Democrat terrorists released by the hundreds while every 1/6 protester faces prison

[LV426]

No wonder you didn't go to DC on 1/6; you can't even stand behind your posts on JPP...

[artichoke]

No wonder you didn't go to DC on 1/6; you can't even stand behind your posts on JPP...

Pathological LV426 Lunacy #1

Problems with the moronic fallacy you are relentlessly spamming this site with about how only domestic terrorists can object to election theft:

-It is invalid logic. It is an ad hominem fallacy (trying to shift the debate to attacking the debater personally instead of attacking their argument) as well as a non-sequiter fallacy (the logic simply does not follow).

-You don't get to arbitrarily invent rules about how people are allowed to respond to a given problem and then psychotically harass them about it for 50 pages straight on a thread that has nothing to do with your absurd fallacy in the first place. Different people can have different solutions to the same problem. Not that it is any of your business how anyone chooses to respond to election theft.

-But even playing along with the obviously stupid and invalid "logic" that if you didn't attack the Capitol Building, then you cannot possibly disagree with the election being stolen, what about poor people, people who live far away, injured people, sick people, people who just had a death in the family, people who had jury duty or who were in jail? Can THEY not have attacked the Capitol Building and still have some random online idiot's permission to disagree?

-It is an idiotic attempt to taunt, goad, and troll anyone who disagrees with election theft. No one is ever going to think this ridiculous line of reasoning is compelling. It is completely ineffective and makes you look childish, obnoxious, and dense.

-By this garbage logic, every Democrat is a coward for peddling the most hysterical conspiracy theories about President Trump being a secret Russian agent and them not responding by invading the White House. Even addressing something so clearly ludicrous seems beneath anything to which any member of this site should ever be expected to subject themselves.

[LV426]

Pathological LV426 Lunacy #1

Problems with the moronic fallacy you are relentlessly spamming this site with about how only domestic terrorists can object to election theft:

-It is invalid logic. It is an ad hominem fallacy (trying to shift the debate to attacking the debater personally instead of attacking their argument) as well as a non-sequiter fallacy (the logic simply does not follow).

-You don't get to arbitrarily invent rules about how people are allowed to respond to a given problem and then psychotically harass them about it for 50 pages straight on a thread that has nothing to do with your absurd fallacy in the first place. Different people can have different solutions to the same problem. Not that it is any of your business how anyone chooses to respond to election theft.

-But even playing along with the obviously stupid and invalid "logic" that if you didn't attack the Capitol Building, then you cannot possibly disagree with the election being stolen, what about poor people, people who live far away, injured people, sick people, people who just had a death in the family, people who had jury duty or who were in jail? Can THEY not have attacked the Capitol Building and still have some random online idiot's permission to disagree?

-It is an idiotic attempt to taunt, goad, and troll anyone who disagrees with election theft. No one is ever going to think this ridiculous line of reasoning is compelling. It is completely ineffective and makes you look childish, obnoxious, and dense.

-By this garbage logic, every Democrat is a coward for peddling the most hysterical conspiracy theories about President Trump being a secret Russian agent and them not responding by invading the White House. Even addressing something so clearly ludicrous seems beneath anything to which any member of this site should ever be expected to subject themselves.

I answered this whole thing you stole from someone else on this thread and you avoided it like you avoided DC on 1/6.

[Nordberg]

This may be the single most hilariously stupid thing I may have ever read someone post on this site with a straight face.

Burning down cities over self-defense is...to make us follow the Constitution?

I suppose violently silencing everyone who disagrees with them...was to restore free speech?

And extorting businesses for money with death threats...was to restore property rights?

Do they also have sex to increase their virginity?

What cities were burned down? Can you even get near the truth. The reds, your peeps, tried to overthrow the government and install a liar to the throne. It would have been a throne because they were trying to make it so elections do not matter unless the right wing approves of the results. Barr and McConnell admitted the election was fair and one of them should tell Trump that. There has not been a more serious threat to the existence of America since 1812. Blacks demonstrating were no threat to the country. None, zero. The significance of 1-6 will be proclaimed if history as long as America survives, assuming it does. It will not if you rightys succeed.
You must know better than you are posting. Why are you doing it?

[LV426]

What cities were burned down? Can you even get near the truth. The reds, your peeps, tried to overthrow the government and install a liar to the throne. It would have been a throne because they were trying to make it so elections do not matter unless the right wing approves of the results. Barr and McConnell admitted the election was fair and one of them should tell Trump that. There has not been a more serious threat to the existence of America since 1812. Blacks demonstrating were no threat to the country. None, zero. The significance of 1-6 will be proclaimed if history as long as America survives, assuming it does. It will not if you rightys succeed.
You must know better than you are posting. Why are you doing it?

Don't expect anything more than a litany of plagiarized responses.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

I do? Thanks for informing me of what I think.

You posted this as the title of the thread you started.

Democrat terrorists released by the hundreds while every 1/6 protester faces prison.

Every has a very specific meaning it means all. It means that not a single one of the 1/6 protestors would be sentenced to probation alone. And yet when you look at the indictments, only about 15% of them are for felonies. The rest are for misdemeanors where the maximum sentence is less than a year and the sentencing guidelines are that if one doesn't have a prior conviction they would not get jail time. So clearly you think 15% means all. Either that or you do not know the definitions of common words.

Then you ignore that one person has already been sentenced for their actions on 1/6 and they received no jail time. If EVERY person faces prison then how can one member of that group not be going to prison?

So the correct answer is that "Yes, you do think that." as evidenced by your repeated false claims. Unless you want to argue that you are delusional and don't know what you are posting. I suppose that is the other possibility.

[artichoke]

I answered this whole thing you stole from someone else on this thread and you avoided it like you avoided DC on 1/6.

Still waiting for proof that SOMEONE ELSE OTHER THAN ME wrote the detailed description of the flaws in your arguments that you are making TO ME. Why WOULD someone else write out the flaws in an argument that you're making to ME?

So not only are you a jaw-droppingly idiotic imbecile for not comprehending the obvious lunacy of your plagiarism claim, but you are also a blatant fucking liar for REPEATEDLY refusing to post proof of this lie.

Next 50-post "pretend away my defeat" tantrum please.

[artichoke]

What cities were burned down? Can you even get near the truth.

I mean, setting entire sections of cities on fire for four years straight is obviously what's being referred to as "burning cities down." Really, THAT'S what your big "counterpoint" is? Splitting hairs over whether burning down a downtown area technically qualifies as burning an ENTIRE city down?

You got me. I stand corrected.

The reds...

The Reds were foreign communists at war with our country...the people DEMOCRATS aided at every turn. Try not to falsely project your treason onto others.

your peeps, tried to overthrow the government and install a liar to the throne.

1) Every time you accuse President Trump of lying or doing something wrong, it turns out to be YOU who is lying, parroting conspiracy theorist lunatic misinformation from tabloid trash "journalists" like Rachel Maddow.

-the "Trump gassed protesters to give a speech" hoax
-the Russia collusion hoax
-the "Trump told people to drink Lysol" hoax
-the Covington Catholic hoax
-the Charlottesville "very fine people" hoax
-the Roy Moore pedophile hoax
-the Kavanaugh rape gang hoax
-the "repealing Net Neutrality will destroy the Internet" hoax
-the Hydroxchloroquine hoax
-the Jussie Smollett hoax
-the "Investigating Biden's corruption is worse than Biden BEING corrupt" hoax
-the Ukraine transcript hoax
-the Duke Lacrosse team hoax
-the Trayvon Martin hoax
-the "uninsured crisis" hoax
-the multitude of college hate crime hoaxes
-the "deceptively edited video" Planned Parenthood hoax
-the "children in cages" hoax
-the Michael Cohen perjury/contacting the Russians hoaxes
-the SPLC "hate group" hoax
-the "Trump mocking people with disabilities" hoax
-the "you can keep your doctor" hoax
-the "immigrants are rapists, criminals, animals" hoax
-the Kavanaugh "white power symbol" hoax
-the "Trump asked Putin to hack the DNC" hoax
-the polar bear dying from climate change hoax
-the "Trump made it easier for the mentally ill to purchase guns" hoax
-the Scaramucci Russian bankers hoax
-the "Muslim ban" hoax
-the global warming "consensus" hoax
-the "Obama's scandal-free presidency" hoax
-the Trump Jr. WikiLeaks hoax
-the Iran nuclear appeasement hoax
-the "polls show Trump will lose" hoax
-the "Obamacare will never fund abortions or illegal immigrants" hoax
-the "Hillary exonerated" hoax
-the "white privilege" hoax
-the voter suppression hoax
-the "hands up don't shoot" hoax
-the "Trump called soldiers losers" hoax
-the "peaceful protesters" hoax
-the "Trump used a Nazi eagle" hoax
-the "Trump ignored Russia putting bounties on U.S. soldiers" hoax
-the coronavirus hoax
-the "Trump used a Nazi red triangle" hoax
-the "Trump admitted to sexual assault" hoax
-the "penises cause climate change" hoax
-the "Trump denying passports to Latinos" hoax
-the "Mission Accomplished" hoax



2) Stop stealing elections and the American people will stop revolting. It's pretty straightforward.

It would have been a throne because they were trying to make it so elections do not matter unless the right wing approves of the results.

Say the Democrat enemies of democracy who:

-silenced and censored their opponents right before a major national election.

-relentlessly suppressed bombshell Democrat scandals from being talked about.

-rioted, looted, and burned down the country to terrorize and silence all dissent.

-staged fake town halls with "undecided voters" who constantly turned out to be Democrat staffers.

-demanded that we stack the Supreme Court to make elections irrelevant.

-launched hoax (Russia) after hoax (impeachment), after hoax (COVID response), after hoax (Kavanaugh gang rapist) to overthrow the 2016 election.

-protect voter fraud and help illegal immigrants fraudulently vote.

-knowingly turned Election 2020 into a train wreck of chaos and fraud through mail-in voting (we can shop and dine in public, but not vote?).

-had to plead the 5th to avoid criminal prosecution for rigging Election 2012.

-protect terrorist groups from prosecution for armed voter intimidation at the polls.

-doctored evidence, lied to a federal judge, and illegally spied to frame their opponents and steal the 2016 election.

-tried to ban anyone from disagreeing with them in public on global warming.

-advocated assassinating or overthrowing by force politicians they disagreed with.

-screamed at the sky in the streets in vagina hats like deranged lunatics over losing an election.

-rioted, burned things down, blocked traffic, and assaulted people for disagreeing with them.

-called on citizens to harass, intimidate, and assault their opponents.

-invented fake #Metoo hoaxes to keep their opponents from carrying out the public will.

-illegally distributed their opponents' personal information to extremist groups for harassment and intimidation.

-used the IRS and the EPA to target and hinder their opponents during a major national election.

-illegally spied on their opponents, seized media phone records, targeted journalists, and persecuted their opponents' donors.

Barr and McConnell admitted the election was fair and one of them should tell Trump that. There has not been a more serious threat to the existence of America since 1812.

Yes...

The 99% of domestic terrorism coming from Democrats (encouraged, celebrated, and funded by Democrat officials) = Nothing to see here.

And the one time the American people rose up and fought back against open election theft = The REAL threat.

Hint: You might be a brainwashed lunatic imbecile.

Blacks demonstrating were no threat to the country. None, zero.

Sure, unless you count four years straight of arson, anarchy, riots, looting, secession, doxing, hoaxes, vandalism, intimidation, gang rapist smears, mock beheadings and assassinations, coup attempts and domestic terrorism...as somehow "dangerous."

The significance of 1-6 will be proclaimed if history as long as America survives, assuming it does.

Because Democrats will mention it every five minutes for the rest of eternity, while insisting we pretend away the 99% of ACTUAL domestic terrorism committed by THEM.

It will not if you rightys succeed.

Say the traitors who:

-help illegal immigrants invade and rape our country

-steal elections

-burn down cities

-issue death threats for donating to anyone but Democrats

-dox, assault, and terrorize anyone who expresses dissent

-declare secession

-burn our flag

-ban our Pledge

-disrespect our Anthem

-tear down our monuments

-lie to school children about our history

-violate their oaths

-shred every part of the Constitution

-oppose national defense

-aid all our enemies

-betray all our allies

Might be time to lay down the crack pipe and try READING a book instead of burning them.

[artichoke]

You posted this as the title of the thread you started.

Democrat terrorists released by the hundreds while every 1/6 protester faces prison.

Still desperately clinging to fallacy this for dear life, I see.

They all WERE facing prison. Everyone they could get charges to stick to IS STILL facing prison. Hence the blatant hypocrisy of the way they are being treated vs. the way the Democrats who committed the OTHER 99% of ACTUAL domestic terrorism were treated.

Comprehend it yet?

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Still desperately clinging to fallacy this for dear life, I see.

They all WERE facing prison. Everyone they could get charges to stick to IS STILL facing prison. Hence the blatant hypocrisy of the way they are being treated vs. the way the Democrats who committed the OTHER 99% of ACTUAL domestic terrorism were treated.

Comprehend it yet?

So your argument is that everyone that is charged with a crime is facing prison even if the reality is that almost everyone that is convicted of a misdemeanor never spends time in prison? Hmmm..... who is not living in reality here?

[artichoke]

So your argument is that everyone that is charged with a crime is facing prison even if the reality is that almost everyone that is convicted of a misdemeanor never spends time in prison? Hmmm..... who is not living in reality here?

The person STILL failing to comprehend what I'm arguing (you). THAT'S who doesn't live in reality.

Again (I can break out the crayons if necessary), they sought to railroad every single one of the conservative protesters, meaning they were all facing prison. Some of those cases fell apart or they weren't able to get everything they wanted.

-Four years straight of Democrat anarchy, arson, sedition, secession, and murder: Everyone gets a pass.

-Conservatives resist treason and election theft one time: Persecuted to the ends of the Earth

"Equal protection under the law" is no longer something anyone pretends actually exists.

Not rocket science. Need it explained a fourth time?

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Again (I can break out the crayons if necessary), they sought to railroad every single one of the conservative protesters, meaning they were all facing prison. Some of those cases fell apart or they weren't able to get everything they wanted.

-Four years straight of Democrat anarchy, arson, sedition, secession, and murder: Everyone gets a pass.

-Conservatives resist treason and election theft one time: Persecuted to the ends of the Earth

"Equal protection under the law" is no longer something anyone pretends actually exists.

Not rocket science. Need it explained a fourth time?

You sure like to use hyperbole that has no basis in reality.
1. What evidence do you have of prosecutors trying to railroad anyone? A criminal indictment is not evidence of anyone being railroaded. All the indictments include evidence to show the person is guilty of the crime they were indicted for.
2. Where is your evidence that everyone got a pass for 4 years of arson? I can point you to 5 convictions for arson in Minneapolis alone.
3. Where is your evidence of anyone committing sedition that was related to Democrats?
4. Where is your evidence of any Democrat committing murder that they weren't charged with?
5. Anarchy and secession are not crimes under any law that I know of. Please cite the law that you think would allow someone to be arrested for committing these acts.

Equal protection under the law means that anyone charged with a crime has the ability to contest those charges. If the charges are not based on evidence they are often dropped. If the crime is a misdemeanor the perp is often given a fine with no jail time or allowed deferred resolution. Most of the cases you are claiming were dropped actually resulted in deferred resolution.

The insurrectionists on Jan 6th were not resisting election theft and treason. They were trying to commit it. There is no evidence that Trump lost due to fraud or theft. The court cases have all made that pretty clear as has Giuliani's law license suspension.


But then you are so far removed from reality, you don't even realize that the cases against some Jan 6 rioters have been dropped.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/0...fendant-491514

[artichoke]

You sure like to use hyperbole that has no basis in reality.
1. What evidence do you have of prosecutors trying to railroad anyone?

The fact that grandmas being allowed into the Capitol by security and taking selfies is NOTHING LIKE the last four years straight of Democrats burning cities down, storming capitals, and trying to overthrow the government...and they leave Democrats alone while throwing the book at grandma.

It doesn't get anymore obvious than that, genius.

2. Where is your evidence that everyone got a pass for 4 years of arson?

You want me to re-post the evidence of the weekly releases of Democrat terrorists by the hundreds, even for serious felonies? I will re-post it all if you promise to comprehend it this time.

It's kind of like how Giuliani is banned from practicing law for questioning the election while the two Democrat terrorists who firebombed a police cruiser are still freely practicing.

I can point you to 5 convictions for arson in Minneapolis alone.

Ah, so now we're transitioning to the game of pretending away the hundreds of Democrat terrorists released every week for serious crimes...because you found a handful that were actually held accountable.

That's not phony or disingenuous at all.

3. Where is your evidence of anyone committing sedition that was related to Democrats?

'Put a bullet in Donald Trump': Watch 2 minutes of Dem threats of violence against president

CBS drama 'The Good Fight' sparks outrage tweeting 'Assassinate,' 'President,' and 'Trump'

Rosie O'Donnell wants military to 'get' Trump from White House

Squad Member Ayanna Pressley Called for 'Unrest in the Streets' Last Year

The Same Dude Who Wants Give Strzok A Purple Heart Just Called For A Military Coup

Michael Moore Shows Off $10,000 Check to Support Trump 'Assassination' Play

10 Times Democrats Urged Violence Against Trump And His Supporters

"No basis in reality," you insisted...yet here we are, as usual.

Newsflash: Your ignorance of common knowledge facts is not other people lying.

Try researching things before presuming to lecture and condescend to those who pay attention and research better than you.

4. Where is your evidence of any Democrat committing murder that they weren't charged with?

You mean like Montez Terrill Lee, who burned down a store and murdered its owner, and the Federal Government had to get involved for him to face any consequences, and still even then only charged him with arson?

Like that?

5. Anarchy and secession are not crimes under any law that I know of.

Anarchy was never listed as a specific crime, it was meant to encompass ALL the violent Democrat felonies that come with rioting...obviously.

Secession was included to demonstrate who the actual disloyal traitors and domestic terrorists are here. And Democrats have spent the last few decades insisting that it was illegal for the Confederacy to do it, so they will be relieved to find out you researched it and exonerated the South.

Please cite the law that you think would allow someone to be arrested for committing these acts.

I agree wholeheartedly. Northern leftists illegally invaded, slaughtered, and enslaved half the republic to free the slaves slightly more quickly...and it was all based on literally zero legal authority. But if government is going to treat secession as something it gets to burn down entire cities and starve and mass murder people for doing...you might as well consider it a law...because it effectively IS law at that point, albeit not LEGITIMATE law. But since when do leftists EVER operate within legitimate law?

Equal protection under the law means that anyone charged with a crime has the ability to contest those charges.

Wrong again.

Here is Cornell Law stating what it ACTUALLY means (funny, they have the same understanding I do, and disagree with your version):

"Equal Protection refers to the idea that a governmental body may not deny people equal protection of its governing laws. The governing body state must treat an individual in the same manner as others in similar conditions and circumstances."

So, like I said, equal treatment under the law is no longer taken seriously as something that actually exists. Because Democrats are lawless, power-abusing tyrants and traitors to the Constitution.

The insurrectionists on Jan 6th were not resisting election theft and treason. They were trying to commit it.

1) *The insurrectionists on Jan 6th Those who resisted non-stop Democrat insurrection.

2) Unless you count the treasonous theft of the election they were doing it in direct response to, yeah.

There is no evidence that Trump lost due to fraud or theft.

Sure, unless you count Democrats:

-Illegally changing election laws on a whim in the middle of the election to favor Democrats
-Using social media platforms to silence only conservatives leading up to the election
-Using the mail-in system Democrats spent the last decade telling us would result in stolen elections before deciding that we could safely shop and dine in public, but somehow not vote
-The literal mathematical impossibility of the outcome
-The mountains of evidence of voter fraud
-Using Google to ban only conservative sources from all searches for a month leading up to the election
-Using blatant media corruption, bias, and abuses of power like the total blackout of the bombshell Hunter Biden scandal to change the election outcome
-The rampant Democrat political violence

Aside from that, it was a completely fair and legitimate election.

The court cases have all made that pretty clear as has Giuliani's law license suspension.

You mean the ones where the judges all refused to let the evidence be presented so they didn't get viciously smeared nationwide while communist mobs burned down their homes You mean THOSE cases?

But then you are so far removed from reality

Says the guy who just got his ass handed to him on literally every single assertion.

you don't even realize that the cases against some Jan 6 rioters have been dropped. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/0...fendant-491514

You're responding to me arguing that the 1/6 peaceful protesters were railroaded with anything our partisan "justice" system could make stick to them (thus implying that those to whom they could NOT make things stick were NOT prosecuted) by informing me that I didn't know some of them were not prosecuted?

Devastating logic there Socrates.

Speaking of being "far removed from reality," or more accurately for your case, just too dumb to follow what's being claimed.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Somehow you posted a lot of meaningless words without any evidence to support your claims.
Where is your evidence of anyone getting off for arson?
I find it funny that the 'democrat' you claim got off for murder you admit was charged with arson after you claim no one was charged with arson.
Where is you evidence of Montez Terril Lee being a democrat?

Please cite the cases you claim the judges didn't look at the evidence. Your claims are not facts. The court rulings are facts and when you read them, many of them did look at evidence and found it lacking.