Terrorists storm US Capitol building; DC National Guard activated

[Spider-Dan]

CF, you've been here constantly defending or downplaying the invasion for the last week.

If you are counting yourself among those on the right who think it is "very wrong" (as in: "equivalent to the protests last summer") then the conservative movement in America is in even worse shape than I thought.

[Dave Gray]

You conservatives on here that are calling this abhorrent and calling these people out as crazy, I take you at your word.  However, I think you are in denial about the state of the average Trump voter.  For whatever reason, you are insulated from the truth...perhaps your friends are not parroting the bullshit, but it's there.

Frank Lutz's conducted a poll last weekend:
Of Trump Voters--
90% would vote for Trump again
80% think the election was stolen
49% think Antifa, Democrats, or the media were responsible for the attack on the Capitol
11% think Trump is responsible for the attack on the Capitol
64% think "the traditional American way of life is disappearing so fast that we may have to use force to save it."

I'm sure all these numbers are fluid, and I imagine that much of the Trump support is "soft support", but brainwashing is a hell of a drug.  Y'all got taken for a ride and a lot of you haven't gotten off yet.  This man, who is the least Christian you can be, convinced Christians he was a bible-reading, God-fearing agent of Jesus Christ.  He convinced poor rednecks that he was siding with them over the rich elites...Donald Fucking Trump, who would be disgusted to be in their very presence.  He convinced conservatives that his was here to look out for small business, while he is the ultimate big-business wannabe.  Shit...he even convinced me rather early that he cared about crumbling infrastructure and wanted to rebuild America's roads, bridges, and specifically he went on and on about airports.  He told us he was the least racist man in America.

History will  not be kind to him or to us.  But admitting that you got played is hard and it takes time to settle in.

[Dave Gray]

Why you always gotta be a voice of reason and sensibility?  Political discussions in here are supposed to be vitriolic and fueled solely by passion and emotions. 

I really appreciate that you are open to listening.  I try to approach this stuff with as little personal bias as possible and at least lie to myself that I am open to changing my opinion when presented with new facts.

[Spider-Dan]

Was it as bad when BLM leader and supporter helped to set off a bomb that actually went off in the Senate wing of the Capitol among her other crimes? Jerry Nadler and President Clinton apparently didn't think blowing up the Capitol was too bad because Jerry convinced Bill to pardon her.

So if I understand correctly, Bill Clinton pardoned BLM for bombing the Capitol in the early '80s?  That timeline sounds totally legit and not at all misleading, like when Bush pardoned the Tea Party for Ruby Ridge.

But to answer your question: if President Alex Jones commutes the sentences of (not pardons) Baked Alaska and the Q Shaman in 2040 after a decade-plus in the federal pen for invading the Capitol, I imagine I'll live with it.

I would have said President Lauren Boebert but it looks like she might be needing that pardon herself:

"Yesterday, on national television, Congressman Sean Maloney made false and baseless conspiracy claims about me that led to death threats and hundreds of vile phone calls and emails. His comments were extremely offensive, shameful and dangerous. There was not an ounce of truth to anything he claimed about me. His allegations are an embarrassment to the House of Representatives and he should correct his false assertions on the record as soon as possible."

For the record, here is the transcript of Maloney's remarks.  See if you can figure out the issue with Boebert's statement.

"My 'I did not aid the attack on Congress' t-shirt is raising a lot of questions already answered by my shirt."

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Boebert seems to lack some very basic reading comprehension.  Maloney went out of his way not to name Boebert and said was an investigation not something he knew as fact.

Getting to the bottom of this should be quite simple.  The capitol has cameras and visitors logs.  Either she gave someone a tour or not.

[CF DolFan]

CF, you've been here constantly defending or downplaying the invasion for the last week.

If you are counting yourself among those on the right who think it is "very wrong" (as in: "equivalent to the protests last summer") then the conservative movement in America is in even worse shape than I thought.

Find any place I have said they do not need to be arrested or punished. I have not skewed from that but yes, it does not appear to be the terror that was first reported. The fact I call you hypocrites for not admonishing the rioters does not mean I equate it to the Washington crap but thanks for putting words in my mouth. Try taking what I say at face value and you'll come away with a whole different perspective.

It's nice that you have found reasons why it was ok to pardon a terrorist who bombed our Capitol. You scare me as much as the crazies who stormed the white house.

Has there ever been a Democrat or liberal who did something wrong in your view or are they all angels of God to you?

[Sunstroke]

Try taking what I say at face value...

You scare me as much as the crazies who stormed the white house...

Then you either:

A) Scare way too easy
or
B) Are so far detached from reality that the best GPS in the world won't bring you back.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Comparing BLM to the insurrection is completely nonsense. 

The goal of BLM is to end police brutality.

The goal of the insurrection was the total and complete destruction of our democracy.  As was the goal of Gohmart’s lawsuit. 

[pondwater]

The intrusion into the capitol was only one aspect of the failed coup.

Failed coup? There was no attempt to overthrow the government. Nor was there ever the slightest chance in hell of that ever happening. It was a rally that turned into a protest that turned into a deadly riot. And from everything I've seen, only a small percentage of the huge crowd participated in the riot.

"The phrase “attempted coup” has been more controversial. It often has military overtones that were absent last week. The AP advises against it, absent evidence that the specific aim was to take over the government."

The government was never going to be taken over. This isn't like the Civil War, nor anywhere close. I don't excuse or condone any of this illegal activity. But lets not blow things out of proportion.

[Spider-Dan]

Find any place I have said they do not need to be arrested or punished. I have not skewed from that but yes, it does not appear to be the terror that was first reported.

Again, you continue to downplay the invasion.  What "terror" was first reported? If anything, the later videos have made it clear that it was WORSE than originally reported.

The fact I call you hypocrites for not admonishing the rioters does not mean I equate it to the Washington crap but thanks for putting words in my mouth.

Your responses during this whole thread have been repeated variations on "But what about BLM?"

It's nice that you have found reasons why it was ok to pardon a terrorist who bombed our Capitol.

I have to admit that I messed up here: I took your wild Facebook conspiracy peddling at something approaching face value, instead of researching what actually happened.

In 1990, there were 2 convictions for the 1983 bombing (which, it bears mentioning, was done at night and resulted in 0 injuries): Laura Whitehorn received 20 years, and Linda Evans received 5 years (to be served consecutively with the 35 years she was already serving after a 1987 conviction for illegally buying guns).

In 2001, Bill Clinton commuted (not pardoned) the sentence of Evans, 11 years after her 1990 sentence of 5 years for the bombing.  So given that she spent 11 years in prison related to a crime for which she received a 5-year sentence, it seems to me that what Clinton actually commuted was the sentence on her gun charges.  (The irony of a 2nd Amendment supporter like yourself citing this case is not lost on me.)  Notably, Clinton did NOT commute the sentence of Whitehorn, who received 20 years for the bombing and was released on parole after 14.

Now that we've cleared up the Facebook conspiracy fog, let's talk about the moral high ground.

Do I think the 1983 bombing was wrong?  Yes.
Do I think it was worse than 9/11?  No (keeping in mind that the Pentagon was attacked on 9/11).
Do I think it was worse than the Capitol invasion? Hell no.
Do I object to the related convictions and sentences handed out?  No.
Do I object to Clinton commuting the sentence of one of the bombers, 11 years after she received a 5-year sentence?  No.

Has there ever been a Democrat or liberal who did something wrong in your view or are they all angels of God to you?

Trump directed his supporters to storm the Capitol and stop the confirmation of the person who defeated him in the election.
You would vote for Trump again today if you could.
Spare me the accusations of mindless devotion.

[Spider-Dan]

Failed coup? There was no attempt to overthrow the government.

The President of the United States directed his supporters to march to the Capitol with the express and illegal purpose of stopping Congress from confirming his own defeat in the 2020 election.

This was a direct attempt by the head of the executive branch to stop the legislative branch from lawfully replacing him.

It was an attempted coup.  Full stop.

Nor was there ever the slightest chance in hell of that ever happening.

First off: that doesn't matter at all.  This isn't a surprising claim from the same people who think that you can't have an obstruction of justice charge if you successfully obstruct whatever alleged crime was being investigated, but the attempt is the attempt.

Second: the only reason it didn't work is because DoD & the Joint Chiefs - after blocking MD and VA from sending their own National Guards to assist Congress - elected to deploy the DC National Guard on the orders of VP Mike Pence, who has no such authority.

Stop trying to downplay or excuse Donald Trump's attempt to overthrow our democratic republic.  It was executed as incompetently as everything else he does, but that doesn't make it any less serious of a threat.

[pondwater]

The President of the United States directed his supporters to march to the Capitol with the express and illegal purpose of stopping Congress from confirming his own defeat in the 2020 election.

This was a direct attempt by the head of the executive branch to stop the legislative branch from lawfully replacing him.

It was an attempted coup.  Full stop.
First off: that doesn't matter at all.  This isn't a surprising claim from the same people who think that you can't have an obstruction of justice charge if you successfully obstruct whatever alleged crime was being investigated, but the attempt is the attempt.

Second: the only reason it didn't work is because DoD & the Joint Chiefs - after blocking MD and VA from sending their own National Guards to assist Congress - elected to deploy the DC National Guard on the orders of VP Mike Pence, who has no such authority.

Stop trying to downplay or excuse Donald Trump's attempt to overthrow our democratic republic.  It was executed as incompetently as everything else he does, but that doesn't make it any less serious of a threat.

Instead of agreeing with you, a hard core leftist. I'll agree with AP, who ranks as one of the most balanced media outlets. Actually, looking at the chart they lean slightly left. So yeah, this wasn't a coup. This was a deadly riot perpetrated by a small fringe extremist minority of people at the rally.

Just to repeat AP so you can try to comprehend. "The phrase “attempted coup” has been more controversial. It often has military overtones that were absent last week. The AP advises against it, absent evidence that the specific aim was to take over the government."

So the AP can't find evidence, but you can? GTFOH, lmfao...

[Downunder Dolphan]

Failed coup? There was no attempt to overthrow the government. Nor was there ever the slightest chance in hell of that ever happening. It was a rally that turned into a protest that turned into a deadly riot. And from everything I've seen, only a small percentage of the huge crowd participated in the riot.

"The phrase “attempted coup” has been more controversial. It often has military overtones that were absent last week. The AP advises against it, absent evidence that the specific aim was to take over the government."

The government was never going to be taken over. This isn't like the Civil War, nor anywhere close. I don't excuse or condone any of this illegal activity. But lets not blow things out of proportion.

The President of the United States directed his supporters to march to the Capitol with the express and illegal purpose of stopping Congress from confirming his own defeat in the 2020 election.

This was a direct attempt by the head of the executive branch to stop the legislative branch from lawfully replacing him.

It was an attempted coup.  Full stop.
First off: that doesn't matter at all.  This isn't a surprising claim from the same people who think that you can't have an obstruction of justice charge if you successfully obstruct whatever alleged crime was being investigated, but the attempt is the attempt.

Second: the only reason it didn't work is because DoD & the Joint Chiefs - after blocking MD and VA from sending their own National Guards to assist Congress - elected to deploy the DC National Guard on the orders of VP Mike Pence, who has no such authority.

Stop trying to downplay or excuse Donald Trump's attempt to overthrow our democratic republic.  It was executed as incompetently as everything else he does, but that doesn't make it any less serious of a threat.

As an outsider looking in, I'd call it a failed coup.

I am disgusted and dismayed at Trump's (many) attempts to subvert the course of a perfectly legitimate election process. He is not interested at all in democracy, he's a power hungry bully and wannabe Dictator trying to force his way back into power using any means possible, mostly illegitimate.

The only fraud in this election is Donald Trump, his claims that it was rigged is absolute bullshit, but he hopes his endless rants will convince the corrupt and the brain dead.

His major legal courses of action all failed (because foundations laid in bullshit tend to fail), so he calls his army of brain dead zombies to march on Capitol Hill the day of the College Electoral vote confirmation. They chant for Mike Pence to be hanged, and by pure coincidence some of them just happen to be armed, carrying pipe bombs and cable ties, and have erected a gallows, of course all just for show...

Trump should not only be thrown out of office, impeached and barred from ever running again, IMO he should be prosecuted and convicted of treason. Preferably he should be sentenced to death, and hung from the same gallows his supporters built outside the Capitol Building... maybe that's going a little too far, but it's no less demented than what is going through the mind of the Psycopath that is the 45th President of the United States.

End of rant.

[Spider-Dan]

I'll agree with AP, who ranks as one of the most balanced media outlets. Actually, looking at the chart they lean slightly left. So yeah, this wasn't a coup.

It's worth mentioning that the immediate next sentence after your quote is "Ortiz has allowed [the use of coup], reasoning there was clearly an attempt by the executive branch to thwart the legislative branch."  So clearly AP recognizes that its peers have, indeed, framed it as a "coup" with some justification.

This was a deadly riot perpetrated by a small fringe extremist minority of people at the rally.

I looked at the link you provided and I cannot find anywhere where the AP (whom you are now claiming as an authoritative source) said that it was a "small fringe extremist minority." What I did find them say is this:

But it became clear, as many breached the Capitol and lawmakers fled for safety, that more was happening. The Associated Press told staff members that protest was too mild a word. Phrases like “mob,” “riot” and “insurrection” were appropriate, noted John Daniszewski, vice president and editor at large for standards.

I presume that you would agree that this was indeed an insurrection, then?

I also found this:

Earlier this week, the conservative website RedState posted an article headlined “Enough! There was no riot, insurrection or storming” at the Capitol. Author Mike Ford described it as a “peaceful rally and a largely peaceful protest that was marred by some bad acts by a very few people.”

The next day, editors retracted Ford’s piece and scrubbed it from the site. Editors, who did not return messages seeking comment, explained to readers that “many details, opinions and analysis contained in the piece were either incorrect or inappropriate.”

Since it's apparent that a) you are very concerned about the proper use of terminology to describe the event, and b) you consider the AP a conclusive authority on the subject, it's strange that you would try to frame it as a few bad apples when the article you are citing warns against such framing.

[pondwater]

It's worth mentioning that the immediate next sentence after your quote is "Ortiz has allowed [the use of coup], reasoning there was clearly an attempt by the executive branch to thwart the legislative branch."  So clearly AP recognizes that its peers have, indeed, framed it as a "coup" with some justification.

Ortiz is with CBS which leans left of AP.

I looked at the link you provided and I cannot find anywhere where the AP (whom you are now claiming as an authoritative source) said that it was a "small fringe extremist minority." What I did find them say is this:

But it became clear, as many breached the Capitol and lawmakers fled for safety, that more was happening. The Associated Press told staff members that protest was too mild a word. Phrases like “mob,” “riot” and “insurrection” were appropriate, noted John Daniszewski, vice president and editor at large for standards.
I presume that you would agree that this was indeed an insurrection, then?

Sure, I'd agree with insurrection. I've already called it a deadly riot. The words, “mob,” “riot” and “insurrection” are different from "coup".

I also found this:

Earlier this week, the conservative website RedState posted an article headlined “Enough! There was no riot, insurrection or storming” at the Capitol. Author Mike Ford described it as a “peaceful rally and a largely peaceful protest that was marred by some bad acts by a very few people.”

The next day, editors retracted Ford’s piece and scrubbed it from the site. Editors, who did not return messages seeking comment, explained to readers that “many details, opinions and analysis contained in the piece were either incorrect or inappropriate.”

Since it's apparent that a) you are very concerned about the proper use of terminology to describe the event, and b) you consider the AP a conclusive authority on the subject, it's strange that you would try to frame it as a few bad apples when the article you are citing warns against such framing.

I'm always concerned about proper terminology. Just as much as the left was worried about terminology when the people displaced by Katrina were correctly called "refugees" by the media.
 
So you have left leaning media skewing one way and right leaning media skewing the other way. And you want to argue that I'm agreeing with a balanced media outlet? There was no coup. Just a group of crazies involved in a deadly riot. Just like happened all through the summer. So what you're actually saying is that your group of crazies is better that the group of crazies on the right. Ummm, okay....