Many of the pardoned individuals have video evidence of assaulting police with weapons and claim to be part of organizations diametrically opposed to BLM, Antifa, and the FBI. Are they:
1. Lying, masquerading as Trump supporters in deep cover for many years (secretly a part of the organizations you're blaming, despite playing part in an attempted coup that would have opposed those organizations and despite no evidence of such multi-year subterfuge)
2. Framed (mind you, AI is wishy-washy for video even now, and it wasn't good enough then)
3. Innocent for some other reason despite their violent actions
There aren't a lot of options that make tasing and trampling cops while heavily armed and overrunning the White House look good. Even republican congressmen, whose careers partially depend on not pissing off Trump, are happy to publicly decry those pardons, no matter how they feel about the rest of the executive orders. Every Trump supporter I've talked to so far (except, perhaps, you) has agreed that was a step too far (though they're all still optimistic about the presidency overall).
What, exactly, about those pardons was appropriate? If I stormed your house with guns and trampled the police blocking my way, would that make me an American hero for defending the right to free speech?
You are not a serious person.
As for the pardons, many were just commutations. They did 3 years or whatever in prison by now. And many full pardons were just misdemeanors for trespassing or whatever anyway. It make more sense to focus on specific people who were violent and got away with nothing.
- most of the pardoned people did no such thing
- there’s irregularities in the prosecution, including not providing evidence, for which the normal remedy is acquittal (as in the Baldwin shooting case)
- time held without prosecution is excessive for many of the alleged crimes, such as trespassing
- the primary charge utilized (interfering in a process) was ruled by the Supreme Court to be total nonsense by the prosecutors clearly misinterpreting the law
- the FBI concluded there was no insurrection or planned attack
- one of the people we have on video urging people to go into the Capitol, including at the perimeter fence as crowd overran it, was mysteriously removed from the FBI wanted list and never prosecuted
- Democrat aligned mobs routinely invade the Capitol building without facing similar charges
- not directly related, but the Congressional panel investigating the matter deleted their records and accepted pardons for their actions, which according to the Supreme Court is an admission of guilt
All of that together points to a prosecution more akin to a modern Reichstag Fire than justice. When considering in the broader context of the year, where billions in arson attacks and dozens of murders by Democrat aligned street gangs weren’t prosecuted, the harsh prosecutions of people who merely attended the event and walked around without causing harm gives a strong indication this was politically motivated.
It’s the internet, can you link to some concrete instances where they did this? Were Congress people forced to retreat when they did it (assuming your claim is that they were roughly similar in extremity?)?
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/31/politics/trump-undergroun...
They interrupted a proceeding two weeks ago.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5087021-protesters-trump...
They fought with police a few months ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIbMhuo1F78
They occupied part of the building until arrested last year.
https://www.npr.org/2024/07/24/nx-s1-5050443/capitol-buildin...
For their large scale violence, Democrat mobs prefer to target civilians — eg, their live-streamed murder of Antonio Mays Jr, by a militia that first fought police and then seized a city park. As part of a coordinated attack on dozens of cities resulting in over seventy murders.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/everybody-down-wha...
None of that resulted in anywhere near the charges of a protest by Republicans that turned riot when police tear gassed a peaceful crowd.
Also, disrupting a public hearing open to the public, definitely rude but not actually illegal.
The Gaza protesters were arrested for refusing to leave the capitol, but didn’t force their way into congressional offices nor did they threaten any congress people. Still wrong which is why they got arrested, I guess, but not the same as an insurrection.
I lived in Seattle during CHOP (well, I still live in Ballard), but I never got over to Capitol Hill to experience it (we go downtown a lot, but never Capitol Hill unless it’s hospital related). I don’t think they were any position to overthrow the government though.
Thanks for linking though, and I didn’t downvote you. It’s always nice to know what the right is referring to when they say “the left does it also!” We can compare the behavior of the two sides head on at least.
One group used weapons to seize an area for multiple days, including acts of murder to defend their ill-gotten territory; one didn’t.
Neither made an attempt to “overthrow the government”.
> when you just protest outside of the white house and don’t actually do anything illegal
They rioted and attacked the gate imposing enough threat the president had to flee to a bunker. They also assaulted the security there.
From the article you clearly didn’t actually read:
> The decision to physically move the President came as protesters confronted Secret Service officers outside the White House for hours on Friday – shouting, throwing water bottles and other objects at the line of officers, and attempting to break through the metal barriers.
I find it interesting that you minimize when people aligned with your policies attempt the same crimes — assaulting police, attempting to break into a secured government building, and forcing politicians to flee.
Truth is whatever you want it to be!