No, libs, the Jan. 6 events weren't a 'coup'
Category: News & Politics
Via: john-russell • 3 years ago • 37 commentsBy: David Harsanyi (New York Post)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
By David Harsanyi
July 30, 2021 | 5:13pm |Updated July 30, 2021 | 5:14pm
Enlarge Image
John Minchillo/AP
When several hundred extremists mobbed Capitol Hill on Jan. 6, they engaged in a deplorably un-American act of criminality. It was an embarrassing day for the nation, and a dangerous one for the many innocent people and officials engulfed in the mayhem.
Here's what Jan. 6 wasn't:
It wasn't the "worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War." Nor did it veer anywhere near the vicinity of being as dangerous as 9/11. Nor was it a "coup" or an "insurrection" — not in any way we commonly understand those words. It wasn't a "putsch." Nor did it, as the chairman of the Jan. 6 committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson, claimed, come "dangerously close to succeeding" in upending "American democracy." That's all a myth. It was a riot. Or, as Christopher Caldwell more forgivingly called it in The New York Times, perhaps "a political protest that got out of control."
And, contra House Republican Adam Kinzinger's overwrought contention on the first day of the Jan. 6 select committee, there's no evidence that "self-governance" was threatened by the rioters. Only two sets of people gain anything from pretending that these rioters had anything approaching the wherewithal to overthrow the United States government: Democrats and the extremists.
Kinzinger is correct when he notes that rioters were "rejecting the rule of law." There's a lot of that going on these days. He'd have more credibility on the matter if he, and others who talk about Jan. 6 as if it were a modern-day Gettysburg, showed any genuine concern about the wide-ranging leftist political violence of 2020, which cost billions in damage and numerous lives. But Kinzinger rejects even the notion that BLM/Antifa riots should be considered in the same terms, saying "some have concocted a counternarrative" — which is actually a textbook example of a false dilemma, as both narratives can comfortably coexist.
A lot of genuine anger is caused by the media's and Washington's demanding that we play by two sets of rules. In May 2020, Secret Service agents, for instance, had to stick then-President Donald Trump into a bunker for hours as hundreds of protesters began overwhelming police, some throwing rocks and bottles and trying to break down police barricades. Good thing law enforcement was prepared for that one, I guess.
Let's also not forget the attempted firebombing of a federal building in Portland, Ore., (and other cities) and the killing of five police officers by a self-professed BLM activist in 2016. Cops are being attacked around the country right now.
Do we get to blame all progressives for fueling the anger that motivates those extremists to act out?
Kinzinger will tell you there is an important "difference" between "a crime — even grave crimes — and a coup." Right. Which is why it's important to stress there was no coup on Jan. 6. The protesters had no plan. There isn't any evidence that Trump, who used grossly irresponsible rhetoric that day, was scheming — or knew how to scheme or knew anyone who knew how to scheme — a coup d'etat.
The Electoral College had already been counted. Then-Vice President Mike Pence had already spurned Trump's request to reject the results. No court was going to overturn an election or stand with the cretins wandering around vandalizing Congress.
It would be one thing if the commission were principally concerned with figuring out how protesters breached security. But the central purpose of the commission is to create the impression that the GOP is in the midst of attempting to overturning "democracy."
Dems want to use Jan. 6 to push their unconstitutional efforts to nationalize elections. And they definitely want to use it to make Trump the central topic of the 2022 midterms.
These days, anyone who fails to adopt Kinzinger's hyperbolic tone and obsess over Jan. 6 is accused of "minimizing" the event or being in league with the insurrectionists.
For the past five years, we have been engulfed in political hysteria. Sure, a number of conservatives have tried to whitewash the ugliness of that day. Rep. Elise Stefanik's contention that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi "bears responsibility, as speaker of the House, for the tragedy that occurred on Jan. 6" is weak tea.
That fact, however, doesn't make the claim that the American republic faced an existential threat on Jan. 6 any less preposterous.
Tags
Who is online
368 visitors
Normally I wouldn't seed an article by a far right , dishonest pundit like David Harsanyi, who is basically a poor man's Dennis Prager, but I want to reply to this one.
Harsanyi's main assertion is that Jan 6th at the Capitol , along with its surrounding components connected to Donald Trump, could not have been a "coup" attempt because it had no chance of ever succeeding.
That is not what makes it a "coup" or not.
Did the "rioters" enter the Capitol Building to "protest" or to try and force Congress to overturn the election results?
The Trump cultists were already "protesting" outside the building, in the designated area for political protests at the Capitol, the agreed to area for which the demonstration organizers had sought and received a permit.
There is a phrase completely associated with this event that gives us the mobs true intention.
"Stop The Steal". The Trump followers who marched the 2 miles from the Trump speech site to the Capitol Building all thought they were going there to try and "stop the steal", not make some lame protest outside the building.
Just because they didnt know exactly how they would accomplish stopping the steal and were winging it in that sense doesnt mean that wasnt the goal. The mob wanted to, and tried to, enter the chamber of the House of Representatives where the House members vote on, for example, whether or not to accept the election results. And members of the mob did enter the US Senate chamber. Clearly the mob intended to (at the least) intimidate the members of Congress and particularly Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi from performing their duties that day. If it was a "protest" they would have done it from outside the building.
Coup may or may not be the perfect word to describe the mob action instigated by Donald Trump, but it definitely was an attempt to overturn the election and keep Trump in office past Jan 20.
What people intend to do is what they should be judged on, not what they are capable of doing.
Harsanyi is neither far right nor dishonest, as you would know if you had taken time to study his writings.
This article is spot on....in the fact that this latest clown show by the Democrats is a partisan political stunt that will come up empty and further damage the left's tattered reputation.
Did the mob enter the Capitol Building (by breaking down doors and windows) in order to "protest" or to try and stop the certification of the election results?
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
We know that on Jan 6, the Congress of the United States was overrun by a mob. We do not (yet?) know why they committed their outrageous crime.
Their expressed purpose was to overturn the result of the Presidential election, as then-President Trump had just incited them to do. Incidentally, some of them cried things like, "Hang Mike Pence!" There are indications that some of the rioters intended to capture members of Congress. Some apparently had special communications equipment.
Each of those statements raises a multitude of questions. Therefore, we need an inquiry...
A politically partisan 'inquiry' will likely morph into an inquisition, a witch hunt.
Just yesterday there was a story , based on DOJ notes, saying that Trump told a deputy attorney general that he knew the election was corrupt based on what he read on the internet (social media).
The committee needs to call Trump to the witness stand and interrogate his ass about Jan 6.
Trump has cooked his own goose with one statement to the acting AG...."Just say it was corrupt and I will take care of the rest."
The BIG, GIGANTIC, GLARING difference between the BLM shit (which those rioters should be arrested and charged) is that Jan 6 was an attempt to literally prevent the peaceful transition of presidential power. Their goal was to usurp our representative democratic government. Full stop.
None of the BLM protests tried to do anything even remotely similar. THAT is the big difference that assholes like the guy who wrote the seed seem hellbent on completely ignoring.
The rioters had no plan to take over the government. If that had been the case, they likely would have succeeded, considering that prior intelligence of possible rioting was ignored, and law enforcement was not sufficient or prepared to protect the Capitol grounds.
Greg, their goal was to stop the certification of the election results and keep trump in the presidency. Period. It doesn’t matter if they had no idea how they were gonna do it and no plan of action at all (just like trump) that was their intent and to me that is all that really matters.
Insurrection is a crime.
who has been charged with it?
When the mob broke down an entrance door of the US Capitol Building with a makeshift battering ram, were they "protesting" ? When one of the mob punched out the window of the locked and barricaded entrance door adjacent to House of Representatives chamber , were they "protesting"?
Your objections dont pass the smell test.
My objection is that there is a legal definition for insurrection. It's a crime on the statute book. If it was an insurrection, rather than a protest that got out of control, why has no one, to my knowledge, been charged with participating in an insurrection?
Going by your definition, I assume you would agree the assault on the White House referenced by the author was a coup and insurrection attempt as well, right? It just failed before the mob overwhelmed White House security.
What does "Stop The Steal" mean to you in relation to the Trump supporters desire to be at the Capitol building on Jan 6 ?
How were they going to stop the steal from outside?
The gallows erected out front was a nice touch.
So, the riot on Jan. 6 at the Capitol progressed in the same manner as any number of BLM riots. Now Democrats are attempting to concoct a distinction between what is considered right wing violence and what is undeniably left wing violence. Condemning one in the most strident manner while kneeling in the Capitol rotunda to support the other has rather obvious political overtones. Democrats politicized the whole thing long before the riot on Jan. 6.
Democrats were for political violence before Democrats were against political violence.
Yes, the Capitol riot on Jan. 6 was unlawful, threatened government authority, was violent and destructive. But that is true of any number of BLM riots since 2014. The public has become inured to political violence. The riot at the Capitol was just another riot on another day in America.
The public has witnessed too many riots to be outraged over another. Democrats are trying to make a political distinction and the public isn't falling in line. The public sees political violence as a threat to the United States. The public doesn't care about the intent or motivations of the rioters; the public only sees the violence and destruction. Political violence has become a new normal and the public won't accept distinctions. Democrats attempting to make distinctions will only have one outcome, political violence will escalate.
Oh god, just stop now before you start blaming black people for all the problems white people have.
I'm saying Democrats have become ensnared in their own double standards. The pubic isn't accepting the arbitrary political distinctions between riots.
Democrats attempting to justify political violence among their base of support while condemning political violence by political opposition will have one outcome. Political violence will escalate.
Very few defended the criminal acts of rioters, I believe just about every prominent Democrat condemned it but perhaps they should have been more forceful in seeking prosecution of those responsible. There is absolutely no comparison to be made between the democratic response to the riots and the GOPs response to Jan 6th.
No, Democrats did not defend the political violence. Democrats simply ignored the political violence. There certainly was not the same degree of outrage and angst expressed by Democrats toward BLM riots.
BLM riots? There were a few incidences of opportunistic gang orchestrated looting in the wake of George Floyd's murder but those were not BLM organized protests which have been peaceful demonstrations. Nobody is excusing those and perpetrators were usually identified but looting a Foot Locker is not on par with a violent attempted coup that forced the US Congress into running for their lives...
Again, the riots and looting that occurred are not the same as what happened on Jan 6. Stop trying to pretend they are comparable.
Really?
That was not a BLM Rally much less BLM Riot.
Hey! Many of the rioters were Black, therefore the riot must have been BLM.
Obviously!
Now BLM is throwing George Floyd protests under the bus? How politically expedient.
Which BLM riot thrashed the US Congress?
BLM did not 'thrash' the US Congress on Jan. 6. That's the point.
The Capitol riot was not associated with BLM or the Democrats' base of support. So outrage and angst by Democrats is politically expedient. Otherwise Democrats would have followed their pattern of ignoring the political violence.
Any talk of BLM or 'riots' or other protests or this or that...
Is nothing more than a squirrel moment to take the focus off of what happened. To put blame in other directions.
What happened on Jan 6 at the Capitol was a riot for political purposes. The Capitol riot followed the same pattern and progression of BLM riots.
The Capitol riot and the BLM riots were political violence in pursuit of political results. The purpose of the riots were to use violence as a means of influencing, intimidating, and coercing political government into using government authority to impose a desired political result onto the country.
Political violence for the purpose of achieving political results in an undemocratic manner has become a normal political activity. The Capitol riot was an escalation of political violence that has been occurring since 2014.
I think you are projecting. The protests did not start out as political and the message was always the same.
No, January 6th ended as a failed attempted coup.
The only coup ever where the vast majority of those involved left on their own.
Also the only coup attempt where those involved were unarmed; didn't have a plan; didn't secure one objective; didn't take any political prisoners; erected no barricades; didn't negate the police or the local military; and didn't have support anywhere else in the US.
Unlike this coup by BLM and Antifa. Of course their Democrat enablers and the left had no damn problem with it.
Or demanding the Mayor step down by taking over City Hall?
But this isn't an insurrection according to the left; because their Democrat enablers allowed it to happen.
Do we forgive attempted murder because it fails?
It was no coup attempt.
That is just a bunch of rhetoric from the progressive liberals who can't understand what a real coup even is.
The very idea is preposterous and stupid.