6 ms·

A lame insurrection is still an insurrection. When was the last time the US Capitol was stormed by organized revolted people?

typeofhuman 2y ago
April 9, 2024 https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/09/israel-gaza-war-protest-cafeteria-dirksen-senate-capitol-dc/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/09/israel-ga...
- klyrs 2y ago
  The Senate Cafeteria Insurrection of '24? No, blockading the lunch counter doesn't compare to violently interrupting the count of electoral votes. They didn't even beat up any cops. They didn't "storm" the building, they orderly unfurled their protest signs and peacefully got arrested.
  - typeofhuman 2y ago
    You're adding new conditions so that you don't have to accept my answer. Your original question: > When was the last time the US Capitol was stormed by organized revolted people Want more? October 2023. Protest broke out causing police to shut down roads outside the Capitol. And they did ASSAULT COPS. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/10/19/israel-hamas-protesters-swarm-house-buidling-washington-arrests/71237857007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/10/19/israel... https://nypost.com/2023/10/18/chaos-erupts-as-pro-palestinian-protesters-take-to-the-capitol-at-least-three-arrested/ https://nypost.com/2023/10/18/chaos-erupts-as-pro-palestinia...
    - typeofhuman 2y ago
      Downvoted for providing you the evidence you asked for. Cognitive dissonance at its finest.
proc0 2y ago
Do you really think they were going to take over the government if they took over the building or stopped whatever process was going on? Why? The military would have taken back that building in 10 seconds, and the process can be postponed till the next day or the next week. Nothing was at danger, that is not how a country functions. You need an armed militia or at least half of the military to take over.
- Timon3 2y ago
  > Do you really think they were going to take over the government if they took over the building or stopped whatever process was going on? Why? No, and I don't know anybody who thinks like this, because it's a misrepresentation of the insurrection that happened. The danger was never that some random person sits down in a government chair and suddenly becomes the new government. > The military would have taken back that building in 10 seconds, and the process can be postponed till the next day or the next week. And that's what the republicans counted on - they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. And who could have stopped them? The supreme court they stacked? That's the insurrection. Do you disagree with any of this? All of it is quite well documented. > Nothing was at danger, that is not how a country functions. You need an armed militia or at least half of the military to take over. If not for the actions of a few individuals, the sitting president would have literally overturned the election results. That's absolutely a huge danger to the country. You don't need an armed militia if half the politicians are working together with the insurrectionists.
  - proc0 2y ago
    > they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. That's the insurrection. I'm trying to understand, you are saying that the military would have showed up and forced Pence to overturn the election? Or what did I miss? I'm saying even if the protesters would have taken the building, the national guard takes it back immediately, and the electors get certified the next day in another building. In this scenario the national guard is not joining in on the effort in any way. It would just delay it. I could see how it could be a real threat to the election if there was proof of a large coordinated effort with firearms, by which I mean people conspired to actually takeover the building and launched a plan to do it, as oppose to a large mob with bad actors.

typeofhuman 2y ago

April 9, 2024 https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/09/israel-gaza-war-protest-cafeteria-dirksen-senate-capitol-dc/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/09/israel-ga...

klyrs 2y ago
The Senate Cafeteria Insurrection of '24? No, blockading the lunch counter doesn't compare to violently interrupting the count of electoral votes. They didn't even beat up any cops. They didn't "storm" the building, they orderly unfurled their protest signs and peacefully got arrested.
- typeofhuman 2y ago
  You're adding new conditions so that you don't have to accept my answer. Your original question: > When was the last time the US Capitol was stormed by organized revolted people Want more? October 2023. Protest broke out causing police to shut down roads outside the Capitol. And they did ASSAULT COPS. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/10/19/israel-hamas-protesters-swarm-house-buidling-washington-arrests/71237857007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/10/19/israel... https://nypost.com/2023/10/18/chaos-erupts-as-pro-palestinian-protesters-take-to-the-capitol-at-least-three-arrested/ https://nypost.com/2023/10/18/chaos-erupts-as-pro-palestinia...
  - typeofhuman 2y ago
    Downvoted for providing you the evidence you asked for. Cognitive dissonance at its finest.

proc0 2y ago

Do you really think they were going to take over the government if they took over the building or stopped whatever process was going on? Why? The military would have taken back that building in 10 seconds, and the process can be postponed till the next day or the next week. Nothing was at danger, that is not how a country functions. You need an armed militia or at least half of the military to take over.

Timon3 2y ago
> Do you really think they were going to take over the government if they took over the building or stopped whatever process was going on? Why? No, and I don't know anybody who thinks like this, because it's a misrepresentation of the insurrection that happened. The danger was never that some random person sits down in a government chair and suddenly becomes the new government. > The military would have taken back that building in 10 seconds, and the process can be postponed till the next day or the next week. And that's what the republicans counted on - they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. And who could have stopped them? The supreme court they stacked? That's the insurrection. Do you disagree with any of this? All of it is quite well documented. > Nothing was at danger, that is not how a country functions. You need an armed militia or at least half of the military to take over. If not for the actions of a few individuals, the sitting president would have literally overturned the election results. That's absolutely a huge danger to the country. You don't need an armed militia if half the politicians are working together with the insurrectionists.
- proc0 2y ago
  > they wanted the election process to be interrupted, which would (according to their reading) have allowed Pence to count the fake electors they provided. That's the insurrection. I'm trying to understand, you are saying that the military would have showed up and forced Pence to overturn the election? Or what did I miss? I'm saying even if the protesters would have taken the building, the national guard takes it back immediately, and the electors get certified the next day in another building. In this scenario the national guard is not joining in on the effort in any way. It would just delay it. I could see how it could be a real threat to the election if there was proof of a large coordinated effort with firearms, by which I mean people conspired to actually takeover the building and launched a plan to do it, as oppose to a large mob with bad actors.