> Rhetoric that led to an insurrection... A situation that some term an 'insurrection' and others term a 'riot'. Trouble is, who's right? Who has the authority

> Rhetoric that led to an insurrection... A situation that some term an 'insurrection' and others term a 'riot'. Trouble is, who's right? Who has the authority to make an objective claim on this? For half-a-year before last week, those on the other side (the so-called insurrectionists and insurrectionist-adjacent) claimed that situations like the Minneapolis protests, the CHAZ, the Portland protests, the Chicago protests, the Atlanta protests, etc. (all together which ended in at least a couple dozen deaths and hundreds of millions in property damage) were riots and insurrections, whereas most media establishments (your NYTs and your MSNBCs) insisted these were 'mostly peaceful' protests. Both sides agreed something was happening--they disagreed on what to call it. In defense of the many who view the situation as a riot as opposed to an insurrection, it's hard to make the case for insurrection when (1) police waved rioters into the Capitol in places, (2) Capitol cops felt so unthreatened by the situation that they posed with rioters for selfies and (3) the Senators were similarly besieged (sans deaths) during the Kavanaugh hearings eighteen months ago... with no one (amongst Democrats) calling this an insurrection. But, as Democrats are the victors, they will write the histories. So it goes.