[dqx]

I agree, most of the violent rioters were armed. It is well documented that organizers had to encourage attendees to leave their guns at home or in their cars (as you mentioned, several were arrested with firearms in their cars on their way to or from the riot).

> The vast majority of participants weren't actually part of any of the so called "far right" groups (e.g. oathkeepers)

LOTS of self-recorded evidence shows that isn't true.

"wait for the 6th when we are all in D.C. to insurrection [sic]"

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2021/03/24/capitol-attac...

We know many members of the Proud Bois were there (since arrested). The Oath Keepers even had their little logos printed on their hoodies! You linked to an admission of guilt from a founding member of the Oath Keepers, you...do realize that right?

> The officer died of a stroke within days of the protest, not from injuries.

Strange, the medical examiner disagreed, saying "all that transpired played a role in his condition." Hmm he was pepper-sprayed and beaten by a violent mob, only to die of a stroke hours later. What a cowinky-dink!

The other officers had no history of mental illness. After being beaten by a violent mob, their partners described them as acting unlike their usual selves, shortly before committing suicide. Another chance coincidence I guess!

The medical examiner said of Officer Jeffrey Smith that the "acute, precipitating event that caused the death of Officer Smith was his occupational exposure to the traumatic events he suffered on January 6, 2021." Are you really that gullible?

[twofornone]

There's no point in having this discussion if you're continuously going to represent my words.

1. I said vast majority. I didn't day such people weren't present. These are not large groups to begin with.

2. Once again you are twisting the word "armed" to conflate flagpoles and bear mace with guns.

My original point stands. You don't go about an insurrection in 2021 without bringing your guns. The rest of what you wrote is irrelevant. This was neither a coup nor an insurrection, because the vast, vast majority of protestors did not bring guns to the capitol, and in fact I'm not aware of a single such firearms arrest/conviction.

You could say that it was a 99.9% peaceful riot - and again I'm only aware of a single person being shown to have a gun, not "armed" with flagpoles and mace, out of hundreds of protestors.

[klibertp]

I have no idea why are you being downvoted. Your argumentation is sound and consistent, and your adversary argues in what looks like a bad faith.

Calling it an (attempted) "insurection" or a "coup" just doesn't check out. I'm not sure, but I think nobody with any power (who could be forced to pass that power to someone, hence making it a coup) even was there in the building during that time? What would be the point of attacking target like this, if the goal was a "coup"?

Anyway, I'm not that interested in this in the first place, but I think your argument is well laid out, it was a pleasure to read this thread.

[dqx]

1. The vast majority were part of the far-right organizations, it was organized by far-right organizations. We have the evidence, we have their communications, they were stupid enough to post everything on social media, we have the video of their little hoodies and logos.

2. They were armed with flagpoles, knives, baseball bats, fire extinguishers, mace, and guns.

Thank you for not even trying to continue pretending the officers that died just happened to die of unrelated causes. Luckily you dropped that the second you were called on it. They died because they were beaten by a violent mob, as confirmed by several medical examiners. You disrespect their lives when you argue in bad faith otherwise, and the Blue Lives Matter bumper sticker on your car.

I never argued there was an insurrection. I argued that an armed, violent riot was staged and organized by the far right, resulting in the deaths of 5 police officers, and the injury of at least 138 more, and extensive damage to The Capitol. Or as you put it, "a 99.9% peaceful riot." The commander in chief of the US military was not powerful enough to stop it.

[twofornone]

>The vast majority were part of the far-right organizations, it was organized by far-right organizations. We have the evidence, we have their communications, they were stupid enough to post everything on social media, we have the video of their little hoodies and logos.

You also have no basis for this claim. Yes, there were multiple contingents of so called "far right" (some/most of these groups are explicitly anti-authoritarian, as evidenced by the Gasden flag in addition to their public statements), but as I've said previously, these groups are not large enough to comprise the "vast majority". Most of these were trump supporters who attended a protest. If you want to argue that the named groups instigated the riot, that's certainly a reasonable position. But claiming that a substantial number of attendees belonged to these "far right" groups is at best unsubstantiated and at worst misinformation.

Further, if their communications contained any evidence of an attempted insurrection/coup, you would have seen corresponding convictions already. I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of these communications consisted of politically themed shitposting anyway.

But we've veered quite far from the original subject, the argument that a lack of firearms is enough evidence to conclude that this was neither a coup nor an insurrection, but merely an impromptu riot spawned of a protest.

[dqx]

I agree, Trump supporters staged an armed, violent riot at the US Capitol. If you're so out of the loop you haven't seen the hours and hours of footage and social media evidence that shows that the vast majority of attendees were parts of far-right organizations, which organized the riot, I can't help you.

Thank you again for immediately dropping the idea that the police officers that died as a result died of unrelated causes, what a disgusting, gullible view to take of things. An argument in such bad faith it rivaled your "99.9% peaceful riot" one, you might want to look up what "peaceful" and "riot" mean.

[twofornone]

One officer died of a stroke and the other four died of suicide. You have been mislead and are spreading misinformation by implying that they were killed by rioters. For all we know, some or all of them took their own lives because they agreed with the rioters but were forced to fight them. Blaming the rioters for their deaths is pure, biased speculation. Are you also blaming nationwide BLM riots for officer suicides?

You are fundamentally not arguing in good faith and continue to twist my words and make disingenuous arguments. For the third time, my original point was that this was not an insurrection because the rioters did not bring guns. That they were technically "armed" with flagpoles and mace does not change the argument, nor is it an excuse for you and the media to conflate "armed" with "carrying lethal ranged weapons (guns)". That is my entire argument and everything else you've written is not relevant to this discussion.

Also >They died because they were beaten by a violent mob, as confirmed by several medical examiners

This is one of the many blatant falsehoods that you are regurgitating.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/third-d-c-officer-who-r...

[dqx]

Yeah, getting beaten in the head by a violent mob was probably unrelated to the officer's stroke. You're actually THAT gullible...luckily the medical examiner isn't.

Severe head trauma was unrelated to the suicides of the officers that otherwise acted normally before the "peaceful riot?" Bad faith arguments like that show you have no respect for their lives or the suffering their families are experiencing.

> Are you also blaming nationwide BLM riots for officer suicides

There were no officers that suffered severe head trauma in those riots and then committed suicide, so no. If you read the news you can learn more about that!