After years of research, our mole discovered that "militia" members liked to dress in plus-sized camo and shoot legally-owned ARs on private property...
That description could fit a group of friends having wholesome fun, or a private army being raised with the goal of taking territory. These groups are somewhere in between, but closer to the latter. The main mitigating factor is that they’re usually pretty incompetent.
He sat in the White House watching the violence unfold on fox news for hours egging the protestors on on twitter while leaving Mike Pence to be hung while he very likely could have stopped the violence with a few tweets. Instead, he waited until it was clear that they already failed. We all saw it live on tv and Jack Smith's investigation brought out the details. Unfortunately, he was not permitted by the supreme court to provide his evidence.
You are spreading misinformation, as did most of the news media and politicians that manufactured outrageous claims about J6. That’s not the quote. Trump literally used the word “peacefully” in the same sentence when he called for the (planned) march. He did not call for illegal actions or violence at any point. This is well known now, so your made up false quote is a lie.
> very likely could have stopped the violence with a few tweets.
That he didn't was repugnant and a dereliction of duty, but even if he had, do you honestly think that mob would have done anything different? People in groups don't think normally, that's pretty well studied and established; I don't think it would have made one whit of difference.
But he should have tried; I'm surprised someone didn't even tell him to just for the optics of it.
> I'm surprised someone didn't even tell him to just for the optics of it.
White house staff and Trump's family members were urging him to do something while he was enjoying watching the show unfold on TV. I'm unsure of where you live but the truly surprising thing is many people in the US aren't aware of this.
One of the more disturbing parts of seeing him back in office is going to be knowing that a lot of this malfeasance is just not known by the general public.
> That he didn't was repugnant and a dereliction of duty
But Trump did call for peace twice on January 6. The tweets are publicly available. The idea that he did not is a conspiracy theory similar to the very fine people hoax.
>But I don't blame you for believing the protesters carried weapons into the capitol. it's because of the intentional framing of the media and the government.
They literally did carry weapons into the capital. There are many instances of this. People have been tried and convicted on those charges. You can literally see weapons present on them in pictures:
First of all, you're moving the goalposts from "weapon" to "loaded gun".
Second of all, you said that "none" of those articles say that the guns were loaded, but the first one I just checked did literally specify that the gun was loaded, and a second one did specify that video evidence shows he had actually fired the gun, so obviously it was in fact loaded.
>Federal prosecutors said that Mazza, "while armed with [a] .40 caliber *loaded* firearm, engaged in multiple efforts to break through the police line: he repeatedly pushed against officers using the combined physical exertion of the mob; he armed himself with a stolen police baton and assaulted officers with the baton; he yelled at officers telling them to get out the mob’s way and to 'Get out of our house!'; he held open the door to the tunnel entrance against the resistance of officers, and after being rebuffed, he gathered additional rioters into the tunnel area to continue 'heave-ho' pushes against officers in the doorway."
...
>The FBI affidavit said that the footage published by Evans, as well as CCTV footage highlighted by NBC News last month, showed Banuelos "raising the gun over his head, and, at approximately 2:34 p.m., firing two shots into the air."
Third, even if the articles didn't literally say the guns were loaded, the lack of the word "loaded" in the article isn't a good reason to assume the guns weren't loaded.
There's not a single indictment of any protester for possession of a rifle inside the capitol.
This is America. Guns are cheap and easy to obtain. They could have all marched into the open doors of the capitol armed but they didn't. Why do you think that is?
Why you wrapping it in all of these conditionals? Why does it matter whether the many people with firearms went inside the capital itself or if they just helped other break through the police barricades outside the capital, which they did? Why are you making a distinction between whether someone with "a rifle" was caught inside or any other type of firearm?
There were many people verified to have brought firearms onto capital grounds, and several of those people tried to get inside the capital building itself, and there may well have been others that succeeded. Or not. Either way, there is little difference.
