the BLM riots were more of an insurrection than Jan 6th if you think about it. The BLM riots were widespread, and widely encouraged by the Dems & affiliated people like Michelle Obama, plus the BLM leadership. All of the aforementioned people lied, incited, encouraged or hid evidence to incite the mobs into a frenzy - against gov't buildings. The mobs took over police stations, attacked federal buildings, and even attacked the WH. They were armed with guns - which they fired at people and killed cops with - molotov cocktails, fireworks, long knives, smoke grenades, tear gas, gas masks, etc. Their attacks were coordinated and endorsed by the Democrats. The Dems would say things like"Oh it's just a summer of love lol" when asked about the seizing of police stations and when US soil was seized as sovereign BLM territory.  

Quote

and given all their violence, there was no way to tell whether they were going to start firing guns or not.  

Nice try, stupid. 

A lot of the "crowd noise" that you heard was fake.

The January 6th committee added their own sound to silent CCTV footage to make it seem worse than it was. https://notthebee.com/article/the-j6-committee-apparently-added-audio-including-screams-and-other-crowd-mayhem-sounds-to-silent-cctv-footage/

Quote

"the J6 committee added audio to silent CCTV footage, inserting screams and other crowd mayhem sounds, to make it seem more ominous."

Why didn't Snopes or anyone else do a "Fact Check" on that? That seems kinda weird, hey? It's a big accusation, and should be super-easy to disprove.... 

Anyhoo, the top 3 reasons that you don't hear gunshots from the crowd:

1. No one in the crowd used guns
2. The only gunshots came from the cops, who were shooting unarmed women
3. The only way to hear gunshots in the audio that the Jan 6th committee added to the silent footage is if the Jan 6th committee added fake gunshot sounds, which apparently wasn't necessary, because people like you are so God-damned stupid that you just assumed they happened. 

Edited December 22, 2023 by WestCanMan

[Rebound]

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You're trying to make the case that it was a planned, armed attack ("insurrection"), but by your own admission people didn't use a single firearm. They had impromptu weapons. What part of that says planned to you, stupid? 

You could charge those people with the same kinds of things that BLM rioters were charged for, but to pretend that it was an "armed insurrection", or a 'planned insurrection', is just stupid, stupid, stupid. 

I told the absolute truth, stupid. 

You're talking about a planned insurrection, which was intended to 'overthrow the gov't'. 

FYI when people plan simple things like robbing a bank or some drug dealers, they bring guns. When they plan bigger things, like for exmple overthrowing the gov't, you think that they go empty-handed and then just grab random things like fire extinguishers and sticks??????  

Your stupid little story goes exactly like this: "They planned to overthrow the gov't, so they drove to DC and then just grabbed things like fire extinguishers from their truck, or used the sticks that were holding their protest signs as "weapons" to overrun Capitol Hill". 

That's not "an armed insurrection" stupid. That's a bunch of protesters who turned into rioters in the heat of the moment.

That group of people absolutely do not fit into the category of "armed". At best you could say that "it was an almost entirely unarmed group, but a small percentage of them armed themselves with impromptu bludgeoning instruments at the protest and started rioting". 

Do you categorize the BLM protesters as "armed"? Were they "armed protesters"? They had sticks too. A lot of them turned into rioters later each evening, and used those weapons to kill people. They attacked federal buildings, police stations, police officers, secret service members, innocent civilians, business owners, etc. 

The BLM riots were more of an insurrection than Jan 6th if you think about it. The BLM riots were widespread, and widely encouraged by the Dems & affiliated people like Michelle Obama, plus the BLM leadership. All of the aforementioned people lied, incited, encouraged or hid evidence to incite the mobs into a frenzy. The mobs took over police stations, attacked federal buildings, and even attacked the WH. They were armed with guns - which they fired at people and killed cops with - molotov cocktails, fireworks, long knives, smoke grenades, tear gas, gas masks, etc. Their attacks were coordinated and endorsed by the Democrats. The Dems would say things like"Oh it's just a summer of love lol" when asked about the seizing of police stations and when US soil was seized as sovereign BLM territory.  

Nice try, stupid. 

A lot of the "crowd noise" that you heard was fake.

The January 6th committee added their own sound to silent CCTV footage to make it seem worse than it was. https://notthebee.com/article/the-j6-committee-apparently-added-audio-including-screams-and-other-crowd-mayhem-sounds-to-silent-cctv-footage/

Why didn't Snopes or anyone else do a "Fact Check" on that? That seems kinda weird, hey? It's a big accusation, and should be super-easy to disprove.... 

Anyhoo, the top 3 reasons that you don't hear gunshots from the crowd:

1. No one in the crowd used guns
2. The only gunshots came from the cops, who were shooting unarmed women
3. The only way to hear gunshots in the audio that the Jan 6th committee added to the silent footage is if the Jan 6th committee added fake gunshot sounds, which apparently wasn't necessary, because people like you are so God-damned stupid that you just assumed they happened. 

A weapon is a weapon, and the insurrectionists did bring weapons. They brought spears, brass knuckles, bear spray, and other implements, and they then used other implements they found to cause more injury.  I don’t know how many of them carried guns. Doesn’t matter; they brought weapons, clearly. 
 

“US Capitol Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell testified that "(c)ommon things were used as weapons, like a baseball bat, a hockey stick, a rebar, a flagpole -- including the American flag -- pepper spray, bear spray." “
 

”Rioters also used knives, stolen police shields, a stun gun, fire extinguisher and more. Hand-to-hand combat led to more than a dozen officers being sent to the hospital, some of whom had bone fractures and concussions. At least three have been charged with bringing guns onto the Capitol grounds.” Guy Reffitt, Christopher Alberts, and Mark Ibrahim are the names of those charged for bringing guns. 
 

Lonnie Coffman was sentenced for four years for bringing loaded guns and a dozen Molotov cocktails and other explosives.  https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/alabama-man-sentenced-46-months-prison-firearms-offenses-district-columbia-and-alabama

Edited December 22, 2023 by Rebound

[WestCanMan]

8 minutes ago, Rebound said:

A weapon is a weapon, and the insurrectionists did bring weapons. They brought spears, brass knuckles, bear spray, and other implements, and they then used other implements they found to cause more injury.  I don’t know how many of them carried guns. Doesn’t matter; they brought weapons, clearly. 

You're making a generalization about the entire crowd, dummy, by calling them armed.

FYI if a group is "armed", that usually means "100% of the were armed", not "3% of them grabbed impromptu weapons and threatened people - 100% of which had actual guns".

By normal English language conventions you're just a f'ing liar. 

And are you going to address the question of how BLM compares to Jan 6th as far as the claim of an "armed insurrection" goes?

Have you addressed the topic of "The jan 6th committee adding rioting sounds to silent CCTV footage"? 

Edited December 22, 2023 by WestCanMan

[Rebound]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

You're making a generalization about the entire crowd, dummy, by calling them armed.

GYI if a group is "armed", that usually means "100% of the were armed", not "3% of them grabbed impromptu weapons and threatened people with actual guns".

By normal English language conventions you're just a f'ing liar. 

And are you going to address the question of how BLM compares to Jan 6th as far as the claim of an "armed insurrection" goes?

Have you addressed the topic of "The jan 6th committee adding rioting sounds to silent CCTV footage"? 

Here’s the problem, stlpid: I have never once defended BLM rioters. Their behavior was indefensible.  They aren’t “my people.” I don’t support them.  So you aren’t getting anywhere by comparing them. All of the violent BLM rioters… all the rioters, period, should go to prison.  I never said they shouldn’t.  
 

The Jan 6 riots were caused by one man and his minions spreading absolute lies about the validity of the election, and convincing a large crowd that they needed to peacefully march to the US Capitol and then STOP the Congress from approving the election of Joe Biden.  He told them that if they did not do this, they wouldn’t have a country any more.  Trump knew this wasn’t true (btw: We still have a country, it’s not destroyed, the stock market hit an all-time high).  
 

You don’t like these facts, but they are facts and judges and juries have verified this hundreds of times by convicting these people.  Nearly 600 convictions so far, including 98 convicted of felonies by a jury.  

[WestCanMan]

1 minute ago, Rebound said:

Here’s the problem, stlpid: I have never once defended BLM rioters. Their behavior was indefensible.  They aren’t “my people.” I don’t support them.  So you aren’t getting anywhere by comparing them. All of the violent BLM rioters… all the rioters, period, should go to prison.  I never said they shouldn’t.  

That doesn't matter. This isn't about you, it's the Jan 6th committee that's making these charges, and the Dems all supported BLM 100%.

This isn't abut your hypocrisy, it's about their hypocrisy, but FYI you are backing their hypocrisy so you're not off the hook.

Quote

The Jan 6 riots were caused by one man and his minions spreading absolute lies about the validity of the election, and convincing a large crowd that they needed to peacefully march to the US Capitol and then STOP the Congress from approving the election of Joe Biden.  He told them that if they did not do this, they wouldn’t have a country any more.  Trump knew this wasn’t true (btw: We still have a country, it’s not destroyed, the stock market hit an all-time high).  

You conflicting narratives don't fly here dude. Stone meet gravity.

If it was "pre-planned and armed", as the J6tards love to say, then why wasn't it "armed"? They're already half-wrong and I haven' even addressed the issue of why Capitol Hill wasn't protected...

So are you now blaming this all on Trump? His speech wasn't the stuff of insurrections, sorry dummy.

Quote

You don’t like these facts, but they are facts

You don't have facts, you have stupid conflicting narratives and lies. Eg, the rioters weren't "armed". A very small percentage of them had impromptu bludgeoning instruments. That does NOT give you room to categorize a large group of people as armed, especially when you're trying to make the case that they planned to go there. 

Quote

and judges and juries have verified this hundreds of times by convicting these people.  Nearly 600 convictions so far, including 98 convicted of felonies by a jury. 

I've never accused the US of being a healthy, functioning democracy in the past 4 years.

I've never said that American judges were credible in general. Quite the opposite. 

I've made you painfully aware of the FBI's litany of lies, crimes, and election influencing. I've made you aware of the times that the Dems were caught actually cheating on elections, all of their proposed voter-fraud-friendly election reforms, all of CNN's election lies and cheating, etc. 

Did 98 people commit crimes, of which they should have been found guilty by a jury? Yes, for sure. But by the same token, 25,000 BLMers committed crimes which they should have been found guilty of, by a jury. Why didn't that happen?  Why is it still just very few people? 

[Hodad]

23 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

 

And are you going to address the question of how BLM compares to Jan 6th as far as the claim of an "armed insurrection" goes?

 

Seeing as how no BLM riot had the expressed intent or opportunity to subvert democracy and, through violence, install an unelected ruler, there isn't really much to compare. ?

[WestCanMan]

20 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Seeing as how no BLM riot had the expressed intent or opportunity to subvert democracy and, through violence, install an unelected ruler, there isn't really much to compare. ?

Neither did the Jan 6th riot, dummy. 

people with stcks weren't going to overthrow the US gov't, regardless of what a low-IQ activist judge says. 

[Hodad]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

Neither did the Jan 6th riot, dummy. 

people with stcks weren't going to overthrow the US gov't, regardless of what a low-IQ activist judge says. 

Of course the Jan 6 rioters intended to overthrow the government, Dummy. That's exactly what Trump told them to do. The final conclusion to that rambling, incoherent, lie-filled screed (sounds a lot like you, actually, with his string of silly, false grievances) was that they would all march down to the Capitol, fight like hell and "stop the steal" or they wouldn't have a country anymore. He said all that specifically in reference to the vote certification. 

The crowd understood exactly what he meant. They've testified to it in court. Many of them are on video talking about their "1776 moment." They certainly expressed intent to harm Pence and Pelosi before they stormed the Capitol to get at those lawmakers. 

It was a crowd full of stupid people who are easily manipulated. It really doesn't matter whether or not you think the fools had any chance of success. The fact is that they acted on Trumps urging, and acted with intent. 

There isn't a law against insurrections that have a likelihood of success greater than X%. There is simply a law against insurrection. 

[impartialobserver]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:59 AM, Nationalist said:

So...Women for America First lied about their plans to march to the Capital?

LOL...Oh that's awful. FIFTY LASHES WITH REBOUND'S WET NOODLE!

Better than with yours.. they would ask why the fan is blowing

[robosmith]

35 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Neither did the Jan 6th riot, dummy. 

people with stcks weren't going to overthrow the US gov't, regardless of what a low-IQ activist judge says. 

Thing is, you don't know anything about the planning and use of election law that lawyers like John Eastman agreed were illegal, but were used anyway to attempt to overthrow the election.

Have you figured out what a "contingent election" is yet?

Here's a clue for you: it depends on failure to certify the EC vote on Jan 6th.

Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress: Perspectives and Contemporary Analysis

Though I highly doubt you will even try to understand it.

[Rebound]

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

That doesn't matter. This isn't about you, it's the Jan 6th committee that's making these charges, and the Dems all supported BLM 100%.

This isn't abut your hypocrisy, it's about their hypocrisy, but FYI you are backing their hypocrisy so you're not off the hook.

You conflicting narratives don't fly here dude. Stone meet gravity.

If it was "pre-planned and armed", as the J6tards love to say, then why wasn't it "armed"? They're already half-wrong and I haven' even addressed the issue of why Capitol Hill wasn't protected...

So are you now blaming this all on Trump? His speech wasn't the stuff of insurrections, sorry dummy.

You don't have facts, you have stupid conflicting narratives and lies. Eg, the rioters weren't "armed". A very small percentage of them had impromptu bludgeoning instruments. That does NOT give you room to categorize a large group of people as armed, especially when you're trying to make the case that they planned to go there. 

I've never accused the US of being a healthy, functioning democracy in the past 4 years.

I've never said that American judges were credible in general. Quite the opposite. 

I've made you painfully aware of the FBI's litany of lies, crimes, and election influencing. I've made you aware of the times that the Dems were caught actually cheating on elections, all of their proposed voter-fraud-friendly election reforms, all of CNN's election lies and cheating, etc. 

Did 98 people commit crimes, of which they should have been found guilty by a jury? Yes, for sure. But by the same token, 25,000 BLMers committed crimes which they should have been found guilty of, by a jury. Why didn't that happen?  Why is it still just very few people? 

Explain in simple English; in a sentence or two, what the January 6 rioters were set to accomplish by attacking the U.S. Capitol, and breaking into the House and Senate by force during the counting of the Electoral College votes? 
 

If the result were that Donald Trump remained power past January 20, that would mean overthrowing the government.  

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

Better than with yours.. they would ask why the fan is blowing

Ur not very good at this, are ya

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Explain in simple English; in a sentence or two, what the January 6 rioters were set to accomplish by attacking the U.S. Capitol, and breaking into the House and Senate by force during the counting of the Electoral College votes? 
 

If the result were that Donald Trump remained power past January 20, that would mean overthrowing the government.  

Not if trump actually won the election and biden got in by fraud. In such a case as that they would have been protecting the gov't.

 

[robosmith]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:59 AM, Nationalist said:

So...Women for America First lied about their plans to march to the Capital?

LOL...Oh that's awful. FIFTY LASHES WITH REBOUND'S WET NOODLE!

There you go again DEFENDING FRAUD, this time with MOCKERY.

Is there ANY Trump related FRAUD you won't DEFEND?

How can you live with yourself? Do your wife and friends know how FRAUDULENT YOU ARE? 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

There you go again DEFENDING FRAUD, this time with MOCKERY.

 

Dude  - it totally deserved being mocked. And if we're being honest so do you  

[Deluge]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:28 AM, robosmith said:

^This is laughable.

From your link:

A dozen PB and OK members/leaders were CONVICTED of seditious conspiracy, so those anonymous "sources" don't know what they're talking about.

Nobody was truly convicted of anything because the courts have been tainted by woke filth. 

But don't worry, robowoke, President Trump will rectify that problem.

[Deluge]

On 12/21/2023 at 10:51 AM, WestCanMan said:

I see that robo replied, but I can't read it yet because he's on ignore.

What are the chances that, as I read his posts, I feel like I'm witnessing the deranged rants of a cultist...? 

I'd say chances are high. 

But if you want a quick slam dunk and a good laugh, you can laways take him off ignore for a few minutes and have some fun. 

[Deluge]

8 hours ago, robosmith said:

Thing is, you don't know anything about the planning and use of election law that lawyers like John Eastman agreed were illegal, but were used anyway to attempt to overthrow the election.

Have you figured out what a "contingent election" is yet?

Here's a clue for you: it depends on failure to certify the EC vote on Jan 6th.

Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress: Perspectives and Contemporary Analysis

Though I highly doubt you will even try to understand it.

There was no insurrection robowaste, so why are you still posting mindless drivel? 

[Deluge]

6 hours ago, Rebound said:

Explain in simple English; in a sentence or two, what the January 6 rioters were set to accomplish by attacking the U.S. Capitol, and breaking into the House and Senate by force during the counting of the Electoral College votes? 
 

If the result were that Donald Trump remained power past January 20, that would mean overthrowing the government.  

I think the scumbag FBI instigators were trying to turn the protestors into insurrectionists, since that's all you f*ckers wanted in the first place. God knows you talk about it enough. 

[Nationalist]

12 hours ago, robosmith said:

There you go again DEFENDING FRAUD, this time with MOCKERY.

Is there ANY Trump related FRAUD you won't DEFEND?

How can you live with yourself? Do your wife and friends know how FRAUDULENT YOU ARE? 

Look silly boy, I do believe that election was stolen. In the beginning I simply "felt" or "sensed" it was stolen. As time has passed and more information has become available, I've become convinced it was stolen and that all those hundreds of thousands who came from all over the USA that day, have been right all along. But the one thing that convices me of it, is how vehemently Libbies deny it all.

Take you for instance. Every time anyone posts anything about it, you chime in with your over used capitals, 'There is NO EVIDENCE of election FRAUD'. Sonny, your desperation literally reaks of cover-up.

As for January 6th itself, again, the information that's come out clearly shows that:

A. Trump did not instruct anyone to go into the capital. 

B. The FBI had all sorts of operatives in the crowd, encouraging a fight with the police.

C. Very few people committed any violent acts.

D. The video from the capital does not show anything more than an impromptu tourist expedition.

And

D. The way you snot-nosed dweebs and your Washington toadies insist on tossing anyone who even attended, and some who didn't even get there, with crimes and locked up old folks and journalists in solitary.

Karma is going to have its way with you lyin' little shits, and I will enjoy every delicious moment of it.

[WestCanMan]

17 hours ago, Rebound said:

Explain in simple English; in a sentence or two, what the January 6 rioters were set to accomplish by attacking the U.S. Capitol, and breaking into the House and Senate by force during the counting of the Electoral College votes? 

They were gonna build a launch pad on top of congress so that the mothership could land, stupid.

It was just a riot. 

You're acting like there was a specific plot to advance 6 members of Alpha Tango 4 squad to room 4b by 11:26 to execute the final phase of operation "STOP THE LIZARDS!"

It was just a riot. It wasn't this:

 

Quote

If the result were that Donald Trump remained power past January 20, that would mean overthrowing the government.  

Oh yeah. It's right in the constitution that he would remain president forever, ship for brains. 

Edited December 23, 2023 by WestCanMan

[ironstone]

23 hours ago, Rebound said:

They brought spears, brass knuckles, bear spray, and other implements, and they then used other implements they found to cause more injury.  I don’t know how many of them carried guns. Doesn’t matter; they brought weapons, clearly. 

What were the odds that a supposed 'insurrection' could have been successfully pulled off with spears, brass knuckles, bear spray and other implements? And a relatively small number of people at that?

It was not Pearl Harbor or 911 all over again.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, ironstone said:

What were the odds that a supposed 'insurrection' could have been successfully pulled off with spears, brass knuckles, bear spray and other implements? And a relatively small number of people at that?

It was not Pearl Harbor or 911 all over again.

What are the odds that a chud will ever understand that crap is not a defence?

[Deluge]

On 12/21/2023 at 12:27 PM, robosmith said:

I'm the jackass who posts evidence, while you got NADA.

Like the evidence of expert legal opinion from CONSERVATIVES.

While you post the "legal OPINION" from a farmer in Florida. LMAO

YOU ARE the jackass who posts manufactured bullshit. 

I AM the patriot who calls you out. 

WE BOTH know that you're a left-wing propaganda dispenser.