Mote and bailey fallacy. You have no proof that if the people that managed to break into the US Capitol had found members of congress, that they'd have done anything violent to them.
Remember this nut goober?
![]()
He's probably the poster child for the Capitol riot, wouldn't you agree?
Well, he was regularly involved in protests here in Arizona for well over a year prior to the Capitol riot, many times ones staged by the radical Left. In one he entered the state capitol building, looking much like he does in that picture, and ran into state legislators. He and they chatted a bit then he was escorted by police from the building. The odds are likely his behavior would have been exactly the same had he run into US legislators.
So your attempt to divert the conversation by what amounts to a bait and switch (the mote and bailey fallacy) is irrelevant.
I see. So if a person made a public threat to harm a person and proceed to that person's house and break in, planning to harm him or kill him but nobody's home, he didn't really mean to harm him. Interesting legal theory you got there.

