Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

RFK Jr., floating conspiracy theory, says 'reasonable' people say Jan. 6 wasn't insurrection


Grim Reaper 6

Recommended Posts

WASHINGTON – Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. argued on Friday that the deadly Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack might not have been a “true insurrection,” and said that, if elected, he would appoint a special counsel to investigate whether prosecutions related to the attack were “politically motivated.”

“It is quite clear that many of the January 6 protestors broke the law in what may have started as a protest but turned into a riot,” Kennedy said in a statement. “Because it happened with the encouragement of President Trump, and in the context of his delusion that the election was stolen from him, many people see it not as a riot but as an insurrection.”

RFK Jr., floating conspiracy theory, says 'reasonable' people say Jan. 6 wasn't insurrection (msn.com)

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

WASHINGTON – Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. argued on Friday that the deadly Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack might not have been a “true insurrection,” and said that, if elected, he would appoint a special counsel to investigate whether prosecutions related to the attack were “politically motivated.”

“It is quite clear that many of the January 6 protestors broke the law in what may have started as a protest but turned into a riot,” Kennedy said in a statement. “Because it happened with the encouragement of President Trump, and in the context of his delusion that the election was stolen from him, many people see it not as a riot but as an insurrection.”

RFK Jr., floating conspiracy theory, says 'reasonable' people say Jan. 6 wasn't insurrection (msn.com)

It wasn't an insurrection.  Riot?  Protest?  Most definitely.

There is a reason no one has been charged or convicted of an insurrection.   Democrats calling it one makes for good propaganda though.

  • Like 6
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RFK Jr is a real drop kick

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RFK is correct, another reason why he is better than Biden and better than Trump!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To me, it could, possibly,be called an insurrection. Due to some planned violence ahead of time. And some have been convicted of Sedition.

What it was not, was a Coup. There's no evidence anyone was taking over anything. And though Trump probably added to the rioting, he didnt participate, or lead them. This why no charge of insurrection for him.

As to Kennedy's "reasonable people" quote. I'd give it a "Partially True", as its nebulous enough to be hard to tack down exactly.

As to politically motivated, I'd say a lot of the follow on reaction (years later) was mainly politically motivated. If they thought he was such a criminal, why were no charges brought? AFAIK the only Jan7 charge Trump faces is one charge of conspiricy to obstruct. 

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Edumakated said:

It wasn't an insurrection.  Riot?  Protest?  Most definitely.

There is a reason no one has been charged or convicted of an insurrection.   Democrats calling it one makes for good propaganda though.

Well, technically your right no one was charged with Insurrection. However, there were people charged with Sedition and technically according to the Constitution. Sedition is actually a worse crime than Insurrection.

1. Sedition, crime against the state. Though sedition may have the same ultimate effect as treason, it is generally limited to the offense of organizing or encouraging opposition to government in a manner (such as in speech or writing) that falls short of the more dangerous offenses constituting treason.

Crickets :lol:

 

Edited by Grim Reaper 6
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

To me, it could, possibly,be called an insurrection. Due to some planned violence ahead of time. And some have been convicted of Sedition.

Is there another definition besides the "Violent uprising against an authority or government" that we are using for "insurrection"?  I'm having a bit of trouble seeing how it would not be definitively be labelled as an insurrection.

Quote

What it was not, was a Coup. There's no evidence anyone was taking over anything. And though Trump probably added to the rioting, he didnt participate, or lead them. This why no charge of insurrection for him.

Ehh...I could go both ways.  I would find it hard to argue that the rioters would not have cheered and happily left the building if the Republican party, particularly Trump, announced that they had seized control and would continue being the president.  Overthrowing the results of an election and seeing your preferred governing body taking its place would definitely count as a coup.  Incompetence in achieving your goals is not really a sound legal defense.

Then again, it could simply be that these rioters were the political equivalent of drunken football fans going way too far to support their team.  If incompetence defined the first group, stupidity would define this one.

But all that aside, I can't see this as anything other than a political stunt by a never-was.  He's trying to play off both sides by using the best soundbites from each, from Trump the promise to protect the rioters, from Biden the promise to seek justice.  I honestly don't see him giving a damn about the subject in any way other than to get votes.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, aquatus1 said:

Is there another definition besides the "Violent uprising against an authority or government" that we are using for "insurrection"?  I'm having a bit of trouble seeing how it would not be definitively be labelled as an insurrection.

It was just barely "violent". How many injured? How badly injured? Bruises in just about all cases. It would be a non-event compared to many, of not MOST, of the BLM riots.

I'd agree if Biden, or Pelosi, or AOC, thought many were in life and death dsnger, they should have been trumpeting about it back in February 2021, and insisted on charges.

Any riot can be dangerous, so I dont blame the Senators for having to leave. But as a Coup, or even an Insurrection, I'd grade it an F.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

It was just barely "violent". How many injured? How badly injured? Bruises in just about all cases. It would be a non-event compared to many, of not MOST, of the BLM riots.

I'd agree if Biden, or Pelosi, or AOC, thought many were in life and death dsnger, they should have been trumpeting about it back in February 2021, and insisted on charges.

Any riot can be dangerous, so I dont blame the Senators for having to leave. But as a Coup, or even an Insurrection, I'd grade it an F.

 

According to the Constitution the event cannot be labeled as an Insurrection, in fact not single person involved that day was charged with participating in an Insurrection. However, a number of people were charged and convicted of Seditious Conspiracy, and they were given the longest sentences. Now, there is no comparison to the Riots earlier in the year and the attack on the Capital. The attack on the Capital was planned and executed in an attempt to prevent a peaceful transfer of power from a Presidential election and the Constitution clearly identifies this as Sedition.

You can laugh this off, call it joke, or anything else you choose to do, but please do not compare an intentional attack on our seat of Government to racial riots. I hope that the violence that occurred during our last election does not occur in November. Because this time the Government is prepared in many ways, so hopefully Trumps minions understand this because just like the last time, Trump will be watching on TV and again he will not lift a finger to help anyone who fought for him. The only difference is the fact that his minions will receive resistance and whatever else it takes to quell an uprising!!!!

JIMHO

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

According to the Constitution the event cannot be labeled as an Insurrection, in fact not single person involved that day was charged with participating in an Insurrection. However, a number of people were charged and convicted of Seditious Conspiracy, and they were given the longest sentences. Now, there is no comparison to the Riots earlier in the year and the attack on the Capital. The attack on the Capital was planned and executed in an attempt to prevent a peaceful transfer of power from a Presidential election and the Constitution clearly identifies this as Sedition.

You can laugh this off, call it joke, or anything else you choose to do, but please do not compare an intentional attack on our seat of Government to racial riots. I hope that the violence that occurred during our last election does not occur in November. Because this time the Government is prepared in many ways, so hopefully Trumps minions understand this because just like the last time, Trump will be watching on TV and again he will not lift a finger to help anyone who fought for him. The only difference is the fact that his minions will receive resistance and whatever else it takes to quell an uprising!!!!

JIMHO

Good thing we have a Right to Free Speech.

Jan6 was a riot. BLM had riots. Both were violent. Some of the BLM riots much more so. The comparison is clear and obvious.

Sedition is the Planning, or Encouragement, of something like insurrection, or rebellion. Trump could probably be shown to have done that.

BLM rioters attacked Federal buildings. Tried to burn them down. Violently. Tried to storm Federal buildings. The comparison is clear. 

Not excusing any of Jan6, but those who firebombed Federal buildings for BLM had near zero concequences.

Since most of those stupid enough, or fanatical enough, to try to carry out another Jan6 went to jail, i suspect we'll not see another election riot. Unless its Antifa reacting to a Trump victory. 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call Jan.6 it by whatever  name you want,

As some Conservatives say about biological sex, there are only two choices, nothing in between, so it is with Jan. 6.

On one side, there are those carrying out the Constitutional law by counting electoral votes.  On the other side there are those who tried to stop the process of law as outlined by the Constitution. That is it.  No in between.

 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Call Jan.6 it by whatever  name you want,

As some Conservatives say about biological sex, there are only two choices, nothing in between, so it is with Jan. 6.

On one side, there are those carrying out the Constitutional law by counting electoral votes.  On the other side there are those who tried to stop the process of law as outlined by the Constitution. That is it.  No in between.

 

The insurrectionists publicly and privately stated they were there to support Trump. I have no doubt, If Trump had told them to stop, leave, hold hostages or kill them, they would have done so. Effectively the mob was Trumps militia. If police and military units and commanders had crossed line you’all would be living in a very different and dangerous America 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Call Jan.6 it by whatever  name you want,

As some Conservatives say about biological sex, there are only two choices, nothing in between, so it is with Jan. 6.

On one side, there are those carrying out the Constitutional law by counting electoral votes.  On the other side there are those who tried to stop the process of law as outlined by the Constitution. That is it.  No in between.

Thats true as far as it goes.

But, as we've seen with HRC, and others, justice and the law, arent always buddies. Especially in Washington DC. 

I was/am all in favor of arresting all the Jan6 rioters, and charging them. I just want when the same happens in a non-Trump situation to be treated the same.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Thats true as far as it goes.

But, as we've seen with HRC, and others, justice and the law, arent always buddies. Especially in Washington DC. 

I was/am all in favor of arresting all the Jan6 rioters, and charging them. I just want when the same happens in a non-Trump situation to be treated the same.

As it should be, as it always has been.  The only exception is if they win.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Good thing we have a Right to Free Speech.

Oh come on that's unreasonable sorry you feel that way!!:rolleyes:

37 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Jan6 was a riot. BLM had riots. Both were violent. Some of the BLM riots much more so. The comparison is clear and obvious.

There is no comparison the BLM riots were based upon racist actions by country folk that resulted in the death of Balck American.

The Sedition that occurred at the Capital was the direct attempt by a sitting President to invalidate a Presidential Election.

Now if you think there is any comparison there, please enlighten me, because so far you have not made a very good argument.

37 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Sedition is the Planning, or Encouragement, of something like insurrection, or rebellion. Trump could probably be shown to have done that.

Oh yes that was the entire purpose of his on January 6, and members of his cabinet along with himself were directly involved the submission of fake electoral votes. 

37 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

BLM rioters attacked Federal buildings. Tried to burn them down. Violently. Tried to storm Federal buildings. The comparison is clear. 

Destroying federal buildings and interrupting Congress in the middle of electoral vote certification do not compare. If you went to the Constitution right now and looked up the destruction of federal buildings, you would find anything that even mentions it. However, intentionally Congress in the middle of vote verification is listed under Sedition in the US Constitution. Thats why I say there is no comparison.

37 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Not excusing any of Jan6, but those who firebombed Federal buildings for BLM had near zero concequences.

Do you have a source for that information, that shows that those who were arrested and charged for firebombing were never prosecuted? I will wait for your source. :rolleyes:

37 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Since most of those stupid enough, or fanatical enough, to try to carry out another Jan6 went to jail, i suspect we'll not see another election riot. Unless its Antifa reacting to a Trump victory. 

I don't care who it is, so long as they are prosecuted to the letter of the Law. But, as far as who becomes violent, we will just have to wait and see, because I can't tell the future!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Oh come on that's unreasonable sorry you feel that way!!:rolleyes:

There is no comparison the BLM riots were based upon racist actions by country folk that resulted in the death of Balck American.

If people want to excuse crimes because they were angry, then we might as well just fold up the nation now. A crime is a crime. Regardless of if a black man died, thats no good excuse to riot and destroy property and the livelyhoods of hundreds.

The BLM riots should never have happened and the Jan9 riot should never have happened. But both did, and both caused millions of dollars of damages, and both were moderately violent, and both resulted in Federal arrests. And both were a result of Trump. One because they hated him, and one because he told them to.

Plenty of things to compare.

Quote

The Sedition that occurred at the Capital was the direct attempt by a sitting President to invalidate a Presidential Election.

I'd agree with that. Nothing I posted in this thread, or since 2021 on UM, would disagree with that.

Yet he wasnt charged. He should have been.

Quote

Now if you think there is any comparison there, please enlighten me, because so far you have not made a very good argument.

My point is to the actual text involved. Both the attack on the Capital, and the BLM riots to burn a Federal courthouse, fit that language.

Insurrection is a violent uprising against the authority of the government. Sedition is the planning and support thereof. 

Both happened in both situations.

One would have had much greater affect on the nation than the other, true, but both were the same crime. And thus they are comparable.

Just as you might compare stealing a 1000 dollar beat up Ford with stealing a million dollar Lamborghini. As being the same crime.

Quote

Destroying federal buildings and interrupting Congress in the middle of electoral vote certification do not compare. If you went to the Constitution right now and looked up the destruction of federal buildings, you would find anything that even mentions it. However, intentionally Congress in the middle of vote verification is listed under Sedition in the US Constitution. Thats why I say there is no comparison.

I'm sorry, but I simply feel differently. To me attacking the Federal government is attacking the Federal government.

The people who attacked the Courthouse should be treated just as harshly as those who invaded the Capital building.

Quote

Do you have a source for that information, that shows that those who were arrested and charged for firebombing were never prosecuted? I will wait for your source.

Eyeroll? Im assuming you think i have no such source.

I don't know why you think that. Every time you ask, i provide.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/almost-half-of-federal-cases-against-portland-rioters-have-been-dismissed

Quote

Of 96 cases the U.S. attorney’s office in Portland filed last year charging protesters with federal crimes, including assaulting federal officers, civil disorder, and failing to obey, prosecutors have dropped 47 of them, government documents show. Ten people have pleaded guilty to related charges and two were ordered detained pending trial. None have gone to trial.

The penalties levied so far against any federal defendants, most of whom were arrested in clashes around federal buildings in Portland including the courthouse, have largely consisted of community service, such as working in a food bank or encouraging people to vote.

Ill keep looking to see if anyone actually did time. Maybe they did the easy ones first?

Edit: I did find one guy, who got sentenced to ten years for throwing molotov fire bombs.

https://www.kptv.com/2022/06/21/man-sentenced-10-years-prison-involvement-portland-riots/

So i guess theres ONE guy who got jail time.

Edited by DieChecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

If people want to excuse crimes because they were angry, then we might as well just fold up the nation now. A crime is a crime. Regardless of if a black man died, thats no good excuse to riot and destroy property and the livelyhoods of hundreds.

Are you saying it was ok to excuse the crime of the mans death?

Normally, or I should say before Trump when a racial crime like this was committed the President would try and calm the Nation, well not Trump!

I don't believe in excusing crimes, my problem with the situation was there was not equality there. This is what caused the riots much more so than the mans death.

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

The BLM riots should never have happened and the Jan9 riot should never have happened. But both did, and both caused millions of dollars of damages, and both were moderately violent, and both resulted in Federal arrests. And both were a result of Trump. One because they hated him, and one because he told them to.

I agree they never should have happened, I also agree they were because of Trump. Not because they hated him, because he didn't quell the situation, if he had nothing would have been done.

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

Plenty of things to compare.

I'd agree with that. Nothing I posted in this thread, or since 2021 on UM, would disagree with that.

Yet he wasnt charged. He should have been.

My point is to the actual text involved. Both the attack on the Capital, and the BLM riots to burn a Federal courthouse, fit that language.

How do figure, you obviously have read the constitution, because the crime that all seditionist are being tried for is Disrupting Congress, not attacking the build. The constitution specifically says that if you disrupted a Congress that is session you have committed Sedition!!!!!!!

Here is a direct quote on Sedition according to the Constitution 

Sedition 18 U.S.C. § 2384, which states, “[i]f two or more persons in [the U.S.], conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

Insurrection is a violent uprising against the authority of the government. Sedition is the planning and support thereof. 

Both happened in both situations.

One would have had much greater affect on the nation than the other, true, but both were the same crime. And thus they are comparable.

Just as you might compare stealing a 1000 dollar beat up Ford with stealing a million dollar Lamborghini. As being the same crime.

Look at the Constitutions definition of Sedition above it clearly explains what Sedition is by definition!

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

I'm sorry, but I simply feel differently. To me attacking the Federal government is attacking the Federal government.

The people who attacked the Courthouse should be treated just as harshly as those who invaded the Capital building.

Eyeroll? Im assuming you think i have no such source.

I don't know why you think that. Every time you ask, i provide.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/almost-half-of-federal-cases-against-portland-rioters-have-been-dismissed

Ill keep looking to see if anyone actually did time. Maybe they did the easy ones first?

Edit: I did find one guy, who got sentenced to ten years for throwing molotov fire bombs.

https://www.kptv.com/2022/06/21/man-sentenced-10-years-prison-involvement-portland-riots/

So i guess theres ONE guy who got jail time.

 

Edited by Grim Reaper 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DieChecker said:

It was just barely "violent". How many injured? How badly injured? Bruises in just about all cases.

Are we parsing the definition of "violent" now?  Ashley Babbit died of a gunshot wound, which is a direct result of how violent it got.  Two people had heart attacks, and I doubt it was from the calm, peaceful atmosphere.  We'll ignore the guy who OD'd on Meth; we know methheads are chill and not prone to outbreaks or anything.  What about on the other side?  Two officers died of stroke.  One of them had been struck several times with a fire extinguisher.  Four officers committed suicide in the months that followed.  Would they have considered the attack "just barely violent"? 

Quote

It would be a non-event compared to many, of not MOST, of the BLM riots.

It would also be a non-event compared to any of the World Wars.  And it would be a horrifying catastrophic loss of life compared to the MLK March.

But we aren't talking about either of those, are we?  We are talking about the attack on the capital, where people were literally clambering over walls, smashing windows and crawling inside, yes, people were armed, yes, they were screaming about hangings and they had a lynch outside, and yes, a mob stormed the capital building.  Barely violent, indeed.  Unless you have come to consider the average day in the life of a GTA npc to be peaceful, that sort of thing cannot be called "barely violent".
 

Quote

 

I'd agree if Biden, or Pelosi, or AOC, thought many were in life and death dsnger, they should have been trumpeting about it back in February 2021, and insisted on charges.

Any riot can be dangerous, so I dont blame the Senators for having to leave. But as a Coup, or even an Insurrection, I'd grade it an F.

 

They did.  That is why they were ushered away.  More importantly, that is why the votes were ushered away and secured.  And yes, as many people were "trumpeting" about it as were not, and yes, charges have been and continue to be filed.  You can't claim that it was "just barely violent" while at the same time acknowledging that it was as dangerous as a riot.  The only difference between a riot and an insurrection is that an insurrection has the purpose of removing the governing authority.

You start by trying to downplay the violence as if it were the defining aspect of an insurrection, then acknowledge that the violence was on par with a riot anyway.  If you want to claim it wasn't a coup or an insurrection, you need to show they were not intent on removing the current authority, and yes, having their preferred party take control would be included in that.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Are you saying it was ok to excuse the crime of the mans death?

I certainly am not

The officer committed his own crime. Both George Floyd and the officer committed crimes. Neither should be excused. 

Quote

I don't believe in excusing crimes, my problem with the situation was there was not equality there. This is what caused the riots much more so than the mans death.

True. Much of the BLM move was peaceful demonstrations. The riots happened at night when Antifa showed up.

If you read what I wrote, I said the mans death should be no excuse for the riots. I in no way said the BLM movement was bogus. And you've been challenging me on that for over a day.

If you disagree, than to me, you are saying you do excuse the riots because the man died.

Quote

How do figure, you obviously have read the constitution, because the crime that all seditionist are being tried for is Disrupting Congress, not attacking the build. The constitution specifically says that if you disrupted a Congress that is session you have committed Sedition!!!!!!!

Here is a direct quote on Sedition according to the Constitution 

Sedition 18 U.S.C. § 2384, which states, “[i]f two or more persons in [the U.S.], conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both

Look at the Constitutions definition of Sedition above it clearly explains what Sedition is by definition!

Right there... "or to oppose by force the authority thereof", and "or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States".  Both of those apply to the Federal Courthouse. Thus both Jan6 and BLM riots had Sedition involved. 

Maybe you should be reading what you are posting. And not just read into it what you want it to say.

You keep assuming you know I'm bluffing, or ignorant, and for the third time in two days, you were wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I certainly am not

The officer committed his own crime. Both George Floyd and the officer committed crimes. Neither should be excused. 

 

True. Much of the BLM move was peaceful demonstrations. The riots happened at night when Antifa showed up.

If you read what I wrote, I said the mans death should be no excuse for the riots. I in no way said the BLM movement was bogus. And you've been challenging me on that for over a day.

I agree, most of the people involved in the riots were only involved for the looting!

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

If you disagree, than to me, you are saying you do excuse the riots because the man died.

Right there... "or to oppose by force the authority thereof", and "or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States".  Both of those apply to the Federal Courthouse. Thus both Jan6 and BLM riots had Sedition involved. 

They were of Arson not Sedition!!:D

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Maybe you should be reading what you are posting. And not just read into it what you want it to say.:D

You keep assuming you know I'm bluffing, or ignorant, and for the third time in two days, you were wrong.🤪

No that isn't true, I assume nothing of the sort. I think you have a problem with reading comprehension, but your welcome to your opinion. We will just have to agree to disagree!!!!!:yes:

Peace Diecheker:tu:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2024 at 3:02 PM, Grim Reaper 6 said:

WASHINGTON – Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. argued on Friday that the deadly Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack might not have been a “true insurrection,” and said that, if elected, he would appoint a special counsel to investigate whether prosecutions related to the attack were “politically motivated.”

“It is quite clear that many of the January 6 protestors broke the law in what may have started as a protest but turned into a riot,” Kennedy said in a statement. “Because it happened with the encouragement of President Trump, and in the context of his delusion that the election was stolen from him, many people see it not as a riot but as an insurrection.”

RFK Jr., floating conspiracy theory, says 'reasonable' people say Jan. 6 wasn't insurrection (msn.com)

Seems like RFK is saying that because Trump is delusional, it was a riot, not an insurrection.

But Trump hasn't been found legally insane, delusional or anything like that.  While it may be true, the law doesn't recognize it.

Doug

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

Seems like RFK is saying that because Trump is delusional, it was a riot, not an insurrection.

But Trump hasn't been found legally insane, delusional or anything like that.  While it may be true, the law doesn't recognize it.

Doug

RFK is a conspiracy theorist himself, I don’t trust anything he says. I think him and Green would make a great team so long as they don’t breed, that would be too dangerous to even consider!!:w00t::P:D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Thats true as far as it goes.

But, as we've seen with HRC, and others, justice and the law, arent always buddies. Especially in Washington DC. 

I was/am all in favor of arresting all the Jan6 rioters, and charging them. I just want when the same happens in a non-Trump situation to be treated the same.

There were 17 people jailed over those riots. Are you referring to something else?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arson_damage_during_the_George_Floyd_protests_in_Minneapolis–Saint_Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

There were 17 people jailed over those riots. Are you referring to something else?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arson_damage_during_the_George_Floyd_protests_in_Minneapolis–Saint_Paul

Specifically I was refering to the attempts to invade, and burn down, the Federal Courthouse in Portland. Since we were talking about Sedition and Insurrection. 

The Federal charges you linked are regular arson charges that happen to also fall into federal jurisdiction.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Specifically I was refering to the attempts to invade, and burn down, the Federal Courthouse in Portland. Since we were talking about Sedition and Insurrection. 

The Federal charges you linked are regular arson charges that happen to also fall into federal jurisdiction.

Why were only 11 individuals charged with seditious conspiracy stemming from the attack on the Capital January 6, 2021?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.