Donald is about to go through some things...

[Al-O-Meter]

in·sur·rec·tion
/ˌinsəˈrekSH(ə)n/
noun

1. a violent uprising against an authority or government.
   "the insurrection was savagely put down"

Thank you.

So your latest definition of insurrection is overthrowing the US president? Interesting. I haven't heard that one yet

Insurrection is a fight against established authority or government. On January 6, Trump was the established authority/government. Insurrection is not a fight against process. A fight against process is called obstruction.

 

[str8line]

Thank you.

Insurrection is a fight against established authority or government. On January 6, Trump was the established authority/government. Insurrection is not a fight against process. A fight against process is called obstruction.

Ummm, not really. Trump had already lost the vote. Hence the insurrection.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Ummm, not really. Trump had already lost the vote. Hence the insurrection.

Until the oath of office on January 20, Trump was the established authority/government. If the events of January 6 had happened 15 days later then you'd have a point, but it happened on January 6. The rioters were trying to stop the process which is why they were criminally charged with obstruction.

 

[fishonjazz]

Thank you.

Insurrection is a fight against established authority or government. On January 6, Trump was the established authority/government. Insurrection is not a fight against process. A fight against process is called obstruction.

Incorrect. The president isn't the government. You literally just posted about this today. There are 3 branches. You mentioned how people only talk about the legislative branch and not the executive and judicial.

The president is part of the government but not the entire thing. The president could actually fight against other parts of the government.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[fishonjazz]

Until the oath of office on January 20, Trump was the established authority/government. If the events of January 6 had happened 15 days later then you'd have a point, but it happened on January 6. The rioters were trying to stop the process which is why they were criminally charged with obstruction.

PART of the established authority/government.
So commiting insurrection wouldn't necessarily have to be against himself because there are other parts of government.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[Al-O-Meter]

The president could actually fight against other parts of the government.

Maybe in theory, but no one believes, and there is no evidence to counter, Trump was after anything other than staying in the role of President, He was battling against the process set in motion by losing the election. He was trying to stop the process too, which you can argue was a crime, but it isn't insurrection.

 

[fishonjazz]

Maybe in theory, but no one believes, and there is no evidence to counter, Trump was after anything other than staying in the role of President, He was battling against the process set in motion by losing the election. He was trying to stop the process too, which you can argue was a crime, but it isn't insurrection.

The insurrection was done by his followers. Against the government. Whom he aided

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[One Brow]

He was battling against the process set in motion by losing the election. He was trying to stop the process too, which you can argue was a crime, but it isn't insurrection.

He helped plan and incite an attack on Congress, which is a civil authority, not a process.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

The insurrection was done by his followers. Against the government.

Not according to all of law enforcement bringing charges against literally hundreds of defendants. The crime J6 defendants were charged with is obstruction for the reasons I've stated over and over and over. You can think all of law enforcement were too dumb to realize that it was insurrection or maybe you could be humble enough to admit that you are not a lawyer while those making the charging decisions were lawyers and they might know a thing you don't.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

He helped plan and incite an attack on Congress, which is a civil authority, not a process.

Congress is a civil authority but now you have to prove Trump's intentions were to attack Congress rather than efforts to stop a process Congress was carrying out.

 

[One Brow]

Congress is a civil authority but now you have to prove Trump's intentions were to attack Congress rather than efforts to stop a process Congress was carrying out.

I agree, and Smith seems to have evidence of this, to my understanding. Also, it's not "rather than", it's "to enact".

 

[fishonjazz]

Not according to all of law enforcement bringing charges against literally hundreds of defendants. The crime J6 defendants were charged with is obstruction for the reasons I've stated over and over and over. You can think all of law enforcement were too dumb to realize that it was insurrection or maybe you could be humble enough to admit that you are not a lawyer while those making the charging decisions were lawyers and they might know a thing you don't.

Ya multiple people were charged with seditious conspiracy which is different than obstruction but very similar to insurrection.

Seditious conspiracy: It is a federal crime found in Section 2384 of Title 18 of the United States code. That law makes it a crime for two or more people to actively plot to overthrow by force the federal government, to levy war against it, to unlawfully seize federal property or “by force to prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States.” A conviction carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison.

I know at least one of those magas from that day got sentenced to over 20 years. You love to downplay that day but again, you trumpers are weird like that

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk