• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Another attempted coup in Washington

"Unarmed" isn't what's relevant. What's relevant is what they are doing--and the 1/6ers were violent. That's very different than a protest where they're where they're not supposed to be but aren't doing any harm other than disrupting things by being there.
 
Wow, Jason, you're right. Taking over someone's office is the same thing as armed insurrectionists who murdered people in an effort to install Dictator Trump.
 
Unarmed protestors occupying a federal office, the textbook definition of an attempted coup.
Said by no one, ever. Nice false equivalency though.
Doesn't support Trump but continues to defend him.
You call that a defense of Trump? :rolleyes:

It's the Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Jimmy Dore defense of Trump. Don't worry I'm certain you have no idea who they are but I'll explain their schtick to you. What they do is constantly slam and belittle Democrats and the left whilst saying nothing about the right. So technically, they're not a Trump supporter.

But I've gotta say, trivialising Jan6 is a very Tucker thing to do. And you can be as obtuse with regards to your original post as you like, that's the impression I got from you. I look forward to your inevitable reply of "You're wrong", without providing any additional context.
 
I don't think it's meant to be a defense of Trump nearly as much as an attempt to downplay the seriousness of what the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys conspired and attempted to do on January 6th.

* #NotAllOathKeepers and #NotAllProudBoys, just the leaders and really active ones, amirite?
 
Unarmed protestors occupying a federal office, the textbook definition of an attempted coup.
Said by no one, ever. Nice false equivalency though.
Doesn't support Trump but continues to defend him.
You call that a defense of Trump? :rolleyes:
Yes. It's called moral equivalency. You are trying to compare 7 protestors peacefully appealing for change by occupying an office. This is not equivalent to Trump leading his henchmen to storm the capital and prevent the constitutionally mandated act of counting the votes and electing a new president. One is a protest. The other is an attempted coup.
 
I don't think it's meant to be a defense of Trump nearly as much as an attempt to downplay the seriousness of what the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys conspired and attempted to do on January 6th.

* #NotAllOathKeepers and #NotAllProudBoys, just the leaders and really active ones, amirite?
Downplaying J6 is defending Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jab
I don't think it's meant to be a defense of Trump nearly as much as an attempt to downplay the seriousness of what the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys conspired and attempted to do on January 6th.

* #NotAllOathKeepers and #NotAllProudBoys, just the leaders and really active ones, amirite?
Downplaying J6 is defending Trump.
I agree, but I think Jason's purpose in downplaying the insurrection is to un-sully the reputation of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys. Defending Trump is just a side effect of achieving that goal.
 
You call that a defense of Trump? :rolleyes:
Yes.

Downplaying J6 is defending Trump.

Damn. You didn't just drink the kool-aid, you purchased the factory.
I am really certain you don't understand what any of those words actually mean.

Protest is one thing and can include occupying someone's office. Insurrection is something completely different. The protesters did not attempt to prevent the Senator from carrying out his duties, such as they are. The J6 insurrectionists DID attempt to prevent the Senate from making the vote for the 2020 Presidential election official. They were armed and threatened to murder the sitting Vice President and the Speaker of the House.

I almost always disagree with you but I used to think that you had an actual point of view.
 
Protest is one thing and can include occupying someone's office. Insurrection is something completely different.

Funny thing is, I agree with you. Now if you meant what you said you would be accused of being a Trump supporter.

They were armed and threatened to murder the sitting Vice President and the Speaker of the House.

Um, sure.
 
Protest is one thing and can include occupying someone's office. Insurrection is something completely different.

Funny thing is, I agree with you. Now if you meant what you said you would be accused of being a Trump supporter.

They were armed and threatened to murder the sitting Vice President and the Speaker of the House.

Um, sure.
You did not see footage? Hear what they said? See the scaffold with a noose on it? Hear them looking for Nancy Pelosi? Have you read the charges against any of those arrested? Followed any of the cases? Noticed any of the convictions?
 
Back
Top Bottom