FBI confirms there was no insurrection on Jan. 6

submitted by Questionable from washingtonexaminer.com

all 10 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Alienhunter 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Was clearly a riot. But calling it an "insurrection" is very much calling a deer a horse.

I must laugh at the people who think that at any point it actually threatened the workings of government. Average citizen is too Hollywood brained. They probably think that if the "insurrectionists" somehow manage to grab the magic gavel of Congress they can use it to summon the founding fathers and enact whatever legislation you want.

I mean there was literally some guy in a Buffalo hat chanting nonsense. You can't fight the government with magic spells and incantations. It's like when the British burned down the white house in 1812. Nobody gave a fuck. Oh no a building burned down! The source to the presidents divine power is severed. Lol.

[–]twolanterns 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Was clearly a riot

and more violence takes place at your average Black Friday Sale

[–]PIPESOCKS 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

They were in possession of bear spray and pocket knives.

If it was an armed attack, they would have had firearms.. pistols, shotguns, etc.

They were invited in to tour the White House during the inauguration..

The insurrection did not happen, but vote fraud did happen.

[–]SoCo 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A conspiracy theory:

The Proud Boys' leader, who is of a minority race, was suspiciously and of questionable Constitutionality banned from protesting shortly beforehand.

While the leader was jailed and court ordered away, a frequent protester known for flip-flopping sides (BLM+Pro-Trump), who was widely suspected of being involved with law enforcement, and a blatant violence provocateur at the protests, got involved with the Proud Boys.

Suspicion is easily aroused that this guy, who is not a Proud Boy, may be the confidential informant in the Proud Boys court charges, who is not only the only one who is accused of making violent threats or illegal plans within the Proud Boys group (aside from stealing a cop shield and breaking a window), but also the one who co-opted their efforts and swiped away recruited volunteers from their staging chat rooms and took over before the event, reminiscent of recent dirty FBI crime setups.

The only serious accusations against the Proud Boys are against the words and actions of the non-member who had recently got involved, co-opted it, and then turned confidential informant...on his self...and also appears not to have been charged/convicted.

This suspicion is about Jayden-X, aka John Earle Sullivan, the YouTube protest provocateur, who took the infamous picture of the unarmed protester, Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt, being murdered on Jan 6 by Capitol Security.

Sullivan was paid handsomely for news talk show interviews and for rights to use his picture of the murder. Then, realizing they may have paid for fruits of a crime, many news agencies freaked out. CNN even lied pretending he was a photographer for them. Eventually, courts forced him to give most money back and ruled it illegal to accept/give it.

More details and sources about this theory

[–]twolanterns 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

dem choreographed stampeding past constitutional process of valid challenges to a swindled election

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Wow and what did the oath keepers' lawyers say when you showed them this Cambridge law dictionary definition was proof their clients would go free? I guess Stuart Rhodes will be out any day now, then?

I mean, you've proven it, vicariously, by comparing an FBI statement to the Cambridge dictionary, and what better proof could there be?

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Were they charged with treason then?

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Here's what the article says

Reuters does note that some “cells of protesters,” including members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, did coordinate to “break into the Capitol,” but the FBI found “no evidence that the groups had serious plans about what to do if they made it inside.”

This is a laughable "true Scotsman" fallacy because I can tell you exactly what treason they had planned with Roger Stone and Trump.

They believed that Trump would swear them in as a new militia, at which point they would bring their weapons caches from Maryland into the capital.

This article is a lie premised on the word "serious".

"Sure they had a treasonous insurrection planned, sure the conspired to sedition - but it wasn't serious!

"And because I've decided it wasn't serious - I'm allowed to say that the FBI believes it didn't happen "

It's all a lie to make rightist readers feel like Jan 6th was a democrat stitch-up, instead of the terroristic outcome which is the natural culmination of four years under trump

[–]ShekelPa 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It is the same stupid ass government that you people deify

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's only one federal government in America my friend. And my people are very clear about separating the church from the state