5 ms·

They smeared feces, stole laptops, broke windows, killed a police officer and got one of their own killed. People with bullhorns directed their fellows to the

They smeared feces, stole laptops, broke windows, killed a police officer and got one of their own killed. People with bullhorns directed their fellows to the next target. It was an insurrection attempt by incompetents and LARPers, but absolutely an insurrection attempt.

trident5000 6y ago
It was idiot rioters just like we had over the summer. Not some well planned out attempt to actually overthrow the govt. It was a disrespectful day and they did accomplish that.
- jldugger 6y ago
  People marched into the capitol with handguns, zip ties, and an intent to award the presidency to the loser. I'm not waiting for someone to actually succeed before I declare them insurrectionists, and I don't know why you want to minimize the threats made against Congress, which did not stop that day: https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-siege/no-bail-for-qanon-believer-who-texted-war-time-and-threatened-to-kill-house-speaker-nancy-pelosi/ https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-siege/no-bail-for-qanon-... If you want to compare it to something, I would recommend the fall conspiracy to capture the Michigan governor, put them on a mock trial and then publicly execute them for their "crimes": https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-governor-gretchen-whitmer/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-go...
  - jessedhillon 6y ago
    > an intent to award the presidency to the loser How would they have done that? Nobody would listen to a bunch of hooligans pronouncing orders from the House rostrum. In a coup, someone like a general is waiting to hear the signal to throw in with the coup leaders, providing actual institutional power to the usurpers. There was no institutional power behind these people -- do you think some general at Andrews was waiting for the phone call to signal his support for the guy in the viking hat? This was an act of vandalism, and maybe burglary or "home" invasion robbery.
    - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      I don't know how you can be so confident that there wasn't a general who would have thrown in if he had a chance. Given the statistics, there must be at least a few high-ranking generals who believe Trump's claims that he won the election.
    - compiler-guy 6y ago
      Their intent to intimidate the lawmakers into leaving Trump in power. Trump absolutely wanted them to do so, and was very strategic in staying just on one side of the line. They didn't need a general waiting in the wings, they just needed the President who was already sitting in the WhiteHouse.
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      > How would they have done that? Attempted murder is still a felony, even if's a very dumb attempt. The same is true for coups. > In a coup, someone like a general is waiting to hear the signal to throw in with the coup leaders, providing actual institutional power to the usurpers. The Q folks think this is exactly what the military is going to do.
      - jessedhillon 6y ago
        The line I responded to was about "awarding the contest to the loser," that means transferring institutional power. Not just killing people on TV. In order for a coup to be successful, institutions need to endorse the new order or have their heads replaced with loyalists. Capturing the symbolic seat of power, or even killing elected representatives doesn't accomplish that. In this scenario there would've needed to be a body of bureaucrats and officers in every branch and every agency who would see the house leader lynched on TV and then said, yes I'm ready to do the bidding of the usurping administration. This would be hundreds of people, if not thousands, in the highest ranking civilian positions who would all have to endorse or be arrested. Then because this is a federalist system, local governments would all have had to endorse the new system or be replaced. Also, the judiciary. Also, all branches of the military. Unless you believe we were on the precipice of this happening, it wasn't a coup, and if you do think we were anywhere close to seeing this happen, you're insane and wrong. It was at best a bumbling terrorist attack. More accurately IMO, it was mob violence resulting from an epic failure of crowd control.
- koolba 6y ago
  At least these rioters showed up at the right place. Breaking into the capital was beyond dumb, but it makes a lot more sense than breaking into a Gucci store.
  - h_anna_h 6y ago
    I think that the right place to protest to the government would be at a government building (such as the capitol) rather than a Gucci store.
smsm42 6y ago
> smeared feces, stole laptops > absolutely an insurrection attempt. You must have a really low bar for "insurrection". If stealing a laptop is "insurrection", by that bar looting a Target - which we witnessed the whole 2020 - would be a Galactic War or something.
- zuminator 6y ago
  We're taking about a mob attempting to topple the actual seat of government by an incursion onto the floor of Congress. What does that have to do with Target?
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > We're taking about a mob attempting to topple the actual seat of government by an incursion onto the floor of Congress They weren't trying to “topple the seat of government” in a destructive, undirected manner, they were trying to redirect the process being executed there of officially determining the winner of the Presidential election to their preferred outcome, and to retaliate against opponents (including the Vice President) who failed to play the role the mob and the President they saw themselves serving preferred they should in that process.
- compiler-guy 6y ago
  That part was responding to the GP claim that they stayed between the velvet ropes and left when they were asked. They did none of those things. As far as insurrection, even someone as dim a bulb as Elizabeth from Knoxville thought it was “a revolution.” That is the very definition of insurrection. https://www.wvlt.tv/2021/01/07/who-is-elizabeth-from-knoxville-and-why-is-she-trending/ https://www.wvlt.tv/2021/01/07/who-is-elizabeth-from-knoxvil...
- DarmokJalad1701 6y ago
  > If stealing a laptop is "insurrection" Stealing a laptop from a federal government facility while attempting to overturn an election's results and possibly assassinate elected officials, is an "insurrection".
ganoushoreilly 6y ago
Like every single riot over the past year? How do you justify the destruction, assaults, murders, deaths, and overall chaos there? Hold these assholes accountable 100%.. but let's also stop pretending people who want to hold the left accountable as well aren't crazy.. and maybe see it as just as damning.
- compiler-guy 6y ago
  I don't see anyone defending the other rioters. I certainly wasn't in the message you are responding to. No one is pretending that the crazies on the left don't need to be accountable. There are those, of course, who believe that. But you are arguing against a point that hasn't been made--and most definitely one I did not make. I'll say it myself, just to be clear: Anyone who riots (or foments an insurrection) needs to be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law after a fair trial.
  - ganoushoreilly 6y ago
    I apologize that it appears I targeted you, you're correct you didn't state that and i'm not intentionally addressing you as an individual. My response is by and large to the media and the large population of people espousing that view (including in this thread). In response I'm addressing the same, not you directly so I don't mean to direct ill will or harm, i'm simply trying to project a perspective that is frustrating and often times ignored or belittled. I watched my friends businesses burn last summer, as well as many other businesses near my home. The common response was " "we're doing this because we have this right, we're frustrated at the system that did X or Y". None of my friends caused any real or perceived in-equality towards anyone, none of them are racist, all of them as well as I, support the right for individuals to love and marry whomever they want. They were by and large allies, yet someone arbitrarily determined that because their business was there, Insurance would cover and they could loot and burn it. They decided that when they responded in public days later, that they were white males and even if they weren't bad, it was retribution for whatever grievance someone held. Anyone that doesn't believe that those actions, that persisted for months, weren't abhorent and just as destructive to democracy and our country, then you're not being honest with yourselves. The point is, the media is choosing to doom and gloom this situation when I would argue half of America has had this same perspective for a year. I'm not arguing the merits of either sides grievances, though I think both have many valid points.

trident5000 6y ago

It was idiot rioters just like we had over the summer. Not some well planned out attempt to actually overthrow the govt. It was a disrespectful day and they did accomplish that.

jldugger 6y ago
People marched into the capitol with handguns, zip ties, and an intent to award the presidency to the loser. I'm not waiting for someone to actually succeed before I declare them insurrectionists, and I don't know why you want to minimize the threats made against Congress, which did not stop that day: https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-siege/no-bail-for-qanon-believer-who-texted-war-time-and-threatened-to-kill-house-speaker-nancy-pelosi/ https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-siege/no-bail-for-qanon-... If you want to compare it to something, I would recommend the fall conspiracy to capture the Michigan governor, put them on a mock trial and then publicly execute them for their "crimes": https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-governor-gretchen-whitmer/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-go...
- jessedhillon 6y ago
  > an intent to award the presidency to the loser How would they have done that? Nobody would listen to a bunch of hooligans pronouncing orders from the House rostrum. In a coup, someone like a general is waiting to hear the signal to throw in with the coup leaders, providing actual institutional power to the usurpers. There was no institutional power behind these people -- do you think some general at Andrews was waiting for the phone call to signal his support for the guy in the viking hat? This was an act of vandalism, and maybe burglary or "home" invasion robbery.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    I don't know how you can be so confident that there wasn't a general who would have thrown in if he had a chance. Given the statistics, there must be at least a few high-ranking generals who believe Trump's claims that he won the election.
  - compiler-guy 6y ago
    Their intent to intimidate the lawmakers into leaving Trump in power. Trump absolutely wanted them to do so, and was very strategic in staying just on one side of the line. They didn't need a general waiting in the wings, they just needed the President who was already sitting in the WhiteHouse.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    > How would they have done that? Attempted murder is still a felony, even if's a very dumb attempt. The same is true for coups. > In a coup, someone like a general is waiting to hear the signal to throw in with the coup leaders, providing actual institutional power to the usurpers. The Q folks think this is exactly what the military is going to do.
    - jessedhillon 6y ago
      The line I responded to was about "awarding the contest to the loser," that means transferring institutional power. Not just killing people on TV. In order for a coup to be successful, institutions need to endorse the new order or have their heads replaced with loyalists. Capturing the symbolic seat of power, or even killing elected representatives doesn't accomplish that. In this scenario there would've needed to be a body of bureaucrats and officers in every branch and every agency who would see the house leader lynched on TV and then said, yes I'm ready to do the bidding of the usurping administration. This would be hundreds of people, if not thousands, in the highest ranking civilian positions who would all have to endorse or be arrested. Then because this is a federalist system, local governments would all have had to endorse the new system or be replaced. Also, the judiciary. Also, all branches of the military. Unless you believe we were on the precipice of this happening, it wasn't a coup, and if you do think we were anywhere close to seeing this happen, you're insane and wrong. It was at best a bumbling terrorist attack. More accurately IMO, it was mob violence resulting from an epic failure of crowd control.
koolba 6y ago
At least these rioters showed up at the right place. Breaking into the capital was beyond dumb, but it makes a lot more sense than breaking into a Gucci store.
- h_anna_h 6y ago
  I think that the right place to protest to the government would be at a government building (such as the capitol) rather than a Gucci store.

smsm42 6y ago

> smeared feces, stole laptops > absolutely an insurrection attempt. You must have a really low bar for "insurrection". If stealing a laptop is "insurrection", by that bar looting a Target - which we witnessed the whole 2020 - would be a Galactic War or something.

zuminator 6y ago
We're taking about a mob attempting to topple the actual seat of government by an incursion onto the floor of Congress. What does that have to do with Target?
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > We're taking about a mob attempting to topple the actual seat of government by an incursion onto the floor of Congress They weren't trying to “topple the seat of government” in a destructive, undirected manner, they were trying to redirect the process being executed there of officially determining the winner of the Presidential election to their preferred outcome, and to retaliate against opponents (including the Vice President) who failed to play the role the mob and the President they saw themselves serving preferred they should in that process.
compiler-guy 6y ago
That part was responding to the GP claim that they stayed between the velvet ropes and left when they were asked. They did none of those things. As far as insurrection, even someone as dim a bulb as Elizabeth from Knoxville thought it was “a revolution.” That is the very definition of insurrection. https://www.wvlt.tv/2021/01/07/who-is-elizabeth-from-knoxville-and-why-is-she-trending/ https://www.wvlt.tv/2021/01/07/who-is-elizabeth-from-knoxvil...
DarmokJalad1701 6y ago
> If stealing a laptop is "insurrection" Stealing a laptop from a federal government facility while attempting to overturn an election's results and possibly assassinate elected officials, is an "insurrection".

ganoushoreilly 6y ago

Like every single riot over the past year? How do you justify the destruction, assaults, murders, deaths, and overall chaos there? Hold these assholes accountable 100%.. but let's also stop pretending people who want to hold the left accountable as well aren't crazy.. and maybe see it as just as damning.

compiler-guy 6y ago
I don't see anyone defending the other rioters. I certainly wasn't in the message you are responding to. No one is pretending that the crazies on the left don't need to be accountable. There are those, of course, who believe that. But you are arguing against a point that hasn't been made--and most definitely one I did not make. I'll say it myself, just to be clear: Anyone who riots (or foments an insurrection) needs to be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law after a fair trial.
- ganoushoreilly 6y ago
  I apologize that it appears I targeted you, you're correct you didn't state that and i'm not intentionally addressing you as an individual. My response is by and large to the media and the large population of people espousing that view (including in this thread). In response I'm addressing the same, not you directly so I don't mean to direct ill will or harm, i'm simply trying to project a perspective that is frustrating and often times ignored or belittled. I watched my friends businesses burn last summer, as well as many other businesses near my home. The common response was " "we're doing this because we have this right, we're frustrated at the system that did X or Y". None of my friends caused any real or perceived in-equality towards anyone, none of them are racist, all of them as well as I, support the right for individuals to love and marry whomever they want. They were by and large allies, yet someone arbitrarily determined that because their business was there, Insurance would cover and they could loot and burn it. They decided that when they responded in public days later, that they were white males and even if they weren't bad, it was retribution for whatever grievance someone held. Anyone that doesn't believe that those actions, that persisted for months, weren't abhorent and just as destructive to democracy and our country, then you're not being honest with yourselves. The point is, the media is choosing to doom and gloom this situation when I would argue half of America has had this same perspective for a year. I'm not arguing the merits of either sides grievances, though I think both have many valid points.