Feds charge over 200 in Capitol riot. We've learned a lot about why it happened.

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  perrie-halpern  •  3 weeks ago  •  116 comments

By:   Pete Williams

Feds charge over 200 in Capitol riot. We've learned a lot about why it happened.
Federal prosecutors have filed charges against over 200 people accused of taking part in the assault on the U.S. Capitol, alleging a wide range of motives.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors have now filed charges against 211 people accused of taking part in the assault on the U.S. Capitol last month, alleging a wide range of motives and behavior, from extreme violence to apparent ignorance that what they were doing was illegal.

Some defendants have been accused of assaulting police officers and threatening to attack lawmakers, while others are charged with the lesser offense of illegally entering a protected building. One father told authorities he wanted to give a son a memorable birthday.

Those charged came from 43 states, with Texas and New York topping the list. Men outnumbered women by about 7 to 1. Twenty were described as military veterans.

"There was absolutely a spectrum of support," said Seamus Hughes, deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University. "In many ways, Jan. 6 was a bug light. It brought extremists from all areas. And they all came with different skill sets."

He added, "You have the militias on one side. On the other side, you have the merely curious, people wrapped up in the moment."

Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, left, and rally organizer Joe Biggs congratulate each other as they return to the march's starting point at the "End Domestic Terrorism" rally at Tom McCall Waterfront Park in Portland, Ore., on Aug. 17, 2019.John Rudoff / AFP via Getty Images file

The FBI said nearly two dozen had ties to right-wing extremist groups, most notably the Proud Boys. Investigators said one of its national leaders, Joe Biggs of Florida, was among the first to enter the Capitol after another member, Dominic Pezzola of New York, used a police shield to break out a window, allowing the first rioters to get in.

Court documents said after Pezzola was inside, he smoked what he called a victory cigar and said on a video that he "knew we could take this mother------ over (if we) just tried hard enough."

Proud Boys leaders from Hawaii and Washington state were also charged, including Ethan Nordean, who was accused of planning in late December for violent action in Washington, D.C., in January.

n_ayman_brk_williams_cowboy_210201_1920x1080.focal-760x428.jpg

Federal judge holds hearing for 'Cowboys for Trump' leader who participated in Capitol riot


Three members of a militia group known as the Oath Keepers were accused of making similar plans and of using their cell phones as walkie-talkies during the siege to coordinate their actions. As it was underway, one said, "We have a good group. We have about 30-40 of us," according to court documents.

A month after the siege at the Capitol, details in arrest warrants and indictments have yet to suggest that the raid was the idea of a single person or group. Nor do they specify when the first plans were formulated for storming the building to disrupt the counting of Electoral College votes for president.

The charges against Nordean, for example, say that "he and other Proud Boys members were planning in advance to organize a group that would attempt to overwhelm police barricades and enter the United States Capitol building." But court documents don't indicate exactly when such a plan was hatched.

Police clash with supporters of President Donald Trump who breached security and entered the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.Mostafa Bassim / Anadolu Agency via Getty Images file

Prosecutors said some of the hundreds who stormed the Capitol were prepared for battle, wearing helmets and tactical gear. At least four were seen on video or in photos carrying baseball bats. Twenty-two are accused of assaulting some of the 140 police officers who officials said were injured during the rioting.

Jeffrey Sabol of New York was charged with grabbing a Washington, D.C., police officer, dragging him down the stairs and beating him. The FBI said Ryan Samsel of Pennsylvania was in the vanguard of people who pushed over police barricades on the Capitol grounds, knocking down a Capitol police officer who hit her head and suffered a concussion.

A New Jersey man, Scott Fairlamb, was accused of shoving and punching a Washington, D.C., police officer. Fairlamb's brother is a Secret Service agent. Court documents said Patrick McCaughey III of Connecticut used a police riot shield to forcefully push against a police officer pinned at a door who cried out in pain.

Trump supporters try to break through a police barrier on Jan. 6, 2021, at the Capitol.Julio Cortez / AP file

No charges have been filed in connection with the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. And the FBI has yet to identify the person who planted two pipe bombs near the Capitol the night before the siege outside the national headquarters of the Republican and Democratic parties.

Michael Sherwin, the acting U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said prosecutors could file charges of seditious conspiracy for anyone considered a leader or commander of the siege, but no such cases have yet been filed.

At the opposite extreme, court documents say some who entered the Capitol seemed unaware it was illegal and claimed they were simply swept up in the fervor. Many later told the FBI they regretted what they did and turned themselves in.

Prosecutors said Dalton Ray Crase, 21, drove from Lexington, Kentucky, with two other men and attended the rally where then-President Donald Trump spoke before the assault. The FBI said he admitted entering the Capitol but said he did not participate in any violence, telling agents, "I think it was dumb that we went in," and adding, "I was breaking the law by being in the Capitol building but it didn't register with me."

Trump supporters near the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.Shay Horse / NurPhoto via Getty Images file

The FBI said James Uptmore of San Antonio was at the Capitol on Jan. 6 as part of a five-day trip to celebrate his son's birthday. Agents said the son, Chance Uptmore, told them he entered the Capitol building "because he was caught up in the crowd and because it was a once-in-a-lifetime event."

The FBI's task of identifying people who entered the Capitol was aided by the more than 200,000 photos and videos sent in by tipsters, including a few who turned in members of their own families, and by the use of facial recognition software to put names to faces.

Investigators said they had little trouble identifying Troy Faulkner of Ohio, accused of kicking in a window. He was photographed wearing a coat that said "Faulkner Painting" on the back.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
1  MAGA    3 weeks ago

It’s mostly Facebooks fault that it happened. 

Coordinated Deplatforming Of Parler Under Question As Arrest Numbers Highlight Facebook’s Role In Capitol Hill Riot

Michael Ginsberg February 08, 2021 10:48 AM ET
zuck-scaled-e1612795788428.jpg/https://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/zuck-scaled-e1612795788428.jpg 320w, https://images.dailycaller.com/image/width=640,height=274,fit=cover,f=auto 640w, https://images.dailycaller.com/image/width=960,height=411,fit=cover,f=auto 960w, https://images.dailycaller.com/image/width=1280,height=549,fit=cover,f=auto 1280w" title="Big Tech CEO's Testify Before Senate On Section 230 Immunity" sizes="(min-width: 1000px) 65vw, 100vw" width="960" height="411" >

(Photo by Michael Reynolds-Pool/Getty Images)

Facebook was the social media network most used to organize the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, an analysis of Department of Justice (DOJ) charging documents shows.

The Program on Extremism at George Washington University has collected the indictments of 223 people who have been charged for participating in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, which caused five deaths and temporarily delayed the certification of President Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory. Facebook was used by 73 of the people charged with crimes, more than all other social media sites combined, according to a Forbes analysis.

read more:
 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1  Kavika   replied to  MAGA @1    3 weeks ago

Maximum sentence to all the traitors.

 
 
 
devangelical
Masters Expert
1.1.1  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @1.1    3 weeks ago

meh, I'm thinking a concrete wall within sight of Arlington.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  MAGA @1    3 weeks ago
Facebook was used by 73 of the people charged with crimes, more than all other social media sites combined, according to a Forbes analysis.

I thought the criminal is the person who uses the gun, not the gun itself. Isn't that what your ilk always says?  Now it's Facebook's fault and not the traitors? lol. 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
1.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  MAGA @1    3 weeks ago

GQP/MAGA... The party of cop killers.....

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
1.3.1  MAGA  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1.3    3 weeks ago

You forget about the retired St.Louis cop the democrat party killed.  

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
1.4  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  MAGA @1    3 weeks ago

You can't complain endlessly about censorship on Facebook on one hand and then point to them as the reason for what happened because there was freedom of speech. Pick one. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Masters Expert
1.4.1  devangelical  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.4    3 weeks ago

uh yeah, good luck with that, teacher ...

 
 
 
gooseisgone
Senior Quiet
1.4.2  gooseisgone  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.4    3 weeks ago
You can't complain endlessly about censorship on Facebook on one hand and then point to them as the reason for what happened because there was freedom of speech. Pick one.

The issue is not so much that Facebook censors, but that Parler  was "Totally Removed" from the internet for its supposed allowing people to communicate plans to attack the Capital on Jan 6th. This being the case why wasn't Facebook, YouTube and Instagram removed form the internet as well since they had 10X's the activity on their sites.   

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
PhD Principal
1.4.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  gooseisgone @1.4.2    3 weeks ago

Who shut down Parler, goose?

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
1.4.4  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.4    3 weeks ago

I don’t talk politics on Facebook.  It’s strictly to keep track of friends and distant family.  I’d be censored or banned from there for sure.  I’ll stick with Parler, Gab, MeWe instead of Facebook and Twitter.  

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
1.4.5  MAGA  replied to  gooseisgone @1.4.2    3 weeks ago

The bottom line...

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
1.4.6  MAGA  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.4.3    3 weeks ago

Amazon...

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
PhD Principal
1.4.7  sandy-2021492  replied to  MAGA @1.4.6    3 weeks ago

And who owns the platform on which Parler operated, MAGA?

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
1.4.8  Thomas  replied to  gooseisgone @1.4.2    3 weeks ago

Different Servers. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.4.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.4    3 weeks ago

Damn! Here comes Perrie using logic again!

 
 
 
gooseisgone
Senior Quiet
1.4.10  gooseisgone  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.4.3    3 weeks ago
Who shut down Parler, goose?

Amazon, what's your point?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
PhD Principal
1.4.11  sandy-2021492  replied to  gooseisgone @1.4.10    3 weeks ago

Now, who owns the platform on which Facebook operates?

 
 
 
gooseisgone
Senior Quiet
1.4.12  gooseisgone  replied to  Thomas @1.4.8    3 weeks ago
Different Servers

So Amazon had no platform on its servers that had people communicating about Jan 6th. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
1.4.13  Split Personality  replied to  gooseisgone @1.4.2    3 weeks ago
but that Parler  was "Totally Removed" from the internet for its supposed allowing people to communicate plans to attack the Capital on Jan 6th.

But Parler's fate wasn't decided by Amazon or anyone other than Dan Bogino and

Rebekah Mercer, who fired John Maetz rather than hire more Mods or accept oversight from Amazon or any other

IPS, Russian or otherwise. 

Basically corporations avoid lawsuits, they don't seek them out deliberately.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

Nothing in this story to disprove that many of them were incited by Donald Trump. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Senior Participates
2.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 weeks ago
Nothing in this story to prove that many of them were incited by Donald Trump. 
Nothing that Trump said could be considered to abet incitement.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
2.1.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Greg Jones @2.1    3 weeks ago

Psssst...... The Earth is round!  There are plenty of videos of those arrested clearly stating that Trump was the one that told them to go charge the capitol.

Denial of the facts and truth is foolish and futile by both you and your savior Trump.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Guide
2.1.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.1.1    3 weeks ago
There are plenty of videos of those arrested clearly stating that Trump was the one that told them to go charge the capitol.

They are facing federal charges. Since there is no way to prove that it was Trump that incited this, because there is no way to prove, other than their interpretation, what the intent was from the get go. That is NOW their convenient way of trying to tamp down their own stupidity and maybe get off a little easier. IF they really think that, they heard what they wanted to hear. But I don't think they do. As posted all over the place, this attack was orchestrated long before Trump's speech on inauguration day. To say that Trump "told them" to go charge the Capitol and break  in and terrorize is crap. They needed an excuse to excuse their own dumbass behavior and find a scapegoat for said dumbass behavior before the shit hits the fan in court..

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
2.1.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.2    3 weeks ago

Again..... Denial of the facts and truth is foolish and futile by both you and your savior Trump.

Why do you want to save the person that is so against democracy Jim? 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Guide
2.1.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.1.3    3 weeks ago
Why do you want to save the person that is so against democracy Jim?

Who would that be? The dumbass House Dems who continually moved the goal posts in the first go around trying to oust a duly elected President or the dumbasses that couldn't accept this election? Face it FN1, they just don't want him to run again and it's no holds barred in doing and in achieving that goal? He upset the status quo apple cart and the elitists in Congress just cannot afford to lose the power and influence over the American people.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.4    3 weeks ago

Oh bullshit.  He tried to extort the President of Ukraine into announcing an investigation of Joe Biden, Trump's election opponent.  In itself, that was more than enough to impeach him. And they proved it. 

The incessant whining of Trump's supporters is doing nothing but getting worse. 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
2.1.6  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.4    3 weeks ago

Go sell it on Breitbart Jim.... cause that dog don't hunt in the real world!

BTW.... Got any evidence of court admissible, results altering election fraud yet?  We're still waiting.....

  

 
 
 
zuksam
Sophomore Silent
2.1.7  zuksam  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    3 weeks ago
Oh bullshit.  He tried to extort the President of Ukraine into announcing an investigation of Joe Biden, Trump's election opponent.  In itself, that was more than enough to impeach him. And they proved it. 

And Joe Biden extorted the Ukraine to get a prosecutor who was going after Hunters Bosses fired. Six of one half a dozen of the other, or maybe not since Trump was actually trying to uncover a crime while Joe Biden was trying to cover some up. Besides Trump is being impeached because he's supposed to have incited an insurrection during his speech on Jan,6, that's all, but I read the transcript of his speech and I didn't see anything to that effect. The Impeachment charge is bogus, they're just using it because they can't legally impeach him for saying and doing perfectly legal things that the Democrats didn't like but that's the real reason they're going after him. 

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
2.1.8  pat wilson  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.1.6    3 weeks ago
election fraud 

They found four dead republicans that voted for trump in Pennsylvania.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Guide
2.1.9  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.1.6    3 weeks ago
Go sell it on Breitbart Jim.... cause that dog don't hunt in the real world!

Evidence says otherwise............

BTW.... Got any evidence of court admissible, results altering election fraud yet?  We're still waiting.....

I don't make a habit of responding to deflections...................

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
2.1.10  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.9    3 weeks ago

BRILLIANT RESPONSE!!!! 

First line says... "Evidences says otherwise"    Which you never provide...!   Ever!

Second line.... "I don't make a habit of responding to deflections..................."   When asked to supply evidence...!

[deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.11  JohnRussell  replied to  zuksam @2.1.7    3 weeks ago
And Joe Biden extorted the Ukraine to get a prosecutor who was going after Hunters Bosses fired. Six of one half a dozen of the other, or maybe not since Trump was actually trying to uncover a crime while Joe Biden was trying to cover some up.

Uh, no.   You should try to educate yourself about this instance without using discredited right wing conspiracy media. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Guide
2.1.12  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.1.10    3 weeks ago
First line says... "Evidences says otherwise"    Which you never provide...!   Ever!

Bullshit. My history says otherwise. Your commentary wreaks of a few others around these parts. Would you read it? Would you think about it? Or would you poo poo it and respond as you did above?

Second line.... "I don't make a habit of responding to deflections..................."   When asked to supply evidence...!

About a topic far from the topic of the seeded article. No relevance to the discussion. Evidence of voter fraud is far from it. And your insult aside, 

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.1.13  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.2    3 weeks ago

There is documented proof of all of the former occupant of the White House's mob's incitement by the former occupant of the White House.  

I cannot believe that every time the subject is brought up, this fact is totally ignored - that the former occupant of the White House - during his incitement to insurrection speech - said that he would go with them - he did not!

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.1.14  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    3 weeks ago

This is all the result of the 'right' accepting the former occupant of the White House's loss gracefully.  LOL!

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.1.15  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.9    3 weeks ago
"Evidence says otherwise............"

Where is that evidence?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Guide
2.1.16  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.15    3 weeks ago

You have made quite clear over the years that you wouldn't read it anyway so why do you ask?

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
2.1.17  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.16    3 weeks ago

In  other words..... as usual..... you got dick!

Try posing your evidence.... There are many of us that would enjoy reading what you think passes as "evidence".

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Guide
2.1.18  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.1.17    3 weeks ago

Democrats can’t let go of Donald Trump even as a former President, so on Monday House managers walked their article of impeachment to the Senate for a trial. Their goal is to banish Mr. Trump from running for office again. The result may instead be his acquittal and political revival.

Even the Aussies see through it.

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.1.19  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.18    3 weeks ago

It's not that we can't let the former occupant of the White House go - he needs to be held accountable - FOR ONCE.

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.1.20  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.18    3 weeks ago

Why the hell should the former occupant of the White House BE ALLOWED TO RUN FOR OFFICE AGAIN?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.1.21  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.20    3 weeks ago

Because a democracy means the people get to vote for who they want.

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.1.22  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.21    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

Over 7 million people DIDN'T WANT HIM

and won't want him in 2024 EITHER

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.1.23  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.22    3 weeks ago

Then there is no need to fear him!

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.1.24  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.23    3 weeks ago

Who says I fear the former occupant of the White House?

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
2.1.25  MAGA  replied to  Greg Jones @2.1    3 weeks ago

Exactly!  Well said.  

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
2.1.26  MAGA  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.4    3 weeks ago

Trumps lawyers and GOP house managers should go scorched earth on the democrats salt the fields and poison the wells rhetorically in the trial vs the illegitimate total bs sham trial before a kangaroo court.  Democrats don’t want healing so call them out on all their hypocrisy and double standards and make it as openly personal as possible for Schumer, AOC, Pelosi, and others. 

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
2.1.27  MAGA  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    3 weeks ago

We are going nowhere and only doubling down on our open and proud support of him.  Might as well get those involuntary camps and compulsory  re education centers ready as nothing short of that will end our support of him and being vocal about it.  

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
2.1.28  MAGA  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.1.6    3 weeks ago

Breitbart is the real world.  

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
2.1.29  MAGA  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.16    3 weeks ago

Great question ! jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
2.1.30  MrFrost  replied to  zuksam @2.1.7    3 weeks ago
And Joe Biden extorted the Ukraine to get a prosecutor who was going after Hunters Bosses fired.

Factually false. 

Biden, (with international support), got a prosecutor that refused to try corruption in the Ukraine, fired. The Ukraine was and is trying to clean up it's act by prosecuting corruption cases. THAT prosecutor refused, so, he was fired. 

That's reality. Right wing conspiracy theorists made up the story you are pushing, to feed a political agenda that you apparently bought. 

Like I said before, the right wing spins and twists itself into knots trying to attach Biden, (or any other Dem), to any country that is currently out of favor with the right wing. 

Biden/Ukraine/Iran/Iraq/Russia/China/etc... All bullshit. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
2.1.31  MrFrost  replied to  MAGA @2.1.26    3 weeks ago
Democrats don’t want healing so call them out on all their hypocrisy

So trump should just get a pass..."because"? It's comical that for the last 4 years trump supporters keep telling Dems to "shut up and deal with the loss", but now, look who doesn't want any accountability and, "unity"?

Hypocrites. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
2.1.32  Split Personality  replied to  MAGA @2.1.28    3 weeks ago
Breitbart is the real world.  

Breitbart is the real paranoid world.  

Breitbart News Network (known commonly as Breitbart News , Breitbart or Breitbart.com ) is an American far-right [5] syndicated news, opinion, and commentary [6] [7] website founded in mid-2007 by American conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart , who conceived it as "the Huffington Post of the right". [4] [8] [9] Its journalists are widely considered to be ideologically driven, and some of its content has been called misogynistic , xenophobic , and racist by liberals and many traditional conservatives alike. [10] The site has published a number of conspiracy theories [11] [12] and intentionally misleading stories

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.33  CB   replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.4    3 weeks ago

Just wow. Donald just threw Q-Anon and the Senate republicans under the bus (when it comes for them), and guess who is next? (Anybody who gets in the way of Donald's mission to rule the world.) Control and dominate.

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
Professor Guide
2.1.34  Larry Hampton  replied to  MAGA @2.1.28    3 weeks ago

Put the crack pipe down; did I just heard you say ,,,

Breitbart is the real world.  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
PhD Quiet
2.1.35  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.21    3 weeks ago
Because a democracy means the people get to vote for who they want.

But obviously those that vote for Trump are not interested or informed enough to be able to vote.  Isn't that right Vic???

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
2.1.36  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1.35    3 weeks ago
But obviously those that vote for Trump are not interested or informed enough to be able to vote.

So people who weren't interested in voting  or informed enough to vote actually went out and voted? That simply makes zero sense.

What exactly is your point here?

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
2.1.37  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.20    3 weeks ago
Why the hell should the former occupant of the White House BE ALLOWED TO RUN FOR OFFICE AGAIN?

Well, to begin with, it is because he has not been convicted of anything that would bar him from running again if he chooses.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
PhD Quiet
2.1.38  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.36    3 weeks ago
So people who weren't interested in voting  or informed enough to vote actually went out and voted?

You're arguing against Vic here.  He claims that if people aren't well enough informed, they should not be allowed to vote.

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
2.1.39  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1.38    3 weeks ago
You're arguing against Vic here. 

Did he write the following?

"But obviously those that vote for Trump are not interested or informed enough to be able to vote."

That doesn't show up in your post #2.1.35 as you quoting him.

They look like something you wrote.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
PhD Quiet
2.1.40  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.39    3 weeks ago
"But obviously those that vote for Trump are not interested or informed enough to be able to vote."

I was paraphrasing his quote.  His exact quote was:

There are many people who either don't care or have no idea what the issues are. Do we want elections decided by people who don't have enough interest to go out and vote?

BTW, his answer to his own question was "no".

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
2.1.41  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1.40    3 weeks ago

paraphrasing isn't necessary

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.1.42  Tessylo  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.41    3 weeks ago

Yeah, because you'll just ignore all of the facts anyway . . . . 

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
2.1.43  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.42    2 weeks ago

your post has ZERO relevance to mine.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 weeks ago
Nothing in this story to disprove that many of them were incited by Donald Trump. 

Then you didn't read the same story. I noted that planning took place sometime before Trump's speech. I noted that pipe bombs were planted the day before Trump's speech.

I also want to take issue with words being improperly used:

The assault on the Capitol was a riot, and a violent one, but it wasn’t an “insurrection.” It wasn’t a coup. Law enforcement had a tough fight on it's hands but the police were loyal to the Congress and the United States of America. Once the mob was defeated & dispersed, the Members returned to the House chamber and counted the votes. Joe Biden was never in danger of not being rightfully installed as President elect.

insurrection
an   organized   attempt   by a   group   of   people   to   defeat   their   government   and take   control   of   their   country , usually by   violence :



The and take control part never happened.
 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.2.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2    3 weeks ago

The purpose of the effort was to get Pence to invalidate the election. That is overthrowing the government, as ,  1. Pence had no such authority, and 2. The electoral college had reported already and informed that Biden was the winner. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.1    3 weeks ago

But John, the article shows that extremist groups planned the riot prior to Trump's speech:

Proud Boys leaders from Hawaii and Washington state were also charged, including Ethan Nordean, who was accused of planning in late December for violent action in Washington, D.C., in January.

Three members of a militia group known as the Oath Keepers were accused of making similar plans and of using their cell phones as walkie-talkies during the siege to coordinate their actions.

The charges against Nordean, for example, say that "he and other Proud Boys members were planning in advance to organize a group that would attempt to overwhelm police barricades and enter the United States Capitol building."

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.2    3 weeks ago

"But John, the article shows that extremist groups planned the riot prior to Trump's speech"

At the former occupant of the White House's urging. . . 

Remember - 'Stand Back and Stand By?'

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.2.3    3 weeks ago

He said "go peacefully' remember?

But who cares about the truth, right?

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.2.5  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.4    3 weeks ago
But who cares about the truth, right?

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
2.2.6  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.4    3 weeks ago

After the riot had been raging for a number of hours already Vic.  AFTER people had gotten hurt, AFTER the capital had been breached. 

 
 
 
MalamuteMan
Freshman Participates
2.2.7  MalamuteMan  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2    3 weeks ago
I noted that planning took place sometime before Trump's speech.

Trump's incitement started long before Jan 6th.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.2.6    3 weeks ago

You mean the riot started before the speech!

Got it!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2.9  Vic Eldred  replied to  MalamuteMan @2.2.7    3 weeks ago

That's right - you now have to move those goalposts.

It seems democrats think showing films of the riot are all they need as "evidence."  Yup turn up that volume! It's all about emotion!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.2.10  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.2    3 weeks ago

The Proud Boys, oath keepers etc,  were roughly 10 percent of those that entered the building.  

There are some who entered the building that told law enforcement or media that they were there because Trump asked them to. 

Had Trump not lied about the election for two months and told these people they needed to have his back , NONE of them would have been there on the 6th. Without Trump's instigation no one would have gone there, period. Not even the Proud Boys. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2.11  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.10    3 weeks ago
There are some who entered the building that told law enforcement or media that they were there because Trump asked them to. 

According to the article, there were a lot of average people who just got caught up in it:

"At the opposite extreme, court documents say some who entered the Capitol seemed unaware it was illegal and claimed they were simply swept up in the fervor. Many later told the FBI they regretted what they did and turned themselves in.


Had Trump not lied about the election for two months and told these people they needed to have his back , NONE of them would have been there on the 6th.

That's like saying if the Titanic had not set sail it wouldn't have hit an iceberg. No John, despite the President's belief that the election was stolen from him, it would be far fetched to assume his intent was to overthrow the government.


Without Trump's instigation no one would have gone there, period. Not even the Proud Boys. 

It was meant as a peaceful protest. The President said "Go peacefully...

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.2.12  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.11    3 weeks ago
There are some who entered the building that told law enforcement or media that they were there because Trump asked them to."
"According to the article, there were a lot of average people who just got caught up in it:
"At the opposite extreme, court documents say some who entered the Capitol seemed unaware it was illegal and claimed they were simply swept up in the fervor. Many later told the FBI they regretted what they did and turned themselves in.
Had Trump not lied about the election for two months and told these people they needed to have his back , NONE of them would have been there on the 6th.That's like saying if the Titanic had not set sail it wouldn't have hit an iceberg. No John, despite the President's belief that the election was stolen from him, it would be far fetched to assume his intent was to overthrow the government.Without Trump's instigation no one would have gone there, period. Not even the Proud Boys. It was meant as a peaceful protest. The President said "Go peacefully...

You don't plan something like this and travel from outside of the state and then suddenly 'get caught up in the moment' and IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE.  

It was never meant as a peaceful protest.  The former occupant of the White House said 'go peacefully' after he incited his mob and watched it unfold on TV.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2.13  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.2.12    3 weeks ago
You don't plan something like this and travel from outside of the state and then suddenly 'get caught up in the moment' and IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE.  

BUT MANY DID NOT PLAN IT. MANY GOT CAUGHT UP IN IT.

READ IT AGAIN!

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.2.14  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.13    3 weeks ago

NO

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2.15  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.2.14    3 weeks ago

You don't want to read?

Alright. 

To each his own.

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.2.16  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.15    3 weeks ago

147380119_10224632392218724_1168402170074870709_o.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=3&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=oQoxsxasMOMAX9bzjGR&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=1c47f4becbeecd963bf4bcfb081ef142&oe=6046D8DC

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.2.17  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.2.16    3 weeks ago

For those who may not know, this is Jeff Tiedrich:

Jeff-Tiedrich.jpg?fit=911%2C510&ssl=1



 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.2.18  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.17    3 weeks ago

Yes, and?

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
2.2.19  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.8    3 weeks ago

Hours after the attack, Trump asked members of the mob to "go home with love and peace" and referred to them as "great patriots." He also wrote that they would "remember this day forever."

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Guide
2.2.20  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @2.2.19    3 weeks ago
He also wrote that they would "remember this day forever."

So will you and I and several million others...............

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
2.2.21  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.11    3 weeks ago
it would be far fetched to assume his intent was to overthrow the government.

Oh goody, we actually agree

He who thinks he IS  the government, has no intention of overthrowing himself, but it would be paramount for him

to remain in power by having the votes changed by any means possible.

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
2.2.22  MAGA  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.4    3 weeks ago

The political left doesn’t 

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
2.2.23  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.4    3 weeks ago
He said "go peacefully' remember?

3 hours after the riot started and only because his handlers told him to. 

Too little too late. 

I never want to hear how the right wing supports the, "Boys in Blue", again after they murdered a cop on the steps of the capitol because they couldn't accept that trump fucking LOST. 

512

 

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
2.2.24  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.17    3 weeks ago

Nice picture...and? 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.25  CB   replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2    3 weeks ago

That's bull patty. Did the organized attempt happen? Enough of these sophomoric anti-truth games! It's stomach-churning. People are dead and some conservatives won't even mention their graves! It's beyond shameful. Its putrid!

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
2.2.26  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2    3 weeks ago

Unfortunately, the operative word from your definition is "attempt"..... 

From Merriam Webster: an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government

From Vocabulary.com :

Insurrection is an uprising against a larger force that's in power. An insurrection can lead to revolution, but it is just as likely to be put down. Other words for insurrection include "rebellion," "revolt," and "uprising," the last of which is the translation of insurrection 's Latin roots. The Boston Tea Party is probably the most famous American act of insurrection. One who rises up in insurrection is called an insurgent by the force they are rising against. Like Paul Revere, insurgents are often called heroes by the people they are rising up to support.

Well, the Boston Tea Party used to be the "most famous American act of insurrection"

Were they or were they not acting against the the Constitutionally defined authority of the United States Government?

Sedition lookups spiked 1500% on Merriam Webster the 6th of January

What does   sedition   mean?

We define   sedition   as “incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.” Many people differentiate between this word and   treason , which we define as “the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.” Because   sedition   is limited to organizing and encouraging opposition to government rather than directly participating in its overthrow, many view it as falling one step short of the more serious crime of  treason . One who incites or promotes   sedition   is a   seditionist , or, less commonly, a   seditionary .

As is clearly shown, if you use the real meanings of these words, that both acts of insurrection and sedition occurred on the 6th.  Unless someone just wants to play Trump and totally ignore the facts.

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.2.27  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.8    2 weeks ago

No, the former occupant of the White House told his mob - several hours after they had 'Stormed the Capitol'! that he loved them and that they were special and they should go home now.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
2.2.28  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.2.27    2 weeks ago

which proves incitement how exactly?

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
2.2.29  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Texan1211 @2.2.28    2 weeks ago
which proves incitement how exactly?

Because they clearly following his directives.

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
2.2.30  Texan1211  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @2.2.29    2 weeks ago

you must have misunderstood the question.

 
 
 
shona1
Freshman Participates
2.2.31  shona1  replied to  Tessylo @2.2.27    2 weeks ago

Anoon tessylo...when Trump said they were special...I wondered if he was referring to them as mentally impaired??

Here if you refer to someone as special, that is what it means. Would be different if he said you are special to me etc...so in some respects you can take it either way..

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.3  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 weeks ago
"Nothing in this story to disprove that many of them were incited by Donald Trump."

Yup, along with the former occupant of the White House announcing the 'rally' on January 6th, 2021 - weeks ahead of time - he also gave a lot of his supporters the go ahead with, remember, 'Stand Back and Stand By'?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.3.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.3    3 weeks ago

Yup, they have so much evidence/s. I suppose that's why the House rushed impeachment without hearings and have not a single witness scheduled for the trial.

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.3.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.1    3 weeks ago

The morons who did this plotted it beforehand on social media and bragged about it, to the press, social media  - took selfies of - themselves in the act  - and then posted that on social media.  With many saying that they did this because the former occupant of the White House told them to.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.3.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.3.2    3 weeks ago

But Tess, that means that Trump's speech on January 6th did not incite the riot. That's what the so-called impeachment was built on.

 
 
 
Tessylo
PhD Principal
2.3.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.3    3 weeks ago

No, it doesn't. This was all done at the urging/incitement of the former occupant of the White House, including those QANon whackjobs whom he supports and encouraged/encourages who are in Congress - Taylor-Greene, and Boebert - whackjobs.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
PhD Guide
2.3.5  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.3    3 weeks ago
that means that Trump's speech on January 6th did not incite the riot.

No, it just means it was Trumps words and actions since losing in November as he constantly lied about supposed election fraud and told his loyalist the election was stolen and rigged which culminated with his speech on January 6th and his clear call to action based on the lies he'd been repeating for months.

Is there any doubt that the insurrection would not have happened had Trump conceded when it was blatantly clear to everyone that he had lost the election? Is there any doubt these unhinged seditionists would not have acted the way they did and felt they had Trumps approval had he not continued that shameless rhetoric up until just minutes before the attack? Is there any question at all that there would have been no planned attack if Trump had not planned his speech that day telling all his faithful to be there and then continued to rile them up against the members of congress and Mike Pence who were at that moment attempting to do their constitutional duties and proceed with a peaceful transfer of power? Of course not, we all know Trump has blood on his hands, trying to duck and dodge, deflect and defend for this clear criminal is just sad, ignorant and shameless.

Besides, the number that were doing the planning and were far smaller in number than the thousands that showed up and were led en masse into the capital. Would they have been able to do what they did if it had been the few dozen who had pre-planned the attack but didn't have the crowd Trump had just riled up at the speech behind them?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
PhD Principal
2.3.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.3.5    3 weeks ago
No, it just means it was Trumps words and actions since losing in November

READ THE CHARGES:




 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.3.7  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.3.5    3 weeks ago

You are correct DP.  If Trump had not lied about the election for two months and riled his activist base up no one would have marched on the Capitol on the 6th. There would have been no reason to. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.3.8  CB   replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.1    3 weeks ago

Just stop with the 'redirection' and gaslighting. Donald Trump only had to keep his big damn mouth and manipulations in the White House with him. But no! That stupid, dirty bastard had to be a 'royal' pain up to and touching eyeballs. And some conservatives got 'talking points' for us? Un-damn believable!

 
 
 
Thomas
Freshman Guide
2.3.9  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.6    2 weeks ago

Here are the charges from Vic's link :

13                                      ...In his conduct while President

14 of the United States—and in violation of his constitutional

15 oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the

16 United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, pro

17 tect, and defend the Constitution of the United States,

18 and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that

19 the laws be faithfully executed—Donald John Trump en

20 gaged in high Crimes and Misdemeanors by inciting vio

21 lence against the Government of the United States, in

22 that:

23 On January 6, 2021, pursuant to the 12th Amend

24 ment to the Constitution of the United States, the Vice

25 President of the United States, the House of Representa

26 tives, and the Senate met at the United States Capitol 

1 for a Joint Session of Congress to count the votes of the

2 Electoral College. In the months preceding the Joint Ses

3 sion, President Trump repeatedly issued false statements

4 asserting that the Presidential election results were the

5 product of widespread fraud and should not be accepted

6 by the American people or certified by State or Federal

7 officials. Shortly before the Joint Session commenced,

8 President Trump, addressed a crowd at the Ellipse in

9 Washington, DC. There, he reiterated false claims that

10 ‘‘we won this election, and we won it by a landslide’’. He

11 also willfully made statements that, in context, encour

12 aged—and foreseeably resulted in—lawless action at the

13 Capitol, such as: ‘‘if you don’t fight like hell you’re not

14 going to have a country anymore’’. Thus incited by Presi

15 dent Trump, members of the crowd he had addressed, in

16 an attempt to, among other objectives, interfere with the

17 Joint Session’s solemn constitutional duty to certify the

18 results of the 2020 Presidential election, unlawfully

19 breached and vandalized the Capitol, injured and killed

20 law enforcement personnel, menaced Members of Con

21 gress, the Vice President, and Congressional personnel,

22 and engaged in other violent, deadly, destructive, and sedi

23 tious acts. 

24 President Trump’s conduct on January 6, 2021, fol

25 lowed his prior efforts to subvert and obstruct the certifi

1 cation of the results of the 2020 Presidential election.

2 Those prior efforts included a phone call on January 2,

3 2021, during which President Trump urged the secretary

4 of state of Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, to ‘‘find’’ enough

5 votes to overturn the Georgia Presidential election results

6 and threatened Secretary Raffensperger if he failed to do

7 so.

8 In all this, President Trump gravely endangered the

9 security of the United States and its institutions of Gov

10 ernment. He threatened the integrity of the democratic

11 system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power,

12 and imperiled a coequal branch of Government. He there

13 by betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury

14 of the people of the United States. 

The Charges do, in fact, contain his actions before January 6th.

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Participates
3  Hallux    3 weeks ago

200? That's a lot of folks trying to play head badminton with flag poles and fire extinguishers.

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Participates
4  Hallux    3 weeks ago

"It’s mostly Facebooks fault that it happened."

That's akin to blaming carrier pigeons for WWI.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
4.1  MrFrost  replied to  Hallux @4    3 weeks ago

Nice analogy..

512

 
 
 
MAGA
Senior Guide
4.2  MAGA  replied to  Hallux @4    3 weeks ago

It’s a valid counter to the absolute bs lie that it all happened on Parler.  The wrong social media was deplatformed after the riot.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
4.2.1  CB   replied to  MAGA @4.2    3 weeks ago

Do Trump supporters understand nuance and blame assessment? Trump supporters, its the lies, the gaslighting, the lack of a balance scale, the no apology motto, the cruelty quotient, the open and deliberate demonization and "Other-izing"  of those who do live as supporters do, and the stupid waste of time co-oping and feigning grievance (when the world has 'gushed' into your pockets for hundreds of year)s.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  MAGA @4.2    3 weeks ago

But I thought all those insurrectionists had been banned from Face Book before all this happened? Weren't you bitching about face book and twitter censorship before Jan 6?

 
 
 
MrFrost
Masters Principal
4.2.3  MrFrost  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.2    2 weeks ago
Weren't you bitching about face book and twitter censorship before Jan 6?

Bingo.

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
5  Split Personality    3 weeks ago

Now the new conspiracy theory is that the attackers were not Trump supporters or GOP but actors, BLM and Antifa

and that security was complicit and allowed this.

To what end?

Who knows.

Michigan State Senator Shirkey knows, just ask him.

Michigan state Senate leader Mike Shirkey apologizes for calling Capitol riot a hoax (msn.com)

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.1  CB   replied to  Split Personality @5    3 weeks ago

I wonder too. After all, they would have to stand with Donald at the White House January 6, and listen and hem and haw approval of his bull patty.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online




cjcold


37 visitors