Without access to any privileged information, I would call it a protest that turned (or was instigated to turn, if you prefer to phrase it that way) into a mob, and there’s never any telling what could happen after that. Read Lord of the Flies - mobs do crazy things.
Just look at the summer of 2020. There were many many examples of protests that turned into riots. Some included federal buildings too. Dozens of people were killed and billions of dollars in damages. It's obvious partisanship to frame these events so differently.
Former president Bush called the people involved “insurrectionists”. President Trumps chosen CIA director - someone with decidedly privileged information - said “we are on the way to a right wing coup”.
Whether you find such a perspective compelling, you would probably be wise to open yourself to the possibility that the events of January 6th is more than mere mob behavior.
I’m open (unpartisan but the names you listed would make me apt to distrust what they had to say) and can believe insurrectionists were behind the instigation of the mob. I also like to think for myself and also understand that randos showing up to protest can end up mobbing without having come with a specific agenda (all it takes is someone to throw the first punch, break the first window, whatever - and sure, that someone instigating the crowd (or setting someone else up to do it for them) might have been there with a very clear agenda and should be labeled as an insurrectionist).
I think the first order of business was to protest that their candidate lost. I’m sure they have a long list of grievances to share with you, if you like (especially since you seem to be asking oh so innocuously).
What really blows my mind is "progressives" point at GW Bush as some sort of pariah, nearly saint now. He was hated then, rightfully so. The guy, and his cohorts (Cheney, Rumsfield, Powell et al) lied repeatedly to get us into wars to fund Big Oil.
Please "progressive" from MN, stop pointing to Bush as some sort of ally for your cause.
> If your friends are yelling fire, you might be foolish to deny the smell of smoke.
I’m bothered (not personally but at the state of things) by the fact that you thought if I didn’t share your opinion that meant I held those two in high regard. Why can’t we just think for ourselves and not take direction from one party or the other?
Fair enough. I certainly know nothing about you, and we are both making assumptions about the other. Lacking context, it’s easy to stumble on our tongues.
A protest, or maybe a field trip. They had signs, not weapons. The FBI and capitol police waved the protesters into the building and held the doors open for them -- its on video. Now all the participants are suffering in a gulag without representation, they are literally begging to be transferred to gitmo.
When people have an ideology that has some kind of immorality as one of its fundamentals (like most far-edges political ideologies do), and they attempt to manifest that ideology, calling it "cosplay" can either be a derogatory term (implying "they failed"), or it can be a defensive term (implying "they're just trolling, they don't really feel that way") to draw attention away from the immorality. That ambiguity has made the term less useful.