| HN Mirror

Wait what? So you don't have any argument against what I said and now you change the subject?

The same senators and congressmen that objected were interrupted from doing so because of the mob. None of the elected officials did anything illegal by objecting. Did they have anything to back their claims? No, but that's another discussion.

I don't see neither how harassing a senator today has anything to do with the other day events. I don't support that just as I don't support the ones who almost beat Sen. Rand Paul.

Any of this makes me become an apologist. I only stated that a coup wasn't the idea behind the Capitol assault.

> Wait what? So you don't have any argument against what I said and now you change the subject?

Take a step back and breath. Lets cover things.

1. You're clearly not seeing the big picture here. Planning for this event has taken place over social media. A large portion of Americans were ignoring thedonald.win, and other websites, but the events on Wednesday means we can no longer ignore these fringe sites.

2. The intent of these trespassers is clear. They're not saying "Some anomalies in some votes", they want Trump to remain president. This is a far more extreme view.

3. They are now harassing Graham because Graham was supposed to support them in the electoral college tally. But Graham changed his tune after the events of Wednesday and is now arguing that the protesters be arrested.

From the perspective of the insurrectionists / would-be coup, Graham has betrayed them and their cause. That's why they're harassing him.

-------

And yes: arguing that they are "not a coup" is the very definition of apologist. You are trying to whitewash their actions by using a weaker word to describe their illegal actions.

My point to you is this: they were not defeated on Wednesday. All that has happened is that they have revealed themselves on the national stage. As we move forward, we need to take them into account in our planning. Calling them for what they are: a coup, a dangerous insurrection mob who wishes to literally take over the country, is the bare minimum.

We need to properly describe the nature of the threat before we can plan against them.

They are a coup. They WILL be back. Hopefully we will be ready next time.

I'm not trying to whitewash anything. I'm saying I don't consider it a coup because it wasn't planned as such. I can plan a move like that with my friends and it wouldn't be a coup.

With a dozen officers they wouldn't have been able to get inside, which is something that blows my mind. Thank god suicide bombers didn't know how easy was to get inside.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJOgGsC0G9U

> With a dozen officers they wouldn't have been able to get inside

You're grossly understating the manpower needed to beat back the mob.

I'm guessing at this point that you didn't watch any of the livestreams, showing the shear strength of the crowd and their vitriol.

I can't reply to your other comment so I'll leave it here.

I'm pretty well aware of the force they needed to get them out. I said they wouldn't have entered with a dozen officers there, which is completely different. The situation wouldn't have escalated that much. But well, that's only a conjecture.

Anyway, I don't want to keep this discussion going which is basically more about the semantics than the facts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtPmi4BShNM

> I'm pretty well aware of the force they needed to get them out. I said they wouldn't have entered with a dozen officers there, which is completely different. The situation wouldn't have escalated that much.

Apologist:

a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial.

You're literally trying to defend the honor of the mob right now. At least you're shifting your argument as I present video footage, so you're smarter than most. But yes, you're an apologist at this point. I only hope you're playing "Devil's Advocate" right now in the interest of spurring discussion.

-----

For your actual discussion point:

They killed an officer and injured dozens more. They were taking the barricades and shoving them against officers. 12 cops sitting at the front asking them to be nice would have done jack diddly squat.

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/national-international/watch-pro...

These people were willing to steal the riot-shields from the officers stationed there, and then use them to break windows elsewhere. They were scaling the building, attacking from multiple floors simultaneously.

There's more than 12-windows in the US Capitol. They needed tons of officers at every entrance, on the top floor, on the base floor, covering all windows and doors. US Capitol police simply didn't have the resources to defend the building.

All of this would be obvious if you spent 30 minutes looking at a few livestream videos. Seriously: look them up. They're still all over Youtube and Twitch. The mob literally livestreamed themselves invading the Capitol. All this information is out there for you to see yourself.

I'm not calling it a coup because it was not a coordinated attempt to overthrow the government. I'm only trying to be as objective as I can.

Maybe you're the one who should look at more videos. Like this one https://twitter.com/christina_bobb/status/134759627858319769... where you can see how police officers didn't do anything. They opened the doors. All the violence started later. You can also check how 3 German police officers made sure nobody could enter a government building.

Have a good day.

> I'm not calling it a coup because it was not a coordinated attempt to overthrow the government.

* It was __coordinated__ with the Electoral College tally. The size of the mob proves the coordination in of itself, and we have proof of conspiracy on thedonald.win, Twitter, Twitch, Youtube, and more.

* It was aiming to install Trump for another term as President (aka: overthrow the Biden administration before they took office)

Do you disagree with either of the two facts above?