> which is to say a bunch of crazy people dressed up as Indians and cowboys who thought that storming a building means controlling a country.

I don't know why people are still pushing this narrative when the hearings have made it perfectly clear at this point that there was orchestration and support among the government, Capitol police and likely even the Secret Service. The "crazy people dressed up as Indians and cowboys" were useful idiots meant to make the whole thing seem like a clumsy farce.

If we want to see what a insurrection look like, let take a look at the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt. There were tanks taking control of airports, people abducted by military splinter groups, buildings bombed by military helicopters, town squared occupied by military troops, TV stations taken, and attacks on government positions occurred in multiple cities. Multiple generals was involved.

We can also observe the reaction (overreaction) that turkey had to the coup, and how the world perceived those actions.

Now compare that to what ever secret conspiracy that led to a bunch of useful idiots making a clumsy farce. How realistic is it that those events will be the start of an US civil war?

>I don't know why people are still pushing this narrative when the hearings have made it perfectly clear at this point that there was orchestration and support among the government, Capitol police and likely even the Secret Service.

Nobody takes the hearings seriously since they're political theatre. But if what you say is true, I definitely look forward to those people in government and the secret service to be charged with treason or sedition. It's been 18 months, so when should we expect that to happen?