It absolutely was and there's extensive documentation on who paid for it and how it came about.

It was if the BLM riots of the previous summer count as well. There doesn't seem to be a difference when looking at the two of them subjectively.

It wasn't even terror.

Trump's and Giuliani's incessant campaign can be seen as domestic terror: "to intimidate and coerce a civilian population", "to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion". The capitol "tourist visit" were boots on the ground, and can themselves be seen as both terrorists and victims of terror. They were intimidated and coerced by trump ("your country will be taken from you unless you fight like hell", etc.) into themselves using force and violence to coerce congress into overthrowing the vote certification. Ultimately DOJ and the courts will settle this discussion.

5 people died as a result.

Would you say this is an honest statement, or an intentionally misleading one?

Follow up question - with thousands of hours of footage of the events, has anybody been charged with any murders?

Last question, why would you post an intentionally misleading statement like that, do you think it helps your argument or hurts it?

The comment you're replying to is an example of what they meant by Trump derangement syndrome. People convince themselves of things that are blatantly just not accurate because "orange man bad".

Quantity of death should have no impact on whether something is terror or not. 10 people died at Astroworld, that was obviously not a terror attack. If the Boston bombings had merely injured people instead of killed them--or even if it had miraculously failed and hurt no one--we would obviously still call that a terror attack. No one is going to be scared to visit the Capitol on January 6, 2022 or 2023, unlike how people were afraid to go to las vegas or the Boston marathon after the attacks.

Mostly rioters or suicide later.