Originally Posted by detbuch
If I remember correctly, DeBarr objected to calling the Jan6 rally an "insurrection." If I remember correctly, there were a variety of types who attended the rally. A few were bent toward violence. Some of those few actually thought they could change the results of the election. If I remember correctly, the variety of types did not act in concert. They did not all get together before hand in order to coordinate an "insurrection." Many of them are now being prosecuted for things other than "insurrection, for some sort of trespassing, assault, property damage, etc. There is one now, If I remember correctly, who is being charged with some variety of insurrecion.
So far, there is no evidence, if I remember correctly, that those protesters who have been arrested had any ties to some alleged Trump conspiracy. And the numbers of "protesters" who were peaceful hugely, vastly, greatly, immensely, outnumber those who were not peaceful. So it was, indeed, if I remember correctly, as DeBarr said, a mostly peaceful protest. Calling the rally an insurrgency or a coup is ridiculous.
If the judge who said that it is more likely than not that there was some sort illegal "coup" plotted by Trump, that is a different story, and yet to be proven. If I remember correctly, the plot that was cooked up was alleged by the cookers to be constitutional. If so, then any "coup" that would result would not be illegal. And if the intent was to stay within the bounds of constitutionality, and the plot was not actually carried out, then it was a mistake that didn't happen.
Of course, with the right DOJ and jury, it can be made out to be what ever the prosecution desires.
|