[wilsynet]

Wait.

The President of the United States has spent the past several weeks trying to get anyone and everyone to: throw our legitimate votes, conjure new illegal votes, getting the Vice President to reject electors, getting the Senate to reject electors, sharing doctored videos, telling his supporters that they need to hold traitors accountable, telling his supporters to March in the capital and show strength.

Yeah, those rioters did not effect a coup, or even come close. But it is definitely true that someone is attempting a coup.

[krzyk]

I think you didn't read the article mentioned by the poster above. Basically to have a coup you need some kind of force and I don't mean thousands of guys with pitchforks I mean a large part of military with real soldiers that have experience and are trained to use guns.

Just because Trump is not capable of seeing that he lost doesn't mean he tried a coup, like the gp said, it is just a stronger wind, not a hurricane.

[sh1989]

You're describing a very specific form of coup, a military coup.

But they did have some kind of force. Enough to storm the capitol. With a noose, zip ties and cries to hang people in the line of succession.

While the President agitated them and then watched on monitors.

[bob33212]

One police officer was murdered and congress had to stop their work. Why don't you tell us where the line should be drawn. If they had murdered 100 cops would that be enough? 5 senators? The vice president?

[jsiepkes]

Even outlets like CNN are back-pedalling on calling this thing a coup: https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/07/us/insurrection-coup-sedi... . Besides opinion pieces (which are clearly marked as such) and some quotes CNN doen't call it a coup (anymore).

> A "coup," shorthand for "coup d'état," is broadly characterized by Merriam-Webster as a "sudden decisive exercise of force in politics," but particularly the "violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group."

Civil unrest definitely does not qualify as "sudden decisive exercise of force". Now if Trump had declared a state of emergency because of the unrest and then use the emergency laws to arrest political opponents, now that would have been a coup.

[bob33212]

What do you call it when a bunch of idiots get brainwashed by Trump and social media echo chambers into believing the election was stolen even though republican officials and courts have clearly show there is not enough evidence to overturn a single state include Georgia that only had a 11k vote difference and those people commit murder and obstruct government work?

[wilsynet]

So somewhere between a military coup and a bloodless coup [1] is what’s being attempted by the current President.

I think we can all agree that if Trump succeeded, a large number of people would call it a coup and they would be right.

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_revolution#

[krzyk]

There are many bloodless coups that are also military coups [1], the possibility of using a force has almost the same power as using a force.

Revelotion != coup.

Coups is done by a small but capable force, they would need to take both Capitol and Pentagon at least (and I mean not just shoot everyone there, but persuade those in control to give it up or turn them).

How do you envision those that raided capitol could take power of US? All they could do is just sit there and wait for special forces shoot them one by one.

Coup wasn't even considered, most probably what they did is plant malicious software on laptops/servers there and I think the real threat will be seen only few months later.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_coups_and_coup_attempt...