[cmurf]

Was it violent? Yes, it was illegal entry by force. Was there plunder? Yes, property was stolen. Was there pillaging? Yes, property was damaged. Was the capitol occupied by an unlawful force having evicting the lawful power? Yes. The entire Congress was evacuated under the threat.

A sloppy mob sacked the U.S. capitol, and occupied it for a few hours.

If this exact same thing happened to the White House, would you call it a coup attempt?

Do you remember last month's attempted kidnapping of the Michigan governor that was foiled? Are you aware their backup plan, if they couldn't find the governor, was to lock themselves in with the legislature and start executing them? That's certainly violent, and the legislators are certainly where power is held in a democracy. Executing them would definitely be the violent overthrow of that government, quite a lot more so than the executive. Not least in terms of numbers, the greater difficult of replacing them, in contrast the straightforward presidential succession process.

You knew that the Vice President was with the legislators in the capitol when this transpired, as was the Speaker of the House. Right? The #2 and #3 in the order of presidential succession?

In my opinion, your position looks timid, lacks imagination and awareness. Perhaps you're not American and have no attachment or pride in the the U.S. capitol being sacked by a sloppy mob that included white supremacists, neo-Nazis, Trump flag waiving cultists and Confederate battle flag waiving losers.

Does their incompetency make it less serious of a problem? You really have no imagination at all for how very differently things might look had it been more sophisticated?

[jcims]

I think you've encapsulated my problem with the coup talk. Too much imagination and not enough evidence.

If they interview people from that group and an actual plan emerges beyond mess up the Capitol building and steal shit I'll eat crow.

[w0de]

A demagogue riled up the plebs and they stormed the senate. Would you call this a coup attempt in 60 BC, Rome?

[cmurf]

The president did ask for this. He's been asking for months, by spewing lies about the election being rigged, a fraud, and stolen. Lies about how to set aside that election's outcome. Recounts and lawsuits are cool. Shaking down legislators to undo it is not OK. It's not ethical, moral, or legal.

Threatening various state authorities to undo it, including constant ridicule and lies directed at Georgia and Pennsylvania officials what they should do and could do is part of this plan. That is not ethical, moral, or legal. Yet he did do that, we have audio of it. And it is a crime against democracy.

And then the big lie that Congress could change this on January 6th. Trump told this lie, over 100 Republicans in the Congress spread this lie.

And then on Wednesday, winding up his supporters at a rally at The Ellipse, telling them more lies about a stolen, fraudulent election, telling them they can't allow it to happen and should fight fight fight. And also proposed that Mike Pence could unilaterally just declare Trump the winner. We have video, audio, and transcripts of that actual plan and effort.

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-sav...

Had this coup attempt worked? Trump absolutely would have taken it. He would accept a second term on this basis and he would have bragged about it. You know he would. I know he would. And I know that you know that he would. Because that's what he does, it's what he has always done.

Had the Republicans in Congress had the majority, would they have gone through this anti-democratic charade? Set aside legally certified results from the states? This is a national security story. You don't like it. I don't like it. You are being timid about it, and I can understand that. And this is why I totally understand your cowardice, I get it, let me put a fine line on it.

This country is founded on violence. It is founded on two revolutionary wars. The first is the war of independence, and it is unquestionably about representation, and self-determination to establish self rule via elections. It was bloody. Far bloodier was the American Civil War. Lincoln won an election, the minority losers did not like that he won and asserted the right to break up the union. Lincoln said no, they must accept their loss or democracy is ruined. We fought a war, in effect, to force the losers to accept the result of an election. We murdered each other over an election.

And that was not the end of it. And it is relevant today. Reconstruction was ended in 1877 with the Hayes Tilden Compromise. That resulted in the Jim Crow era. It resulted in lynchings. These murders, morally worse than the Civil War because it forced freed Blacks to disproportionate shoulder the sins of this society. Yet again. Now, you tell me what kind of person says we need to use the Hayes Tilden Compromise as a model to to resolve the 2020 election question, which is not a question. Questioning its veracity is a lie. What do you think the end game is? Just making money? You hope that's all it is about is stealing money from racist fools with too much money. But what kind of person is Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, for proposing this specific solution?

You might think this is mere politics. I think it is language that asks for violence, it begs for people to give up on a peaceful civil approach to resolving disputes and just revert to murdering each other. It is not that I have an imagination for it, I am all too well schooled on the history of humanity and especially the United States, and the actual murders that have happened as a result of election disputes, over self-determination disputes.

Had these people succeeded, Trump would have gladly accepted the win. He has made it clear over the past two months he will accept the most craven bullshit reasons to claim he has won, including claiming he has won by a landslide when he plainly has not.

This is an incendiary blood lie, to falsely claim that elections are stolen when they are not. The entire intent is to commit a fraud followed by another. And it is a crime against democracy. Had it succeeded, it would have had not one tiny bit of legitimacy, even by Trump's own supporters. They, like him, simply would have accepted the win anyway.

And we would absolutely murder each other for that. We would. There's ample evidence of it. I do not want to find out. But I know it to be true.

Trump's white nationalist, white supremacist supporters are appalled at being shot at by police this week. Only BLM rally goers are supposed to be shot at by police! White people should not have to comply with the police on demand! Black people should!

White nationalism must be made to submit to equality, to truth, and to democracy. If they do not do it peacefully, the foundation of this country demands that it will be done with murder. That is America's past, present, and future. There is no escape. It must be confronted and people are going to have to stop being cowards about the rampant white supremacy of this presidency. It started that way on the racist lie of birtherism which Republicans, overwhelmingly, profited from. And it's now ending on a series of lies that know no bounds that are at their core both white nationalist and anti-democratic, one in the same thing because they know when all legal votes are counted they lose.

I understand you don't want to call it a coup attempt. But that's what it is.