Capitol Riot arrests (2 Viewers)

[Bigdaddysaints]

Figured we should start a separate thread on the arrests and those involved in the storming of the Capitol. I know it has been talked about in the other thread a lot, but for the ones who just want to follow the ones arrested and/or charged, this will be an easier way to see updates on the investigations.

Link below is everyone who has been arrested. But we know there will be more.

Capitol Breach Cases

www.justice.gov

The website seems to be updated with new information daily.

The ones who are getting the most air time:

Notable Arrests After the Riot at the Capitol (Published 2021)

Dozens have been charged since a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

www.nytimes.com

Jake Angeli

Adam Johnson

Richard Barnett

Kevin Seefried

Eric Gavelek Munchel

Larry R. Brock
Lisa Eisenhart
Robert Keith Packer
Klete Keller
Aaron Mostofsky
Anthime Joseph Gionet
Peter Francis Stager
Christine Priola

 

[brandon]

given that the SS and capital police could keep the legislators from physical harm ?

On January 6th, that was absolutely not a given.

 

[donato]

Stop feeding the troll.

 

[Booker]

An unsuccessful coup is still a coup. There was a clear attempt to use violence, or at the very least the threat of violence, to intimidate Congress to alter the existing government by denying the elevation of a rightly elected president.

Was it very well thought out? Not really, but again these are Trump supporters, not Mensa candidates. A stupid coup is still a coup.

 

[bdb13]

And how - precisely - where they going to OVERTHROW the government ? The term overthrow implies replacing it with something else. How exactly would you imagine that rabble doing THAT ?

Your walking talking duck would be in possession of a building. Until the government forces (police, national guard etc) evicted it. The whole notion of this being a coup d'etat is Quackers !

let's just say that the insurrectionists had been able to get to the politicians and killed a large portion of them.. not at all implausible, right (It's really not)?

What's your game theory on what Trump's next move would be then? Keeping in mind that that dictator in democratic (small 'd') clothing was sending out Tweets as the insurrection was occurring saying "these are the things that happen when you steal a great Landslide election from the people.. " (something real close to that anyway).

It's not at all far-fetched to say that had the insurrectionists succeeded in what many of them wanted - which was to overthrow the lawful federal government of the United States because that lawful government was to be led by Joe Biden on January 20th - that there would have been an absolute crisis of which is unimaginable being that they most thankfully did not reach the politicians.

 

[Sandman]

And how - precisely - where they going to OVERTHROW the government ? The term overthrow implies replacing it with something else. How exactly would you imagine that rabble doing THAT ?

Your walking talking duck would be in possession of a building. Until the government forces (police, national guard etc) evicted it. The whole notion of this being a coup d'etat is Quackers !

This was an attempt to keep the Electoral College votes from being counted. In Trump's way of thinking, if they didn't count them, he is still President. He wanted Pence to say "these don't count" in certain states. Pence wouldn't do it. So he riled up a mob and sent them over to stop the counting. This was the last attempt to stop the election (they tried courts and even tried getting Secretaries of State to throw out, or "find" votes). When all that failed, send in the mob!

As for sending in the police/national guard, Trump resisted it. It was only after it was clear that the members of Congress and the Senate had escaped and that the vote was going to go forward that he finally said "Go home. We love you."

Had they succeeded in capturing members of the House and Senate, there probably would have been some sort of stand-off. Trump would have declared a national emergency and attempted to seize power. Over 100 Republican Congressmen voted to throw out votes, so he would have had the support of a group in Congress. Even now, the Republican Congressional Leader is down in Florida kissing Trump's ring. Would the military and the police have eventually stepped in against Trump? You hope so, but there is no guarantee. It was a bad plan, granted. However, the intent was to stop Biden from being "elected" by stopping the count and for Trump to remain in power in violation of the law. It was an attempted coup d'etat.

 

[bdb13]

I can't believe y'all are actually playing this reindeer game.

I even posted that sentiment earlier, and yet here I am lol.

 

[bdb13]

Fair enough. In that case, I'm going to have to ask you a question.

WHAT 'danger to the country' was there in the Capital insurrection ?
Think about it ... I'm not being arch or sardonic. What was the "danger to the Nation", given that the SS and capital police could keep the legislators from physical harm ?

It is not the least bit clear that the politicians were in no danger. What is there to suggest that there was a very low risk to the politicians? Just because something didn't happen doesn't mean it couldn't have, and we saw the tremendous beating the Capitol police took at the hands of the insurrectionists.

 

[wardorican]

I appreciate the political differences between the insurrectins in Portland and Seattle, and the Insurrection at the Capitol. However, they should be treated as the same IN LAW. Justice should be blind.

They are. They're just different specific laws that were broken.

 

[SFIDC3]

These response are just ridiculous. It doesn't seem like you understand democracy at all.

This guy is a troll and may be a full on US MAGA [mod edit - no name calling] IMO....or maybe just a UK version of one.....

 

[Roofgardener]

They are. They're just different specific laws that were broken.

Ahhh... THANK you Wardorican. NOW we get to the meat of it. So far, the Capitol rioters have only been charged with variations on affray (entering a restricted building without authority, violent entry, and disorderly conduct). I guess the first of these WOULD differentiate between Seattle, Portland, and the Capitol building. (curiously, at least one person DID repeatedly enter the Seattle East Precinct police station after the police had abandoned it. I don't know whether that is considered a 'restricted building' or not).

At least 150 people have been charged in Capitol riot | CNN Politics

At least 150 people have now been charged by federal prosecutors in connection with the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol, according to a CNN review of court records and Justice Department announcements, as a top prosecutor said charges of sedition are not out of the question.

edition.cnn.com

... Investigators have used 500 grand jury subpoenas and search warrants to gather information in the sweeping, unparalleled investigation, Michael Sherwin, the top US prosecutor in Washington, said in a news conference Tuesday.
Sedition, among other charges, is "what we're trying to build toward," Sherwin said. ...

 

[wardorican]

Ahhh... THANK you Wardorican. NOW we get to the meat of it. So far, the Capitol rioters have only been charged with variations on affray (entering a restricted building without authority, violent entry, and disorderly conduct). I guess the first of these WOULD differentiate between Seattle, Portland, and the Capitol building. (curiously, at least one person DID repeatedly enter the Seattle East Precinct police station after the police had abandoned it. I don't know whether that is considered a 'restricted building' or not).

At least 150 people have been charged in Capitol riot | CNN Politics

At least 150 people have now been charged by federal prosecutors in connection with the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol, according to a CNN review of court records and Justice Department announcements, as a top prosecutor said charges of sedition are not out of the question.

edition.cnn.com

That wasn't the point I was making. the FBI doesn't make it a habit of taking over city or state investigations, outside of specific circumstances.

However, issues surrounding the Capitol building is definitely under their purview. Secondly, they want to get after the people who planted the pipe bomb and had other more violent intent. The fact they're having trouble is showing that those folks were smart enough to mask their identity, so part of it may be trying to flush them out by casting a wide net.

I'd imagine if a thousand folks stormed Parliament, the UK government wouldn't just let that go.

 

[superchuck500]

 

[DaveXA]

Good, throw the book at that idiot.

 

[B4YOU]

ROFL. A coup d'etat ?
A coup d'etat is the removal of an existing government from power, usually through violent means.

How - precisely and exactly - did a bunch of idiots wandering around the capital building constitute an organised removal of the government from power, to be replaced by a new revolutionary government ?

And since when did 'News outlets' suddenly become 'overly generous to Trump' ? Quite the opposite, I would have said ?

As for 'how would I describe it' ? Well, in the words of CNN, it was a 'mostly peaceful, but fiery, protest'

You can call it an insurrection if you want, but only if you call the riots in the US cities over the previous years insurrections.

If you want to label Portland and the Jan 6 event in DC the same, then you need point out the specific actions that mirror DC. There is an entire thread with articles describing Jan 6. People are giving the definitions of insurrection and coup. Definition

What occurred in DC was a failed coup d’etat. The goal was the prevention of installing a legally elected government so Trump could remain in power. There was violence but that’s not necessary for it to be a coup.

On violence: It’s very telling that an unarmed woman, Ashli Babbitt, was fatally shot and even Republicans who voted to contest the election called it justified. “Zip tie guy” had plastic handcuffs (not zip ties) with him inside the Capitol and the only reasonable purpose would be for hostage taking. Over 140 police were injured and one beaten to death. A jointsession of Congress led by the 2nd in secession, VP Pence, was ajourned and politicians were evacuated. Doors were barred at gun point to protect the lives of politicians. Gallows were built on Capitol grounds.

Not all protests are insurrections. Not all insurrections are coups d’etat. America has along history of all of these starting with its birth, the Wiskey Rebellion, the successful local coup d’etat in 1898 Wilmington, and the failed Jan 6 coup. I’m giving you specific examples so you can read and compare. Wilmington 1898 is what Jan 6 would have looked like given the opportunity. They are the same thing divided by success/failure and not coup/insurrection. It’s 123 years later and the same people are doing the same stuff - see the confederate flags, Christian flags, and Trump flags inside the Capitol during the Jan 6 coup d’etat.

Go find the dark places where “Stop the Steal” was echoed. Read what people were saying if you can find them - many comments, threads, board, tweets, etc. have been deleted. The hate, racism, calls for violence, and desire/call to action to install Trump as President in 2021 are there.

Show me a similar event in Portland. I am open to labeling Portland an insurrection. Are you open to labeling Jan 6 a coup? Are you open to discussion or only seek to debate?

 

[Roofgardener]

If you want to label Portland and the Jan 6 event in DC the same, then you need point out the specific actions that mirror DC. There is an entire thread with articles describing Jan 6. People are giving the definitions of insurrection and coup. Definition

What occurred in DC was a failed coup d’etat. The goal was the prevention of installing a legally elected government so Trump could remain in power. There was violence but that’s not necessary for it to be a coup.

On violence: It’s very telling that an unarmed woman, Ashli Babbitt, was fatally shot and even Republicans who voted to contest the election called it justified. “Zip tie guy” had plastic handcuffs (not zip ties) with him inside the Capitol and the only reasonable purpose would be for hostage taking. Over 140 police were injured and one beaten to death. A jointsession of Congress led by the 2nd in secession, VP Pence, was ajourned and politicians were evacuated. Doors were barred at gun point to protect the lives of politicians. Gallows were built on Capitol grounds.

Not all protests are insurrections. Not all insurrections are coups d’etat. America has along history of all of these starting with its birth, the Wiskey Rebellion, the successful local coup d’etat in 1898 Wilmington, and the failed Jan 6 coup. I’m giving you specific examples so you can read and compare. Wilmington 1898 is what Jan 6 would have looked like given the opportunity. They are the same thing divided by success/failure and not coup/insurrection. It’s 123 years later and the same people are doing the same stuff - see the confederate flags, Christian flags, and Trump flags inside the Capitol during the Jan 6 coup d’etat.

Go find the dark places where “Stop the Steal” was echoed. Read what people were saying if you can find them - many comments, threads, board, tweets, etc. have been deleted. The hate, racism, calls for violence, and desire/call to action to install Trump as President in 2021 are there.

Show me a similar event in Portland. I am open to labeling Portland an insurrection. Are you open to labeling Jan 6 a coup? Are you open to discussion or only seek to debate?

Thanks for that B4YOU; I'll read about some of those events you describe.
I note, however, that you have not explained how the Capital incursion could possibly have constituted a coup d'etat ? Those hopeless idiots did NOT have any plan for replacing the government with anything. (a necessary feature of a coup d'etat).

A riot, yes. Insurrection, yes by definition. Disrespectful ? Certainly. But a coup d'etat ?

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Thanks for that B4YOU; I'll read about some of those events you describe.
I note, however, that you have not explained how the Capital incursion could possibly have constituted a coup d'etat ? Those hopeless idiots did NOT have any plan for replacing the government with anything. (a necessary feature of a coup d'etat).

A riot, yes. Insurrection, yes by definition. Disrespectful ? Certainly. But a coup d'etat ?

Actually, they did. Their goal was to stop Congress from certifying Biden's win, by any means, and to install Trump to the presidency. Had they succeeded trump would have been an un-elected "President" embolden to do whatever he likes, U.S. Constitution be damned.



Edit:Nvmd what I posted as @B4YOU already explained that to you in a more eloquent way and you still failed to comprehend, so I bow out.

 

[Sandman]

Actually, they did. Their goal was to stop Congress from certifying Biden's win, by any means, and to install Trump to the presidency. Had they succeeded trump would have been an un-elected "President" embolden to do whatever he likes, U.S. Constitution be damned.



Edit:Nvmd what I posted as @B4YOU already explained that to you in a more eloquent way and you still failed to comprehend, so I bow out.

This has been explained to him a number of times in this thread. He clearly doesn't want to comprehend it.

Edit:

 

[B4YOU]

Thanks for that B4YOU; I'll read about some of those events you describe.
I note, however, that you have not explained how the Capital incursion could possibly have constituted a coup d'etat ? Those hopeless idiots did NOT have any plan for replacing the government with anything. (a necessary feature of a coup d'etat).

A riot, yes. Insurrection, yes by definition. Disrespectful ? Certainly. But a coup d'etat ?

Discussion requires equal effort from both participants, agreeing on definitions, and a general agreement on facts. You knowing and understanding American history may help us reach the point where discussion can be had.

Below’s links are Trump’s role in the coup and the belief by Trump and his supporters that if sufficiently pressured Pence could reject the electors and “come through” for Trump on Jan 6. There is/was a widely held belief by some that if Pence rejected the electors Trump would remain the de facto President. That was “The Plan”. The people who violently stormed to Capitol did so to implement that “Plan”. The stupidity of “The Plan” just makes it a stupid, failed coup.

Some 147 Rs voted to rejected the outcome. The uproar about Rs Senators supporting the House is due to Bush/Gore precedent for how this is handled. Gore issued a concession speech weeks earlier. He presided over Bush’s certification. When House Ds rejected a state’s vote, Gore gaveled them down and not a single Senator join them to force debate. By Jan 3rd eleven R Sen said they would reject certification prior to the coup.

Trump never issued a concession speech and did not commit to an orderly transfer of power until a Jan 7 tweet. Before then, he used every possible action to stage a coup that would not result in his removal via impeachment or the 25th Amendment.

Redirect Notice

Redirect Notice