That's a mere interpretation of what happened that would never stand up in a court of law, hence why no formal charges have been brought. It's completely speculative.

Which is exactly why we can't remove him from ballots or refer to it as an insurrection.

Remember the Iraq War? We referred to the opposition after Hussein fell as terrorists (not very accurate, very lame Zioconservative take), or as insurgents, which is accurate.

Insurgency implies some long term armed resistance. It can't refer to some impromptu riot on the police lines.

[–] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You didn't answer my question - where do you get your definition of insurrection?

Trump has already been found to have incited insurrection in court, and was disqualified from the ballot in Colorado for just that reason.

The stacking of the senate, failure of democracy and abandonment of the rule of law makes bringing federal charges pointless (see his multiple impeachments). This is a strange standard to try (and fail) to apply under the circumstances.

[–] Jayu@lemm.ee -1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I suppose my definition is the one from the Oxford dictionary:

an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence:

J6 cannot meet such a burden since it was not an organized attempt and it certainly wasn't violent in the way that a real move to overthrow the government would be, only violent in the sense that any disorganized protest can be.

... And while some people can toss around the word insurrection, you notice that there is no serious charge against Trump on this, because there can be no charge, since he said nothing nor does any other evidence exists which show he incited anyone to any illegal act, let alone an attempt to overthrow the government. This is only possible through assumption & interpretation of what happened that it was even an 'insurrection.'

[–] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

An organised attempt by a group of people

✅ Pre-planned by several groups - remember the criticism Pelosi was facing because it was well known ahead of time that this attack was planned? Several organisations were involved - Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, NSC-131, Qanon... Yep.

to defeat their government and take control of their country

✅ A transparent attempt to seize the capitol by force and overturn the election after loudly and consistently rejecting the results, coercing electors, posing as fake electors - not to mention decades of gerrymandering and voter suppression, but that's straying from insurrection into rigging elections... Yep.

usually by violence

✅ Aside from using force to achieve what they did, don't forget that there were caches of weapons and that Trump was trying to have the mag detectors removed. The insurrectionists were calling to hang members of parliament while forcing their way on to the floor, ransacking congressional offices, injuring cops... Yep.

What part of your definition do you think hasn't been met, again?

Trump hasn't been charged with insurrection because the Democrats are cowards and the Republicans and their appointed judges are corrupt. I'll rely on the dictionary for my definitions over relying on liberal cowardice and conservative corruption, thanks.

[–] Lord_ToRA@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

This is what's called "cherry picking". It was an insurrection, even Fox News calls it that. Bro...

[–] Jayu@lemm.ee -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nah, an insurrection is what was happening in Iraq after the 2003 invasion (and happening rightfully so).

If what occurred on J6 was an insurrection, it would have been explicitly violent or had a real organized plan for the literal overthrow of the government.

Even the ridiculous plan organized by the Proud Boys was not really an insurrection even though it involved demanding a re-vote (or a re-vote after a recount) because it ultimately wanted to preserve democratic norms, and the fools who came up with it sincerely believed that democracy was completely undermined by the last election... Which, arguably, it was.

Employing non-lethal means to occupy a place as a protest seems reasonable, doesn't it? This is what people did after the killing of George Floyd.

[–] Lord_ToRA@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Whatever you gotta tell yourself in order to feel like you're not a piece of shit for supporting Trump and/or the GOP

[–] Jayu@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago

I would suggest that we have always wanted uprisings against the government which is ruled by corrupt, "middle of the road" people, right, so there should be a loose alliance between the grassroots right wing and the grassroots left wing that fight for policies that are ideological and based on principle.

It's the centrists, who govern through practicality and concerns of the immediate future, that are the greatest stumbling blocks to change. They have obligations to the elites - the ideological left/right do not have any such obligations.

I disagree vehemently with Trump on his views of Muslims and his ideas about Israel, of course, but the guy certainly is an enemy of the establishment and floats out ideas that are radical and haven't been talked about in decades, like his 10% tariff tax plan.

These are real starting points for change.

BTW, I am not really a conventional leftist - I am a Libertarian, and you probably got that from some of our arguments, but I want to come out and say it... I do nto want to be seen here like PRETENDING to be a conventional leftist and thus undermining discussion.