Yes, by the instruction of our incoming president they attempted an insurrection.

The fact they didn’t bring weapons proves that is false.

This statement is, of course, false. They did bring weapons.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/07/08/jan6-defe...

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/missouri-man-sentenced-fe...

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters...

>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:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jan-6-de...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/trump-su...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jan-6-ri...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jan-6-ri...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/capitol-...

None of the links say they brought a loaded gun into the capitol.

It's America. Guns are cheap and easy to obtain. Thousands of protesters could have easily marched into the capitol armed-- but they didn't. Why?

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.

If you watched the video where Babbit got shot, there was literally a man in the corner of the hallway with a rifle and camo

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 do you think that question is relevant at all.

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.

There is a massive difference between random Americans being armed and an actual coup of armed soldiers.

Which one was JAN6?

If you haven’t already, look at any other coup attempt from Turkey to Russia and you’ll find the answer fairly easily.

This is provably false -Donald Trump stated that there should be no violence multiple times on January 6. If you have evidence, otherwise please state it here.

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.

> 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.

People in the white house did tell him, we know this from testimony under oath. He refused to do anything until it failed.

> 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 it 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.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-capitol-probes-season-fi...

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.

He also said “let’s all march to the capitol” and wanted to walk with them until the secret service stopped him

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.

Is that why they kept beating up cops?

> Egging the protesters on on Twitter

No. This is false. Trump specifically called for law and order at the protests twice on Jan 6th.

I saw people beating up cops on TV, and now he’s promised to pardon them.

That does not address the comment you are replying to, which I presume means you also know that Trump’s calls for peace on January 6 are fact.

More than 1500 people were charged for the Jan 6 riot. Trump has indicated there will be exceptions.

Words are not always confined to their literal meaning. You need to read about the concepts of powertalk and the big lie.

Trump says many things and not all of them are true.

They were simply chanting “hang Mike pence” because it sounded nice I'm sure.

Ah yes, the protests of 2020. Known for their love of and appreciation of all our politicians.

There's a credible organization.