Re: 1/6, it's really this simple. One of the most important locations/buildings in our country was under attack during one of the most important events which only occurs once every 4 years. The then-President should have been furiously working to stop the attack, through words and actions, and it's incomprehensible to behave otherwise.
I'm not a Republican. Why do you think I am, and why do you keep pushing that lie?
And yet, you still would have been screaming bloody murder about Biden politically attacking Trump.
That's funny. You seem to ignore my criticism of Trump, Gaetz, the GOP warmongers, etc, etc., because it doesn't fit your narrative. You even pull one sentence from a post to dispute, even though the rest of the post contradicts you. You be you though.
Like I said, you ignore whatever doesn't fit your narrative.
That was a violent attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a free and fair election. Its goal was to keep Trump in the WH. To call it a riot ignores those truths. And PLEASE don't try to dismiss it by saying they didn't do it well. That just makes you sound stupid.
Don't think of it as disagreeing. Think of it as being (wait for it) uncertain whether they could establish the requisite intent.
What? You mean prosecutors pursued the charges that they thought would be the easiest to get convictions on?? Holy cow! That NEVER happens!!! You got me there. Point conceded...there wasn't any violence on 1/6 in an attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a free and fair election with the goal of keeping Trump in the WH. Never happened. Just some rowdy tourists, amirite?
Cool. That still makes it uncertain based on the federal statute. I do believe that intent is needed to overthrow the government. Inciting a riot appears to be a slam dunk though.
