8 ms·

The media calling January 6th an 'insurrection' is a perfect example of the problem. It's pure sensationalism. There were no guns, there was no centralized or

The media calling January 6th an 'insurrection' is a perfect example of the problem. It's pure sensationalism. There were no guns, there was no centralized organization to indicate an insurrection, the 4 people who died were all protestors, mostly from being dumbasses. Clearly those people who damaged the capitol should be punished, just like the Black Lives Matter protesters who damaged the Foley Federal Building. But calling it an INSURRECTION is just pure disingenuous sensationalism by the media. What story will make the media more money: A protest that got very heated? Or an insurrection? And of course the more extreme opponents of either side will seize on the identity politics and propagate this narrative and we continue down the path of polarization. I have no idea how to fix this issue of media propaganda other than teaching people statistics and critical thinking, but that starts with education from an early age. I don't know if most people even have the time to research alternative views so they just trust their news sources, which worked up until the past decade(?) or so.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
Why were they there? To support overturning the results of the vote. That's at least in intent an insurrection. Why did they bring a noose for Mike Pence? Isn't that insurrection? Or is it "merely" assassination? (Or just an over-the-top prop that they didn't intend to use?)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
TomSwirly 5y ago
A group of people publicly proclaimed that the election was fake. They announced they were going to advance on Congress and Stop The Steal. They showed up in the thousands with weapons and restraining devices, broke into the Capitol building, broke a lot of things, literally wiped their shit on the walls, and were finally repulsed. Sounds like an "INSURRECTION" to me. What part is missing? Do you only count it as an "INSURRECTION" if it fails? Hmm... --- Hey, I heard a joke: Q: How do you know Trump was running the January 6 insurrection? A: It failed. :-D
- edmcnulty101 5y ago
  > weapons Sensationalism. There were no guns, which an insurrection would have. > A group of people publicly proclaimed that the election was fake. They announced they were going to advance on Congress and Stop The Steal. Even your language: 'advance on Congress and stop the steal' is vague and non-specific, and could refer to a protest. They organized a protest that got out of hand. Sensationalism. I'm not really going to spend time debating your extreme views. You're demonizing these people. The protesters were wrong in entering the capitol and should be punished just like the BLM folks who damaged the federal building in Vegas. But this is not close to an insurrection. This pushing of sensationalized agendas and 'demonization of the other' is the problem magnified by the media. We live in information bubbles. Here's a joke for you: Before the internet: > I want to have sex with toasters > Don't be an idiot, grow up, get a life. After the internet: >I want to have sex with toasters >Google and find a community with 1000+ members about people wanting to have sex with toasters >Hate anyone who tells you and friends that sex with toasters is a bad idea and shut down rational discussion about it >Mess up your life This is identity politics in America.
  - ShamelessC 5y ago
    > This is identity politics in America. No. Identity politics is (for instance) being incredibly pedantic about the usage of a word because you take (glaringly obvious, btw) personal offense to its usage. We have all gathered you are some form of right-leaning conservative at this point. No one else would be as defensive as you have been about this topic. Whether you feel it was an insurrection or not, can we at least agree that it was an attack on democracy? These protestors may not have been armed, but they were threatening and intimidating as they chanted things like "hang mike Pence" and "where are you Nancy?". The overall context of course was that many of these people believed themselves that they were there to prevent the electoral college votes from being counted by the joint assembly.
    - edmcnulty101 5y ago
      I'm actually pretty left leaning and pro UBI and socialized healthcare and education But I'm also against lies and propaganda. And the narrative here is a perfect example of how identity politics are damaging to the country as a whole. This is equivalent to conservatives demonizing liberals for being 'communists'. Its inaccurate, wrong, polarizing, and the media and the people in power benefit while the rest of us hate each other a little more.
throw0101a 5y ago
> There were no guns Yes there were. Three examples of people charged: > Lonnie Coffman of Alabama: Police found multiple firearms and weapons in Coffman’s possession. Coffman’s truck, which he had parked in the vicinity of the Capitol on the morning of Jan. 6, was packed with weaponry including a handgun, a rifle and a shotgun, each loaded, according to court documents. In addition, the truck held hundreds of rounds of ammunition, several large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, a crossbow with bolts, machetes, camouflage smoke devices, a stun gun and 11 Molotov cocktails. […] > Guy Reffitt of Texas: Reffitt was charged with bringing a handgun onto Capitol grounds. Court documents showed that Reffitt, reported in court documents to be a member of the militia group Three Percenters, told his family he brought his gun with him and that he and others "stormed the Capitol." > Christopher Michael Alberts of Maryland: Alberts brought his handgun onto Capitol grounds. An officer saw that Alberts had a gun on his hip and alerted fellow officers. When Alberts tried to flee, officers detained him and recovered the loaded handgun along with a separate magazine. * https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/07/14/some-jan-6-capitol-rioters-were-armed-guns-documents-show/7963993002/ https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/202... Another: > According to court documents, Alberts was arrested after he tried to flee police officers while leaving the Capitol grounds. Investigators said that three officers tackled him and found he was carrying a loaded 9mm handgun, 25 rounds of ammunition, a gas mask, pocket-knife, first aid kit and one military meal. > Alberts faces four federal charges: carrying a gun at the Capitol, unlawful entry onto restricted grounds, carrying a gun without a license, and possessing a large capacity ammunition feeding device. Alberts' lawyer declined to comment on the charges. * https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/25/politics/capitol-insurrection-loaded-handgun/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/25/politics/capitol-insurrection... From an actual court filing: > Based on the foregoing, I submit that there is probable cause to believe that MEREDITH violated 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), which makes it a crime to transmit in interstate commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another. There is also probable cause to believe that MEREDITH violated 7 D.C. Code § 2502.01(a) and 2506.01(a)(3) , which make it a crime to possess a firearm in Washington, DC without being the holder of a valid registration certificate, and to possess ammunition unless it is for a firearm that is property registered. * PDF: https://www.justice.gov/opa/page/file/1353311/download https://www.justice.gov/opa/page/file/1353311/download > there was no centralized organization to indicate an insurrection No centralized organization is needed. From case law (in an insurance case of all things): > The district court held that the word insurrection means '(1) a violent uprising by a group or movement (2) acting for the specific purpose of overthrowing the constituted government and seizing its powers.' 368 F. Supp. at 1124. * https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/505/989/453507/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/505... Movements do not need necessarily need leaders: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaderless_resistance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaderless_resistance * https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/11/leaderless-protests-around-world/602194/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/11/le... * https://www.csis.org/analysis/age-leaderless-revolution https://www.csis.org/analysis/age-leaderless-revolution
pjc50 5y ago
> There were no guns As a non-American who's overexposed to second amendment rants, I'm slightly baffled as to why there weren't any guns. The sheer incoherence of the protesters may have been a factor.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > I'm slightly baffled as to why there weren't any guns. There were guns. And bombs. And... There was perhaps insufficient organization for the armed participants to employ them effectively.
  - edmcnulty101 5y ago
    Where did you hear that there were bombs?
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      You mean the bombs at DNC and RNC HQ, or the ones that Lonny Leroy Coffman confessed to bringing, along with firearms, to Capitol Hill?
      - edmcnulty101 5y ago
        No I mean confirmed bombs found in the capitol or near the capitol.
        dragonwriter 5y ago
        Coffman's truck was, and the DNC and RNC where the bombs were placed are, all near the Capitol.
        edmcnulty101 5y ago
        Ok. But no confirmed bombs on the capital grounds or in the capital and no confirmed connection between those bombs and the protesters?
dragonwriter 5y ago
> There were no guns, There were guns; several firearms charges have been filed related to the Insurrection. > there was no centralized organization to indicate an insurrection, A single centralized organization is not required for an insurrection; there were various organized groups with common purpose as well as participants inspired by direct calls from influential leaders without participating in a formal organization. > the 4 people who died were all protestors, insurrections, especially unsuccessful ones, very often experience disproportionate casualties. Even beyond disputes about which deaths count as due to Jan. 6, not sure why you’d cite this since it doesn't even support your case. > But calling it an INSURRECTION is just Is just factually accurate; it was a violent, unlawful collective action aimed at using force and threat of force against officials as a means of overturning the election and keeping the loser in the paramount executive position; the particular official acts it sought to intimidate people into taking were advocate by the leader it sought to retain in power and the approach of intimidation was also at his direction; it was insurrection in support of an auto-coup. That it was, perhaps, desperately and hurriedly assembled, poorly planned and organized, and certainly ultimately unsuccessful isn't an argument that it wasn't an insurrection.
- edmcnulty101 5y ago
  >> There were guns One person was found with a gun on Capital grounds not inside the capital. the other charges are related to guns in a vehicle and a hearsay claim. You're inflating statistically and significant details to further an inaccurate narrative. >>was a violent, unlawful collective action aimed at using force and threat of force against officials as a means of overturning the election Nice claim but pretty subjective interpretation. I'm sure there were a few people there with bad intentions. But are all Arabs terrorists? Were all the protestors there to overthrow the government? Your sensationalizing a statistically insignificant number of bad people to demonize an entire group who were there to peacefully protest. It seems to be a pattern. Take a statistically insignificant detail and exaggerate it to demonize and further a narrative. This is what the media does as well.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > One person was found with a gun on Capital grounds not inside the capital One insurrectionists was physically caught in the cordon on the grounds when law enforcement was clearing it with a firearm (Alberts), whether he had gone inside the building or not is uncertain (and immaterial). One insurrectionist (the DEA Agent Ibrahim) was caught and charged with having been on the grounds with a firearm based on photographic evidence; solid cell phone data and the plethora of photos and videos his friend took at his direction make it pretty clear he stayed around the outside of the Capitol. Another insurrectionist (Reffitt) initially not charged with firearms offense (but where the initial complaint noted that family members indicated that he had taken a disassembled gun to DC) had a firearms charges related to the Capitol complex added in a superceding indictment, but at least the posted information on his case doesn't indicate clearly whether it was just on the grounds or in the building.
archagon 5y ago
Some reading for you: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempts_to_overturn_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempts_to_overturn_the_202...
- LazarWolf_ 5y ago
  Just so you know. Larry Sanger, a founder of Wikipedia. Wrote exactly about those articles, and it left leaning biases. https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-than-ever/ https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-... It’s a good read.
- edmcnulty101 5y ago
  I read that. It seemed very non-neutral and politically charged. The first citation I looked at...Citation number 7...is to a politico blog post. I don't know if that can be taken seriously. We are truly in a post-truth era.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

Why were they there? To support overturning the results of the vote. That's at least in intent an insurrection. Why did they bring a noose for Mike Pence? Isn't that insurrection? Or is it "merely" assassination? (Or just an over-the-top prop that they didn't intend to use?)

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

TomSwirly 5y ago

A group of people publicly proclaimed that the election was fake. They announced they were going to advance on Congress and Stop The Steal. They showed up in the thousands with weapons and restraining devices, broke into the Capitol building, broke a lot of things, literally wiped their shit on the walls, and were finally repulsed. Sounds like an "INSURRECTION" to me. What part is missing? Do you only count it as an "INSURRECTION" if it fails? Hmm... --- Hey, I heard a joke: Q: How do you know Trump was running the January 6 insurrection? A: It failed. :-D

edmcnulty101 5y ago
> weapons Sensationalism. There were no guns, which an insurrection would have. > A group of people publicly proclaimed that the election was fake. They announced they were going to advance on Congress and Stop The Steal. Even your language: 'advance on Congress and stop the steal' is vague and non-specific, and could refer to a protest. They organized a protest that got out of hand. Sensationalism. I'm not really going to spend time debating your extreme views. You're demonizing these people. The protesters were wrong in entering the capitol and should be punished just like the BLM folks who damaged the federal building in Vegas. But this is not close to an insurrection. This pushing of sensationalized agendas and 'demonization of the other' is the problem magnified by the media. We live in information bubbles. Here's a joke for you: Before the internet: > I want to have sex with toasters > Don't be an idiot, grow up, get a life. After the internet: >I want to have sex with toasters >Google and find a community with 1000+ members about people wanting to have sex with toasters >Hate anyone who tells you and friends that sex with toasters is a bad idea and shut down rational discussion about it >Mess up your life This is identity politics in America.
- ShamelessC 5y ago
  > This is identity politics in America. No. Identity politics is (for instance) being incredibly pedantic about the usage of a word because you take (glaringly obvious, btw) personal offense to its usage. We have all gathered you are some form of right-leaning conservative at this point. No one else would be as defensive as you have been about this topic. Whether you feel it was an insurrection or not, can we at least agree that it was an attack on democracy? These protestors may not have been armed, but they were threatening and intimidating as they chanted things like "hang mike Pence" and "where are you Nancy?". The overall context of course was that many of these people believed themselves that they were there to prevent the electoral college votes from being counted by the joint assembly.
  - edmcnulty101 5y ago
    I'm actually pretty left leaning and pro UBI and socialized healthcare and education But I'm also against lies and propaganda. And the narrative here is a perfect example of how identity politics are damaging to the country as a whole. This is equivalent to conservatives demonizing liberals for being 'communists'. Its inaccurate, wrong, polarizing, and the media and the people in power benefit while the rest of us hate each other a little more.

throw0101a 5y ago

> There were no guns Yes there were. Three examples of people charged: > Lonnie Coffman of Alabama: Police found multiple firearms and weapons in Coffman’s possession. Coffman’s truck, which he had parked in the vicinity of the Capitol on the morning of Jan. 6, was packed with weaponry including a handgun, a rifle and a shotgun, each loaded, according to court documents. In addition, the truck held hundreds of rounds of ammunition, several large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, a crossbow with bolts, machetes, camouflage smoke devices, a stun gun and 11 Molotov cocktails. […] > Guy Reffitt of Texas: Reffitt was charged with bringing a handgun onto Capitol grounds. Court documents showed that Reffitt, reported in court documents to be a member of the militia group Three Percenters, told his family he brought his gun with him and that he and others "stormed the Capitol." > Christopher Michael Alberts of Maryland: Alberts brought his handgun onto Capitol grounds. An officer saw that Alberts had a gun on his hip and alerted fellow officers. When Alberts tried to flee, officers detained him and recovered the loaded handgun along with a separate magazine. * https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/07/14/some-jan-6-capitol-rioters-were-armed-guns-documents-show/7963993002/ https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/202... Another: > According to court documents, Alberts was arrested after he tried to flee police officers while leaving the Capitol grounds. Investigators said that three officers tackled him and found he was carrying a loaded 9mm handgun, 25 rounds of ammunition, a gas mask, pocket-knife, first aid kit and one military meal. > Alberts faces four federal charges: carrying a gun at the Capitol, unlawful entry onto restricted grounds, carrying a gun without a license, and possessing a large capacity ammunition feeding device. Alberts' lawyer declined to comment on the charges. * https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/25/politics/capitol-insurrection-loaded-handgun/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/25/politics/capitol-insurrection... From an actual court filing: > Based on the foregoing, I submit that there is probable cause to believe that MEREDITH violated 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), which makes it a crime to transmit in interstate commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another. There is also probable cause to believe that MEREDITH violated 7 D.C. Code § 2502.01(a) and 2506.01(a)(3) , which make it a crime to possess a firearm in Washington, DC without being the holder of a valid registration certificate, and to possess ammunition unless it is for a firearm that is property registered. * PDF: https://www.justice.gov/opa/page/file/1353311/download https://www.justice.gov/opa/page/file/1353311/download > there was no centralized organization to indicate an insurrection No centralized organization is needed. From case law (in an insurance case of all things): > The district court held that the word insurrection means '(1) a violent uprising by a group or movement (2) acting for the specific purpose of overthrowing the constituted government and seizing its powers.' 368 F. Supp. at 1124. * https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/505/989/453507/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/505... Movements do not need necessarily need leaders: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaderless_resistance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaderless_resistance * https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/11/leaderless-protests-around-world/602194/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/11/le... * https://www.csis.org/analysis/age-leaderless-revolution https://www.csis.org/analysis/age-leaderless-revolution

pjc50 5y ago

> There were no guns As a non-American who's overexposed to second amendment rants, I'm slightly baffled as to why there weren't any guns. The sheer incoherence of the protesters may have been a factor.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> I'm slightly baffled as to why there weren't any guns. There were guns. And bombs. And... There was perhaps insufficient organization for the armed participants to employ them effectively.
- edmcnulty101 5y ago
  Where did you hear that there were bombs?
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    You mean the bombs at DNC and RNC HQ, or the ones that Lonny Leroy Coffman confessed to bringing, along with firearms, to Capitol Hill?
    - edmcnulty101 5y ago
      No I mean confirmed bombs found in the capitol or near the capitol.
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        Coffman's truck was, and the DNC and RNC where the bombs were placed are, all near the Capitol.
        edmcnulty101 5y ago
        Ok. But no confirmed bombs on the capital grounds or in the capital and no confirmed connection between those bombs and the protesters?

dragonwriter 5y ago

> There were no guns, There were guns; several firearms charges have been filed related to the Insurrection. > there was no centralized organization to indicate an insurrection, A single centralized organization is not required for an insurrection; there were various organized groups with common purpose as well as participants inspired by direct calls from influential leaders without participating in a formal organization. > the 4 people who died were all protestors, insurrections, especially unsuccessful ones, very often experience disproportionate casualties. Even beyond disputes about which deaths count as due to Jan. 6, not sure why you’d cite this since it doesn't even support your case. > But calling it an INSURRECTION is just Is just factually accurate; it was a violent, unlawful collective action aimed at using force and threat of force against officials as a means of overturning the election and keeping the loser in the paramount executive position; the particular official acts it sought to intimidate people into taking were advocate by the leader it sought to retain in power and the approach of intimidation was also at his direction; it was insurrection in support of an auto-coup. That it was, perhaps, desperately and hurriedly assembled, poorly planned and organized, and certainly ultimately unsuccessful isn't an argument that it wasn't an insurrection.

edmcnulty101 5y ago
>> There were guns One person was found with a gun on Capital grounds not inside the capital. the other charges are related to guns in a vehicle and a hearsay claim. You're inflating statistically and significant details to further an inaccurate narrative. >>was a violent, unlawful collective action aimed at using force and threat of force against officials as a means of overturning the election Nice claim but pretty subjective interpretation. I'm sure there were a few people there with bad intentions. But are all Arabs terrorists? Were all the protestors there to overthrow the government? Your sensationalizing a statistically insignificant number of bad people to demonize an entire group who were there to peacefully protest. It seems to be a pattern. Take a statistically insignificant detail and exaggerate it to demonize and further a narrative. This is what the media does as well.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > One person was found with a gun on Capital grounds not inside the capital One insurrectionists was physically caught in the cordon on the grounds when law enforcement was clearing it with a firearm (Alberts), whether he had gone inside the building or not is uncertain (and immaterial). One insurrectionist (the DEA Agent Ibrahim) was caught and charged with having been on the grounds with a firearm based on photographic evidence; solid cell phone data and the plethora of photos and videos his friend took at his direction make it pretty clear he stayed around the outside of the Capitol. Another insurrectionist (Reffitt) initially not charged with firearms offense (but where the initial complaint noted that family members indicated that he had taken a disassembled gun to DC) had a firearms charges related to the Capitol complex added in a superceding indictment, but at least the posted information on his case doesn't indicate clearly whether it was just on the grounds or in the building.

archagon 5y ago

Some reading for you: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempts_to_overturn_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempts_to_overturn_the_202...

LazarWolf_ 5y ago
Just so you know. Larry Sanger, a founder of Wikipedia. Wrote exactly about those articles, and it left leaning biases. https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-than-ever/ https://larrysanger.org/2021/06/wikipedia-is-more-one-sided-... It’s a good read.
edmcnulty101 5y ago
I read that. It seemed very non-neutral and politically charged. The first citation I looked at...Citation number 7...is to a politico blog post. I don't know if that can be taken seriously. We are truly in a post-truth era.