[kgwxd]

BLM was instigated by a real video of a cop executing a Black man face-down in the streets, and then escalated by more real videos of other cops executing more Black people extrajudicially, (all following decades of more real videos showing the same type of thing), and then escalated even further by the sitting president not showing a single ounce of empathy for those situations and then actively fighting it in some of the most unconstitutional ways the country has seen since the 50's.

Jan 6th was instigated by completely fabricated lies, lies that began months before there was even an election to be contested, again, by the sitting president. Made more effective by people the sitting president had just recently plopped into key positions that would be involved in controlling such an event.

One side scorned the violence for both events (showing sympathy/understanding for violent reaction to very real, very bad things is not the same as advocating), the other scorned one and excused the other using the same lies that started it.

Regardless of all that, comparing a coup to a protest is absolutely stupid. Only one side does that, because it lets them downplay a coup as nothing bigger than a protest when it's clearly a much bigger issue, so much bigger that, in the constitution, one is a protected right and the other is treason.

[helloworld11]

For one thing, the January 6th event was no "coup". It could maybe, very ambiguously, very generously speaking be called a coup attempt (a truly idiotic, inept one if so) and more plausibly you could call it a sort of protest of its own (yes, protests that get violent still get to be called protests even if they don't fit your personal political prejudice). Secondly, the vast tide of BLM-inspired protests was enormous and lasted for many weeks, with many flavors of violence and also in many cases what could very easily be called attempts at local government overthrow in some cases. Whether they fit such a description is arguable, but without a doubt they were in numerous cases no less violent than the January 6th events. Your comparison between the two is absurd and absurdly biased.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

> For one thing, the January 6th event was no "coup". It could maybe, very ambiguously, very generously speaking be called a coup attempt

Firstly, we should understand that while "attempted murder" is a thing when the intended victim lives, this is an unusual situation. If I attempt to rob a bank, but I am arrested when I trip and fall running for a door with a sack of cash, the charge would be "bank robbery", not "attempted bank robbery", as that's not a thing. There is no distinction (1). No court is going to say "well the cash never left the building so hey, no crime!"

> (a truly idiotic, inept one if so)

If I attempt to rob a bank, with a water pistol, the charge would be "bank robbery", not "idiotic bank robbery", as that's not a thing. I'd be an "idiot criminal" but it's a regular crime, not a separate one. There is no distinction.

> plausibly you could call it a sort of protest of its own

It was protest, a protest about the election result, and also part of a larger plan concerning that election result, which cannot in any way be said about BLM. Other parts of the plan were to delay certification of the regular electors, pick alternate electors, change key states votes ... you know, coup stuff. They had a PowerPoint for it. The fact that the coup attempt did not succeed make no difference. The supposition (which we cannot be sure of) that it was not close to succeeding makes no difference.

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbery

"Robbery is the crime of taking or attempting to take ..."