Capitol Insurrection / rebellion thread

[DarkTZeratul]

In this case, yes - but I will be the first to admit that we suffer from ENORMOUS inequality in our law enforcement and judicial system based on skin color. Courts do typically let people travel under those circumstances that I laid out. And I will further admit that I don't think if the Proud Boys guy had the same circumstances, he would have been allowed to travel to Mexico.

All of that being said, we do have an extradition treaty with Mexico, and we'd get her back if she fled. Then she would go to jail for a LONG time, regardless of the insurrection related charges.

It's also probably important to note that she had only been charged with misdemeanors; she isn't looking at potentially decades of jail time like some of the others.

[Draco-Onis]

Yup, because white skin. /rolling-eyes

Let's just..idk..forget all the "protesters" during the countless BLM sessions who were just released getting off scotch free. Because that totally didn't happen...

How is that the same thing? Feel free to point BLM sessions where people died and the same crimes were committed. BLM protesters were mostly peaceful so people getting released for doing nothing makes sense. Feel free to show how most of these nut jobs were peaceful.

[cubby]

It's also probably important to note that she had only been charged with misdemeanors; she isn't looking at potentially decades of jail time like some of the others.

I initially thought that as well, but she has been brought up on further charges.

Cudd, who owns a flower shop in Midland, Texas, was originally charged with two misdemeanors, but she was indicted this week on five federal charges in connection with the assault on the Capitol, including obstructing an official proceeding — a felony that carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison — unlawfully going into a restricted area, and violent entry or disorderly conduct.

The difference might be the history of criminality - she doesn't have a prior record, and the Proud Boy guy does, plus he's a member of a violent organization.

[beanman12345]

I initially thought that as well, but she has been brought up on further charges.


The difference might be the history of criminality - she doesn't have a prior record, and the Proud Boy guy does, plus he's a member of a violent organization.

I assumed that's what they had been doing with basically all of these people, getting them initially on minor charges, just to initially put a hold on them so they can charge them with real heavy charges. Is there people who are really only going to be charged with misdemeanors with this thing?

[cubby]

I assumed that's what they had been doing with basically all of these people, getting them initially on minor charges, just to initially put a hold on them so they can charge them with real heavy charges. Is there people who are really only going to be charged with misdemeanors with this thing?

It's possible - although the DoJ is already floating the idea of RICO charges being drafted. And if that shit gets set up properly, then everyone involved in would be brought up on the higher end charges - the felonies.

I'm very curious to see how this plays out.

[Bodakane]

Yup, because white skin. /rolling-eyes

Let's just..idk..forget all the "protesters" during the countless BLM sessions who were just released getting off scotch free. Because that totally didn't happen...

What evidence would it take for to admit there's systemic racism in America? Honest question.

[beanman12345]

It's possible - although the DoJ is already floating the idea of RICO charges being drafted. And if that shit gets set up properly, then everyone involved in would be brought up on the higher end charges - the felonies.

I'm very curious to see how this plays out.

oh RICO would be lovely, but underscores how dumb it is for any judge to even think about letting anyone leave the country considering the possible charges that brings.

[Edge-]

https://www.vice.com/en/article/akdq...e-capitol-riot

Another fascist identified, this one seems to be a big fan of going to right wing rallies where there's violence. He was at Charlottesville, too.

Looks like he tried to pull down his videos, but the internet never forgets.

[Dontrike]

I have nothing to really say about the actual protesters/rioters at the capital. In my eyes, they are as dumb and easily led as BLM/ANTIFA.

Looking to kidnap and/or kill specific people is the same as people that protested against police brutality? Well that argument is....."smart."

[Felya]

I have nothing to really say about the actual protesters/rioters at the capital. In my eyes, they are as dumb and easily led as BLM/ANTIFA. Just taking a jab at the stupidity of "amazing what white skin gets you" that was posted. If anything, that is what annoys me. People are too quick to look at skin and make assumptions off of that, as opposed to potential other factors that might come into play.

Yeah, in your eyes, people who have no affiliation with each other, are as easily lead as people literally carrying the flag of their leader. For you to treat them the same, you would have to believe that that systematic racism is as big a problem as systematic democracy, that caused Trump to not be god king.

[Slant]

I have nothing to really say about the actual protesters/rioters at the capital. In my eyes, they are as dumb and easily led as BLM/ANTIFA. Just taking a jab at the stupidity of "amazing what white skin gets you" that was posted. If anything, that is what annoys me. People are too quick to look at skin and make assumptions off of that, as opposed to potential other factors that might come into play.

They are not victims. They are perpetrators. Never EVER give people a pass just for being stupid.

[Levelfive]

They are not victims. They are perpetrators. Never EVER give people a pass just for being stupid.

More to the point, they're not stupid:

"Democrats should try campaigning on the truth: The Republican Party is controlled by intelligent, college-educated, and affluent elites who concoct dangerous nonsense to paper over a bigoted, plutocratic agenda and to justify attacks on the democratic process. That agenda and those attacks are supported by millions of reasonably intelligent voters who will believe or claim to believe anything that furthers the objective of keeping conservatives in control of this country forever. Simply pointing to figures like Greene and hoping the indignation of college graduates will do the rest is a mistake. Instead, Democrats should present voters with a material choice between a party that has nothing to offer the majority of Americans but abuse and conspiratorial flimflam and a party committed to building a democracy and an economy that work for all. If they don’t, the lizard people who run the GOP will be running the government again in no time."

https://newrepublic.com/article/1612...-taylor-greene

[Edge-]

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/0...AYw8Wis0RZ7Uo0

Well that's "fun", one of the rioters is a former FBI section chief. Law enforcement needs to take a harder line on weeding these fucks out before they can be burnt out ex-feds joining anti-government militia movements.

[DarkTZeratul]

It won’t be a big deal until tomorrow at the earliest, but are we using this thread for the impeachment discussion or the Trump thread?

Feels like either the Trump Megathread or a new one would be more fitting.

[Shalcker]

- Source

So we know that what constitutes a violent protest is inflated by the actions of police and non-BLM actors.

If you apply same logic to Capitol Riot then the one death in Capitol riot was caused by police, one was from trampling (thus not intentional), and the rest were unrelated (people count strokes and heart attacks even in those who never entered Capitol).

Would you accept it as "no deaths but those caused by police actions" for consistency? (obviously violence still happened)

First, the Black Bloc is a protest tactic that is seen internationally.
Second, BLM is not a anarchist movement.

That doesn't contradict any points made?

This is like arguing that GoP politicians, like Trump, are being silenced due to being banned from social media when they're perfectly capable of reaching their audience through more traditional media or other forms of social media. The system does not devalue their beliefs, it's reinforcing them, which is what helped precipitate the events at the Capitol.

In a social media system limiting their reach and asking them to look for alternative venues after years of free access is silencing. It could be justified, but it's silly to deny it. (though i would argue that such approach is both harmful and inconsistent in how social media companies apply it - plus banning "Stop the Steal" by Facebook and constant "Claims are disputed" by Twitter didn't actually prevent Capitol Riot that was still planned primarily through Facebook and Twitter)

And both can also be true simultaneously if there are independent systems in place.

Plus "reinforcing" and "devaluing" can play into each other - devaluing by their perceived opponents can reinforce value of in-group channels.

I don't accept Wikipedia articles for accurate reporting on events, especially given the article you linked oh-so-kindly ignores the effects of counter protests.

I have linked it as a reference to other election-related protests you could use to gauge percentage of violent vs non-violent, if you were inclined to give it a same approach as you did to BLM protests rather then go with (obviously flawed) "one was violent therefore entire movement is" (as you reject such approach in case of BLM).

- Source

I don't see why you think it's relevant? Sure, right-wing violence exist, and some groups are more violent then others.

221 were arrested, with arrests being ongoing. The problem is not that the police refuse to arrest people, or that only 221 people committed a crime, it's that there's thousands of people that they have to find and arrest. It's a problem of scale and the arrests are ongoing.

Can you provide your source for number of how many people entered Capitol total?

None of those who remained outside the entire time can be considered as riot participants or face any charges.

[Kathranis]

None of those who remained outside the entire time can be considered as riot participants or face any charges.

The capitol grounds count as the capitol, and there were assaults on cops and vandalism outside the building as well. Entering the building vs not entering the building isn't an entirely meaningful distinction.

[postman1782]

The capitol grounds count as the capitol, and there were assaults on cops and vandalism outside the building as well. Entering the building vs not entering the building isn't an entirely meaningful distinction.

Yep, in fact there have been several people that have been arrested that never stepped foot inside the building because they assaulted Capitol police with weapons, and fire extinguishers and whatnot.

[cubby]

None of those who remained outside the entire time can be considered as riot participants or face any charges.

This statement is entirely false.

The riot started outside. Just because you didn't make it inside doesn't mean you weren't part of the riot, and therefore culpable for all the crimes that happened as part of that riot.

[Blur4stuff]

So as long as I don't go into the building I'm helping my buddies rob, I can't be charged with a crime. Need to remember this for later.

[Edge-]

https://www.woodtv.com/news/michigan...l-riot-a-hoax/

Don't worry guys, January 6 was just a "hoax".

At least until this asshole got caught saying that. He's very sorry for calling an attack that left people dead and has led to the arrest of well over 100 suspects with 100s more being tracked down, a hoax.