January 6th, Just What Was It?

[Guitar's Cry]

Unarmed girl climbs through window and he shot her in the neck.

If there was such concern, then why weren't other protestors shot elsewhere??? Since she was white she was disposable.

If I remember right, there were Senators in the room this crowd was breaking into.

From a security perspective, they didn't know that the girl was unarmed, and clearly, there was an immediate danger to the Senators if that crowd broke into that room.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I thought Reagan and Bush were much worse, because they supported outsourcing, the breaking of labor unions, the deterioration of the US economy, and the decline in the U.S. standard of living.

They were just the middle two in the infinite regress of increasingly more horrible Republicans. When I was a boy, we thought we'd never see another president as vile as Nixon. The came Reagan, and we thought the same. Then came Bush, and we thought the same. Surely this is as horrible a Republican as America will ever have to endure. Then came Trump saying, "Hold my beer."

I can't explain to you why I detest Trump so much more than the others and really just about anybody else, but I trust the intuition. If he met the same fate as bin Laden or Hussein, I would consider it just for the same reason. Neither of them harmed America one tenth as much as Trump, and being American is irrelevant to me apart from it making the crime worse. I wouldn't treat Trump any differently for being American.

 

[Stevicus]

They were just the middle two in the infinite regress of increasingly more horrible Republicans. When I was a boy, we thought we'd never see another president as vile as Nixon. The came Reagan, and we thought the same. Then came Bush, and we thought the same. Surely this is as horrible a Republican as America will ever have to endure. Then came Trump saying, "Hold my beer."

I can't explain to you why I detest Trump so much more than the others and really just about anybody else, but I trust the intuition. If he met the same fate as bin Laden or Hussein, I would consider it just for the same reason. Neither of them harmed America one tenth as much as Trump, and being American is irrelevant to me apart from it making the crime worse. I wouldn't treat Trump any differently for being American.

I consider Trump to be a product of the Reagan era, as that's when he started to become famous and popular among the Reagan Robots (as we used to call them). That was the ultra-capitalist, consumerist, "greed is good" era which has mostly continued to this day. A key difference is that Reagan was the Teflon president, and the media treated him with kit gloves. Even a lot of Democrats really liked Reagan.

I think there has been far more significant long-term harm that has come to America, which has occurred over the course of decades and across multiple administrations. Trump also did harm, although my impression is that people were merely reacting to his obnoxious, offensive, blowhard attitude - which obviously rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.

 

[F1fan]

I can't explain to you why I detest Trump so much more than the others and really just about anybody else, but I trust the intuition.

The man has no wit. I think anyone who lacks a sense of humor has some degree of a personality defect. The only times he seems to be enjoying himself is when someone else is being harmed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Unarmed girl climbs through window and he shot her in the neck.

If there was such concern, then why weren't other protestors shot elsewhere??? Since she was white she was disposable.

LOL! She was part of an armed mob. The police did not have time to pat downs. You really do not seem to know how this works at all. By being part of an armed mob she herself was "armed".

 

[Ponder This]

Your prejudices are dying out. It’s no wonder that MAGAs are exploiting the bias if their base to attract attention and agreement.

Oh you mean the cherry picked bits that Tucker Carlson presented to his followers. So you’re admitting to being manipulated and misinformed.

You’d think with thousands of hours of footage that Carlson would be showing the “evidence of tourists” for months on end. Instead most of the shows the last few days have been interviewing Russel Brand.

Not exactly a slam dunk.

The charges against him included interfering with an official meeting, and him being in front of the podium where pence was running the counting of votes IS what showed his guilt. How do you have any exculpatory evidence that he didn't interfere when he was videoed in the chamber!!? I susvect you are aware of Tucker Carlsons disinformation a few night ago and you don;t know enough to understand it was bogus. Carlson lies to his viewers. And many of his viewers have such low self-respect that they don't care they are getting played.

While it is true that Chansley pled guilty to Obstruction of an Official Proceeding, it is not true that being in front of a podium is a violent act. Moreover, being led to the Senate Chamber by police officers is exculpatory. I am aware that Tucker Carlson holds opinions that I disagree with. He, like you, has called other people liars. You have that in common with him now.

I do not think that you know how to use the term "exculpatory" correctly. How was that video in the least exculpatory?

Exculpatory evidence is, by definition, evidence, such as a statement, tending to excuse, justify, or absolve the alleged fault or guilt of a defendant. The video shows Chansley cooperating with police officers, thanking the police for letting him enter the Senate Chamber, and, generally, being non-violent. Fault refers to both the actus reus and the mental state of the defendant. The video is exculpatory is multiples ways. For example, with regards to his mental state: non-violent; with regards to his Obstruction of an Official Proceeding: he was led to and allowed into the Senate Chamber by police officers. Chansley's lawyer also described the footage as exculpatory and has explained that the prosecution was obligated to provide that footage. Unfortunately for Chansley, he was ill-advised to sign a plea deal waiving his right to appeal.

 

[Colt]

LOL! She was part of an armed mob. The police did not have time to pat downs. You really do not seem to know how this works at all. By being part of an armed mob she herself was "armed".

The mob wasn’t armed, not ONE single shot was fired by protestors.

 

[Kenny]

Edited and cut to provide a false narrative, but your comments do raise questions. Do you think a guy dressed like a buffalo should be allowed to wonder aimlessly around the Capitol unescorted?

It was an insurrection. Not all that unplanned either. It cannot be helped that those engaged are not top shelf insurrectionists.

I wouldn't have let him have all that freedom. I think what bothered me the most was when the police checked the door to see if it was locked. Why didn't they let him check the door?

 

[Kenny]

"Trying to overthrow our democratically elected government isn't a crime if there are cops who are in on it!"

Do you even hear yourself?

I don't think I said that

 

[Kenny]

I agree it's weird, reckless, and stupid. But I can't see any motive. Dems had everything to lose and nothing to gain by this. There was a plan by the Trump suppoerters to subvert the election results, and that plan was viable. Stop the certification of the election, flip the results... it might have worked. And it was very close to happening. One person with integrity, Mike Pence, did the right thing and made sure the certification of the results proceeded. It all came down to just one person. Why in the world would Dems push this to the brink intentionally? Isn't it much more likely they were just being dumb?

I guess we will never know... they certainly milked it for all the political gain they could achieve. Granted, there were a lot of "dumb" people involved.

 

[Kenny]

Another poster brought a summary, but I think you deserve to see the raw data:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

Open the link in a browser, then search for the word "weapon".

A pastor from our area that some people know. The report was that he wasn't even in the Capitol - but was in the rally. As the statement goes by him--they charged him because he had credit card receipts of having been at Washington DC

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I think there has been far more significant long-term harm that has come to America, which has occurred over the course of decades and across multiple administrations. Trump also did harm, although my impression is that people were merely reacting to his obnoxious, offensive, blowhard attitude - which obviously rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.

My judgment of Trump is based in who he is, which is the origin of the things he's done, some of which damaged America, and some were simply repulsive, but not JUST the things he done to harm America. It didn't damage America materially when Trump had children extricated from their families and caged, although it did damage America spiritually, both those who approved and those who wept for them.

Trump is a human parasite, and has made an example of that the way of thinking and living that the fictional character Gordon Gecko was an example of a related type of societal parasite, but one only characterized by sociopathy, unchecked greed, and Machiavellianism. Trump adds a black hole of need for adoration and power not seen in the Gecko parasite, as well as a sadistic streak that calls out for vengeance for what this man who shows loyalty to nobody considers disloyalty to him. He mocks the handicapped and disesteems fallen soldiers. I don't know how much that kind of thing harms America compared to teaching it to disrespect democracy, egalitarianism, church-state separation, and the rule of law and to reject election results, or setting a standard for future MAGA Republicans, but it repulses me just as much.

The man has no wit. I think anyone who lacks a sense of humor has some degree of a personality defect. The only times he seems to be enjoying himself is when someone else is being harmed.

Agreed. My two litmus tests for special people are sense of humor and kindness to animals. Trump has neither. Trump is kind to nothing. Sense of humor is a lower standard than wit, the latter requiring the generation of humor, the former only its appreciation.

While it is true that Chansley pled guilty to Obstruction of an Official Proceeding, it is not true that being in front of a podium is a violent act.

So what? He was guilty of a crime, and now he's doing time.

Moreover, being led to the Senate Chamber by police officers is exculpatory.

Not for me or millions of others. It just makes the police complicit. Being led into a bank by the president to rob it isn't exculpatory, either. It's aiding and abetting if there was no prior plan, and criminal conspiracy if there was. Everybody that facilitated the crimes of January 6th should be brought to justice.

It remains a mystery to me why so many Americans want this covered up rather than investigated and prosecuted as a serious crime.

 

[F1fan]

While it is true that Chansley pled guilty to Obstruction of an Official Proceeding, it is not true that being in front of a podium is a violent act.

No one is claiming it was. But if he was part of an organized conspiracy to break into tthe Capitol then any violence done by others would apply to him. I suspect he was just there as part of Trump's election fraud.

Moreover, being led to the Senate Chamber by police officers is exculpatory.

No it isn't. That he was INSIDE the building illegally with others IS the crime of obsructing the official proceeding. The members of congress had to stop their work due to him and others breaking into the building. As explained the police were overwhelmed and at some point worked to get the rioters out, as the video showed. The police could not arrest the people who were inside because they feared more violence, and had no where to put a 1000 people. Fortunately many of the rioters took video and pictures and the law enforcement have been able to track them down.

I am aware that Tucker Carlson holds opinions that I disagree with. He, like you, has called other people liars. You have that in common with him now.

Well if a person lies then they are a liar. I don't call people liars unless I can confirm they are lying. Carlson is an entertainer that has very low ethics by making many untrue suggestions and statements, but he is making quite a bit of money. He plants a lot of fasle ideas by using tons of innuendo.

Exculpatory evidence is, by definition, evidence, such as a statement, tending to excuse, justify, or absolve the alleged fault or guilt of a defendant. The video shows Chansley cooperating with police officers, thanking the police for letting him enter the Senate Chamber, and, generally, being non-violent.

Him being in the Capitol was the crime. His presence in the Capitol, along with many hundreds of others, resulted in Congress stopping their proceeding, thus the crime. You don't seem to understand that him being IN THE BUILDING was the crime. How the police corralled all the rioters is irrelevant to them committing a crime as soon as they broke in.

Fault refers to both the actus reus and the mental state of the defendant. The video is exculpatory is multiples ways. For example, with regards to his mental state: non-violent; with regards to his Obstruction of an Official Proceeding: he was led to and allowed into the Senate Chamber by police officers.

The guy was an idiot to trust Trump in the first place. He was an idiot again by travelling to the Capitol to protest an election that was secure and valid. He was stupid on a thrid level by following others into the Capitol. If this guy has mental health problems then his parents should seek legal guardianship and not allow him to make his own poor choices. And again, it does not matter how the poilce corralled the rioters after they broke in, that these people broke into the building WAS the crime.

Chansley's lawyer also described the footage as exculpatory and has explained that the prosecution was obligated to provide that footage. Unfortunately for Chansley, he was ill-advised to sign a plea deal waiving his right to appeal.

Well he was seen in the building, and that was the crime. So there is no excupatory evidence that he wasn't IN the building, which WAS the crime. Do you follow me here? The obstruction of the official proceeding was caused when rioters broke in. Chandley was one of them He was given what, 40 months? That should be enough time for him to ponder how to not trust conmen like Trump again.

 

[F1fan]

The mob wasn’t armed, not ONE single shot was fired by protestors.

It was a good thing that there were few guns in the crowd. Can you imagine what would have happened if they were? My guess a lot of them understood they would be in big trouble if they did, bigger trouble than they already were causing. They seemed to believe that if they interupted the proceeding that somehow Trump would remain president. I have no idea what Trump and his co-conspirators were telling these people, nor what they believed would happen. One thing for sure, they didn't realize they were breaking the law until after they were arrested. And most thought they were patriots.

 

[Stevicus]

My judgment of Trump is based in who he is, which is the origin of the things he's done, some of which damaged America, and some were simply repulsive, but not JUST the things he done to harm America. It didn't damage America materially when Trump had children extricated from their families and caged, although it did damage America spiritually, both those who approved and those who wept for them.

Trump is a human parasite, and has made an example of that the way of thinking and living that the fictional character Gordon Gecko was an example of a related type of societal parasite, but one only characterized by sociopathy, unchecked greed, and Machiavellianism. Trump adds a black hole of need for adoration and power not seen in the Gecko parasite, as well as a sadistic streak that calls out for vengeance for what this man who shows loyalty to nobody considers disloyalty to him. He mocks the handicapped and disesteems fallen soldiers. I don't know how much that kind of thing harms America compared to teaching it to disrespect democracy, egalitarianism, church-state separation, and the rule of law and to reject election results, or setting a standard for future MAGA Republicans, but it repulses me just as much.

Frankly, I could never understand how he became popular and well-known to begin with, except when looking back over his rise to stardom which started under Reagan and encouraged by a mainstream media which became more and more enamored with the lifestyles of the rich and famous. The character of Gordon Gekko is a perfect illustration of the kind of mentality which pervaded the Reagan era. But I think it's Alec Baldwin who seems to capture the Trump persona, not just in his parodies of Trump, but also in the character he played in Glengarry Glen Ross, where he may have been channeling an earlier form of Trump.

But all in all, at least in my dealings in life, in jobs I've had, places I've worked, businesses I've dealt with, or oftentimes just in everyday situations (even within my own family), I've encountered that basic personality type that Trump seems to display. Not necessarily the same political views, but just as brash, arrogant, pushy, aggressive, parasitic, narcissistic, predatory. It's a common phenomenon I've noticed across the spectrum.

At first, I, like many others, didn't really consider Trump to be a serious candidate at all. I recalled previous tycoons who tried to run for President and never really got anywhere, such as Steve Forbes and Ross Perot (and a few others I can't recall offhand).

Politics is a strange business anyway. Why do people enter politics? Some may do it just for the perks and privileges, not to mention all the free gifts. But if they're already rich, why go into politics? Is it just the fame and prestige? Is it the power and celebrity status? Is it because they're idealists with a dream and a plan to make the world a better place? I don't think any of these questions would apply to Trump. With Trump, it made me think of some kind of wealthy hobbyist engaging in an expensive bizarre hobby that only an ultra-wealthy person can indulge in. He had no political experience, he was no great political philosopher, no real statesman of any kind. His ideas weren't very original. He probably listened to Rush Limbaugh a lot.

But when people compared him to Hitler, it just didn't make any sense. Hitler is someone who is viewed (among other things) as an "evil mastermind" in a government full of evil masterminds who were still quite capable, well-organized, and dangerous. Even if Trump might have been just as evil, he was surely no mastermind. Not even close to that.

 

[F1fan]

I wouldn't have let him have all that freedom. I think what bothered me the most was when the police checked the door to see if it was locked. Why didn't they let him check the door?

Is it ever a trespasser's job to check doors? No. They are criminals. My take on the officer checking the door was as part of clearing the Capitol from the trespassers. Keeping an eye on anyone wandering around would be a smart move until it was confirmed he left.

I guess we will never know... they certainly milked it for all the political gain they could achieve. Granted, there were a lot of "dumb" people involved.

Milked it? The riot never should have happened because there was no election fraud. Trump lied about it and took advantage of these duped right wing idiots. THAT is what you should be critical of, not how there are numerous investigations as to why it happened. Your posts indicate that you are sympathetic to Trump, this corruption, and the Jan 6 riot. Right wing citizens need to demand better ethics from their leadership. The far right MAGAs are arguably are very troubled people, both emotionally and rationally. They do pose a threat to future democracy. I think our national security will benefit when Trump starts getting indicted for his actions. If Trump is convicted of crimes it will be interesting to see what the far right will do. What do you think should be done if Trump is convicted of any of the many crimes he is being investigated for?

 

[metis]

I guess we will never know... they certainly milked it for all the political gain they could achieve. Granted, there were a lot of "dumb" people involved.

And now there seems to be enough ample evidence to include Trump, Giuliani, Bannon, and some others who were involved in the plot.

And now we see Fox and many Pubs "milking" this, plus I think that anyone who likes our democracy should "milk" to hopefully make it certain that it doesn't happen again!

 

[Subduction Zone]

The mob wasn’t armed, not ONE single shot was fired by protestors.

Armed does not necessarily mean carrying guns. Armed means carrying weapons. So yes, it was an armed mob:

Definition of ARMED

furnished with weapons; also : using or involving a weapon; furnished with something that provides security, strength, or efficacy; marked by the maintenance of armed forces in readiness… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

I wouldn't have let him have all that freedom. I think what bothered me the most was when the police checked the door to see if it was locked. Why didn't they let him check the door?

One of the best ways to divert some one is to open safe doors and to try to open doors to rooms that you do not want the mob going into and saying, "Nope, it was locked" . It works best if there are some locked doors that you can try to open for them first.

Remember, these were not the brightest people on the planet by a long shot.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Exculpatory evidence is, by definition, evidence, such as a statement, tending to excuse, justify, or absolve the alleged fault or guilt of a defendant. The video shows Chansley cooperating with police officers, thanking the police for letting him enter the Senate Chamber, and, generally, being non-violent. Fault refers to both the actus reus and the mental state of the defendant. The video is exculpatory is multiples ways. For example, with regards to his mental state: non-violent; with regards to his Obstruction of an Official Proceeding: he was led to and allowed into the Senate Chamber by police officers. Chansley's lawyer also described the footage as exculpatory and has explained that the prosecution was obligated to provide that footage. Unfortunately for Chansley, he was ill-advised to sign a plea deal waiving his right to appeal.

You mean that the cherry picked video shows that. So what? A cherry picked video does not qualify as evidence. Just because someone is nice at times does not mean that he was not violent elsewhere. It was shown on the very first page of this thread that Carson cherry picked his scenes. Sorry, it is not exculpatory.