> No, they were threatening and intimidating lawmakers that were in session to try to manipulate the election. This is an enormous difference. Sure, it is a di

> No, they were threatening and intimidating lawmakers that were in session to try to manipulate the election. This is an enormous difference. Sure, it is a difference -- as in not identical. But what do you conclude from that difference? That crimes that are less serious than this should be excused when committed as an act of protest but these crimes are different and should not be excused? The assertion is that there is a double standard between these types of events. That some riots are excused and yesterday's are not. You seem to be asserting that there isn't a double standard because the events were different in the way that you described and so it sounds like you are saying the different treatment is justified. No one is excusing yesterday's rioters but you seem to be excusing previous incidents of rioting because they were different.