1/6 Defendants demand to be sent to GITMO

[Stann]

Orange fat guy? Dude. YOu aer a troll. Nothing more.


And that you don't believe in teh fbi agistators, makes it more likely that they were there.

I don't even want to say his name anymore, the fat guy with the orange mop on his head orchestrated the whole thing. Instructed the crowd exactly what to do and directed them with hatred and anger towards the Capitol. Many of the organized ones were already at the Capitol waiting to lead the other fools on. They didn't go to the meeting to get excited they had already planned out their attack. They just needed the cover of all those fools that believed the orange devil.

 

[Coyote]

now seriously, coyote - this is a prime example of all that is wrong on our overall culture today.

unless you agree with me, there can be no common ground.

i won't ever agree with you. not at this point because you take your and pretend it justifies your hostility to their actions.

you refuse to demand ALL the evidence and say what you have is enough - i can only guess it's because what you have now supports your hate. that seems important to you for some reason.

pelosi it not releasing all video. why? if you want the truth you need the entire story. anything less than that is a narrative, to me.

we did have FBI in the crowd stirring them up - why? if you came to DC to have an insurrection then you hardly need some old bald dude desperately trying to look cool, now do you?

while we do have people trashing shit - which side in recent history is responsible for 95% or more of said trashing of shit? leave your justification at the door and simply answer the question - which side has been tearing shit up all over the country for years? who bailed them out?

then who is pushing this so hard? same people who bailed them out.

you also have to overlook the capital police letting people in and taking selfies.

there is zero denial things got way out of hand. people did die that day and it wasn't the capital police. i see you left her out. why? doesn't fit your narrative?

this is why we can't have common ground. you aren't looking for it.

You are looking for validation.

I don't require you to agree with me, but I won't waste time anymore with someone who who can't even acknowledge some basic facts.

1. Calling an attack on our Capitol as people just wanting to compmIn about the election...

2. Dismissing, constantly, the vicious attacks on the police trying to protect the lives of our elected officials (traumatic brain injurirs, heart attacks from being tazed, fractured vertebrae).

3. Bringing up the person who was shot like she is supposed to besone kind of victim. She wasn't. She was in the process of committing a crime with violent mob backing her. It was tragic but the results of her actions, not because she just happened to be there minding her own business.

It is these, fueled by the evergrowing pile of conspiracy theories, that has made believe it is impossible to have a debate because not only do we no longer share the same definition of "fact" we don't share the same definition of right and wrong. Your oresponses keep coming down to "the other side is worse". No. just no.

 

[Stann]

I don't require you to agree with me, but I won't waste time anymore with someone who who can't even acknowledge some basic facts.

1. Calling an attack on our Capitol as people just wanting to compmIn about the election...

2. Dismissing, constantly, the vicious attacks on the police trying to protect the lives of our elected officials (traumatic brain injurirs, heart attacks from being tazed, fractured vertebrae).

3. Bringing up the person who was shot like she is supposed to besone kind of victim. She wasn't. She was in the process of committing a crime with violent mob backing her. It was tragic but the results of her actions, not because she just happened to be there minding her own business.

It is these, fueled by the evergrowing pile of conspiracy theories, that has made believe it is impossible to have a debate because not only do we no longer share the same definition of "fact" we don't share the same definition of right and wrong. Your oresponses keep c 2. oming down to "the other side is worse". No. just no.

1. The attack was planned. 2. The police were attacked, they were defending themselves and the people they swore to protect. 3. The woman who tried to break into the chamber that still had government officials in it was an act of courage. No one wants to shoot another person unless they're crazy, there were a lot of crazy people in that crowd. The police were just doing their job and they did it as best they could under the circumstances.

 

[Correll]

3. Bringing up the person who was shot like she is supposed to besone kind of victim. She wasn't. She was in the process of committing a crime with violent mob backing her. It was tragic but the results of her actions, not because she just happened to be there minding her own business.

If she were a lefty, shot by police, especially if she was black and the cop white,


your viewpoint would be exactly the opposite.

 

[iceberg]

Do you think the FBI was stirring up the people ? No it was the orange fat guy. End of story, never mind the story isn't over yet, the orange guy needs to be held accountable for his actions then the story will be finally over.

you're so cute when you're like this.

bullshit me again!

 

[Stann]

If she were a lefty, shot by police, especially if she was black and the cop white,


your viewpoint would be exactly the opposite.

In that situation, it wouldn't make any difference who the person was because what the person was doing threatened too many lives. She was the aggressor. There's no doubt about it. The policeman were trying to protect themselves and the people they swore to protect. It was the last line of defense.

 

[Correll]

In that situation, it wouldn't make any difference who the person was because what the person was doing threatened too many lives. She was the aggressor. There's no doubt about it. The policeman were trying to protect themselves and the people they swore to protect. It was the last line of defense.

Sure.

 

[iceberg]

I don't require you to agree with me, but I won't waste time anymore with someone who who can't even acknowledge some basic facts.

Until we get past that one major fallacy, we have NO common ground or shared reality upon which to engage in discussion.

sounds like i must see it the way you do or you won't even hear my side / understanding of it.

1. Calling an attack on our Capitol as people just wanting to compmIn about the election...

you calling it an attack on our capital by a group of people who had no guns is funny to me. its either the worst "planned attack" in the history of mankind or a situation that was not initially an attack but got out of hand.

2. Dismissing, constantly, the vicious attacks on the police trying to protect the lives of our elected officials (traumatic brain

now i never said it happened, now did i? this is you inventing my side of the story because i don't make this my #1 bullet and no "nah nah nah" to any other options.

now, are we going to simply keep making lists of what the other person dismisses? this will be fun.

keep in mind you yourself said we had enough video and nancy didn't need to provide ALL video. would you agree ALL DATA is needed to arrive at a fair conclusion?
no = hear my facts
yes = you could be wrong.

which is it?

3. Bringing up the person who was shot like she is supposed to besone kind of victim. She wasn't. She was in the process of committing a crime with violent mob backing her. It was tragic but the results of her actions, not because she just happened to be there minding her own business.

so - if you're engaged in violence, esp with a mob, it's ok to shoot and kill you.

except if you're in portand burning down gov buildings, then it's jackbooted thugs daring to haul you away for a bit and find out what is going on.

you warp situations to fit your own reality and at every opportunity, fail to acknowledge how these standards YOU SET should be applied to all. with you, you cite an extreme stance and when time to hold that same stance to yourself, cry out FOUL and scream how different the situation is.

if you're going to say how things should be, live it yourself.

It is these, fueled by the evergrowing pile of conspiracy theories, that has made believe it is impossible to have a debate because not only do we no longer share the same definition of "fact" we don't share the same definition of right and wrong. Your oresponses keep coming down to "the other side is worse". No. just no.

do, we sure do not have the same definition of fact.

fact - russia was complete bullshit and trump demonized
fact - the DOJ is currently completely weaponized and going after anyone and everyone who speaks out against them

both of those are facts you will find some way to twist or justify because you find validation for your hate in that. my emotions have no bearing on facts but they drive your own interpretation of them.

in that light, we are night and day.

in the end, we cannot debate or talk about these things because of what your yourself said - and i'll repeast:

Until we get past that one major fallacy, we have NO common ground or shared reality upon which to engage in discussion.

which to me screams AGREE WITH ME OR WE CAN'T TALK! the common ground *could* be there. you simply refuse because of your emotional stake in this.

You see - these differences, TO ME, are WHY we should be talking. i don't talk to force views or sell my own, i do it to learn other views and maybe change mine. maybe *that* is why we can't talk.

good day.

 

[Correll]

Until we get past that one major fallacy, we have NO common ground or shared reality upon which to engage in discussion.

sounds like i must see it the way you do or you won't even hear my side / understanding of it.

you calling it an attack on our capital by a group of people who had no guns is funny to me. its either the worst "planned attack" in the history of mankind or a situation that was not initially an attack but got out of hand.


now i never said it happened, now did i? this is you inventing my side of the story because i don't make this my #1 bullet and no "nah nah nah" to any other options.

now, are we going to simply keep making lists of what the other person dismisses? this will be fun.

keep in mind you yourself said we had enough video and nancy didn't need to provide ALL video. would you agree ALL DATA is needed to arrive at a fair conclusion?
no = hear my facts
yes = you could be wrong.

which is it?

so - if you're engaged in violence, esp with a mob, it's ok to shoot and kill you.

except if you're in portand burning down gov buildings, then it's jackbooted thugs daring to haul you away for a bit and find out what is going on.

you warp situations to fit your own reality and at every opportunity, fail to acknowledge how these standards YOU SET should be applied to all. with you, you cite an extreme stance and when time to hold that same stance to yourself, cry out FOUL and scream how different the situation is.

if you're going to say how things should be, live it yourself.

do, we sure do not have the same definition of fact.

fact - russia was complete bullshit and trump demonized
fact - the DOJ is currently completely weaponized and going after anyone and everyone who speaks out against them

both of those are facts you will find some way to twist or justify because you find validation for your hate in that. my emotions have no bearing on facts but they drive your own interpretation of them.

in that light, we are night and day.

in the end, we cannot debate or talk about these things because of what your yourself said - and i'll repeast:

Until we get past that one major fallacy, we have NO common ground or shared reality upon which to engage in discussion.

which to me screams AGREE WITH ME OR WE CAN'T TALK! the common ground *could* be there. you simply refuse because of your emotional stake in this.

You see - these differences, TO ME, are WHY we should be talking. i don't talk to force views or sell my own, i do it to learn other views and maybe change mine. maybe *that* is why we can't talk.

good day.

iceberg, coyote, I want both of you to understand I consider that, to be an epic win.

 

[Stann]

Until we get past that one major fallacy, we have NO common ground or shared reality upon which to engage in discussion.

sounds like i must see it the way you do or you won't even hear my side / understanding of it.

you calling it an attack on our capital by a group of people who had no guns is funny to me. its either the worst "planned attack" in the history of mankind or a situation that was not initially an attack but got out of hand.


now i never said it happened, now did i? this is you inventing my side of the story because i don't make this my #1 bullet and no "nah nah nah" to any other options.

now, are we going to simply keep making lists of what the other person dismisses? this will be fun.

keep in mind you yourself said we had enough video and nancy didn't need to provide ALL video. would you agree ALL DATA is needed to arrive at a fair conclusion?
no = hear my facts
yes = you could be wrong.

which is it?

so - if you're engaged in violence, esp with a mob, it's ok to shoot and kill you.

except if you're in portand burning down gov buildings, then it's jackbooted thugs daring to haul you away for a bit and find out what is going on.

you warp situations to fit your own reality and at every opportunity, fail to acknowledge how these standards YOU SET should be applied to all. with you, you cite an extreme stance and when time to hold that same stance to yourself, cry out FOUL and scream how different the situation is.

if you're going to say how things should be, live it yourself.

do, we sure do not have the same definition of fact.

fact - russia was complete bullshit and trump demonized
fact - the DOJ is currently completely weaponized and going after anyone and everyone who speaks out against them

both of those are facts you will find some way to twist or justify because you find validation for your hate in that. my emotions have no bearing on facts but they drive your own interpretation of them.

in that light, we are night and day.

in the end, we cannot debate or talk about these things because of what your yourself said - and i'll repeast:

Until we get past that one major fallacy, we have NO common ground or shared reality upon which to engage in discussion.

which to me screams AGREE WITH ME OR WE CAN'T TALK! the common ground *could* be there. you simply refuse because of your emotional stake in this.

You see - these differences, TO ME, are WHY we should be talking. i don't talk to force views or sell my own, i do it to learn other views and maybe change mine. maybe *that* is why we can't talk.

good day.

There were two groups of people there on January 6th. The fools who thought they were being patriotic and followed Trump. Plus another group with very definite plans to overthrow the government headed by the so-called oath keepers. Then you understand what happened. They led to charge on the Capitol. They had weapons as a backup if needed. They came prepared with body armor, wrist restraints and we're actually ready to kill. Thank GOD they didn't have the opportunity.

 

[Correll]

There were two groups of people there on January 6th. The fools who thought they were being patriotic and followed Trump. Plus another group with very definite plans to overthrow the government headed by the so-called oath keepers. Then you understand what happened. They led to charge on the Capitol. They had weapons as a backup if needed. They came prepared with body armor, wrist restraints and we're actually ready to kill. Thank GOD they didn't have the opportunity.

That is stupid. Weapons as BACKUP? Miles away? That really dumb.

Your entire claim is stupid.

 

[iceberg]

There were two groups of people there on January 6th. The fools who thought they were being patriotic and followed Trump. Plus another group with very definite plans to overthrow the government headed by the so-called oath keepers. Then you understand what happened. They led to charge on the Capitol. They had weapons as a backup if needed. They came prepared with body armor, wrist restraints and we're actually ready to kill. Thank GOD they didn't have the opportunity.

All evidence

I am pretty clear on that. That only fucknuggests saying we don't need it all are the assholes trying to sell me something.

Fuck off.

 

[Coyote]

If she were a lefty, shot by police, especially if she was black and the cop white,


your viewpoint would be exactly the opposite.

Nope. Not in the least. ANYONE doing what she did risked getting shot. Interesting that you make distinctions. People don’t always fit in your neat little pigeonholes.

 

[Correll]

Nope. Not in the least. ANYONE doing what she did risked getting shot. Interesting that you make distinctions. People don’t always fit in your neat little pigeonholes.

Plenty of times, various "unarmed" black criminals doing shit far worse than what she did, and the Left supported the criminal.


Remember that Trevon Martin? The NO LIMIT NIGGA? He was beating a man "MMA style" when he got his ass shot, and you people acted like he was just an innocent child, walking home with his skittles.


Or, what about the murderous lunatic child rapist that attacked and tried to kill Rittenhouse? He expressing stated in public hin intent to commit murder, and you people arrested and tried his would be victim.


Your denial, AT BEST, reveals a complete lack of self knowledge.

 

[the other mike]

Who supported those who rioted during the Floyd protests? I’m willing to bet very few and certainly not the mainstream.

No one called them patriots.
No one called them political prisoners.
No one said they were in a gulag.


Which has nothing to do with J6 or the Floyd riots. Not a only that, he’s dead. He couldn’t speak up for himself as to what transpired. We will never really know. We only have one man’s word.

That case was far from straight forward. You can’t go around killing unarmed people and not expect to be held accountable or freed through the legal process. Did anyone call these guys patriots? Oh Ya. Rittenhouse.


You can’t come with anything. Martin was long before Floyd. The arguments over Rittenhouse were not about defending rioters.

Why is Epps still free ?
MTG leaves Pelosi Speakless.

 

[Coyote]

Plenty of times, various "unarmed" black criminals doing shit far worse than what she did, and the Left supported the criminal.

Who supported those who rioted during the Floyd protests? I’m willing to bet very few and certainly not the mainstream.

No one called them patriots.
No one called them political prisoners.
No one said they were in a gulag.

Remember that Trevon Martin? The NO LIMIT NIGGA? He was beating a man "MMA style" when he got his ass shot, and you people acted like he was just an innocent child, walking home with his skittles.

Which has nothing to do with J6 or the Floyd riots. Not a only that, he’s dead. He couldn’t speak up for himself as to what transpired. We will never really know. We only have one man’s word.

Or, what about the murderous lunatic child rapist that attacked and tried to kill Rittenhouse? He expressing stated in public hin intent to commit murder, and you people arrested and tried his would be victim.

That case was far from straight forward. You can’t go around killing unarmed people and not expect to be held accountable or freed through the legal process. Did anyone call these guys patriots? Oh Ya. Rittenhouse.

Your denial, AT BEST, reveals a complete lack of self knowledge.

You can’t come with anything. Martin was long before Floyd. The arguments over Rittenhouse were not about defending rioters.

 

[Stann]

That is stupid. Weapons as BACKUP? Miles away? That really dumb.

Your entire claim is stupid.

I agree but that's what these stupid idiots did.

 

[Correll]

Who supported those who rioted during the Floyd protests? I’m willing to bet very few and certainly not the mainstream.

No one called them patriots.
No one called them political prisoners.
No one said they were in a gulag.

The VP worked to get them bail. That is certainly supporting them. Many mayors ordered cops to stand down during various illegal "protests". At least two people defending their home were arrested.

YOu are just incorrect.

Which has nothing to do with J6 or the Floyd riots. Not a only that, he’s dead. He couldn’t speak up for himself as to what transpired. We will never really know. We only have one man’s word.

Says the lib convienently forgetting that there was an eyewitness. And thus siding with the criminal. Yes, it had nothing to do with teh Floyd riots, my point was clearly about your lefty reflext to side with the criminal. Which was my original point. If 1/6 was a lefty riot, you would be siding with the "unarmed" woman.

That case was far from straight forward. You can’t go around killing unarmed people and not expect to be held accountable or freed through the legal process. Did anyone call these guys patriots? Oh Ya. Rittenhouse.

Sure it was. THe video clearly showed a mob attacking a young man, and him defending himself. That even after we heard of the STATMENT OF INTENT TO COMMITT MURDER, by the insane child rapist, you people still sided with the criminals.

Oh, and "unarmed"? LOL. Thanks for making my point.

You can’t come with anything. Martin was long before Floyd. The arguments over Rittenhouse were not about defending rioters.

It shows the normal bias of the Left for the lawbreaker, and against the keepers of civilization.

The primary differnece of 1/6, is NOT that place of the riot, but the political leaning of the rioters.


You people support crime and violence, especially when it is political, IF IT LOOKS TO BE ON YOUR SIDE, OR AT LEAST BY AN ALLY.

 

[Correll]

I agree but that's what these stupid idiots did.

Nope. That is YOUR stupid take on their actions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is these, fueled by the evergrowing pile of conspiracy theories, that has made believe it is impossible to have a debate because not only do we no longer share the same definition of "fact" we don't share the same definition of right and wrong.

Correct.

‘Debate’ is pointless and futile with conservatives who refuse to acknowledge the facts of 1/6:

“The cumulative effect of all the Jan. 6 hearings, culminating in Thursday's wrap-up of the central narrative, has made clear that Donald Trump set up the coup before the election, was personally involved in the various attempts to execute it, understood that violence was possible on Jan. 6, and incited the crowd to storm the Capitol and refused to take any action to stop them. Everything that happened came at his direction and was done in his name.”

Trump planned and directed the whole damn thing: Can anyone deny it?

Final Jan. 6 committee hearing yields no blockbusters but a clear narrative: It was all planned in advance. By him

www.salon.com

And the right’s attack on America’s democracy continues – with conservatives’ reprehensible defense of the January 6th domestic terrorists, with the right’s continued support of Trump, and with conservatives’ campaign of misinformation and lies intended to undermine the political process and destroy our democratic institutions.