[Leparamour]

Is this a case of Gell-Mann amnesia in where the commenters usually lament how the US judicial system is fucked up in overcharging to force a plea deal but in this case the litany of charges is convenient proof of the extreme dangerousness of the Jan 6th protesters?

[CodeMage]

I honestly don't understand this. One commenter asserts that it shouldn't be called "insurrection", because the charges are not serious enough. When presented with evidence that there are more serious charges, you claim that it's done to force a plea deal.

When people gather outside the Capitol, shouting that they have to stop the Congress from enacting the will of the people -- and construct gallows while they're at it -- that's not attempted insurrection, that's free speech. When they force their way into the Capitol, that's not attempted insurrection, that's trespassing. When they fail to obey the commands of the LEOs charged with protecting the Capitol and the people working inside, when they beat up some of those LEOs, that's not attempted insurrection, either.

To me, it sounds like the goalposts keep moving. At what point do you call it attempted insurrection?

[tyingq]

For me, I recognize that historical issue, but saying that the worst current charge is illegal parading is just patently untrue. There's even video proof of at least misdemeanor assault/theft/etc, so there's not much to debate.

I do recognize there's plenty of room to argue whether it was an insurrection or not. I'd personally call it a riot.

[Leparamour]

>I'd personally call it a riot.

In contrast to the 'mostly peaceful' BLM protests leading up the elections of 2020?

[tyingq]

I assume some people were arrested for charges above and beyond illegal parading in (some of) those events as well.

[dragonwriter]

> Is this a case of Gell-Mann amnesia

No. First, whether the charges are overcharged or not is irrelevant; the matter in debate was specifically the claim that the most serious charges alleged were illegal parading.

Second your post relies on treating “the commenters” as a unitary entity; unless the specific commenters involved tended to argue that DoJ systematically overcharges, there would be no inconsistency even if the charges were offered to support the dangerousness of the insurgents rather than to rebut a false claim about the charges.

Third nice demonstration of sealioning and gish galloping.