Jump to content

Leftist say 1/6 was an insurrection


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

How how do you have an insurrection with out ANY arms? I don't recall seeing ANY insurrections being carried out with pepper spray and flag poles. The whole riot was disgusting and people should pay f

A pathetic attempt. But a good start. 

Its already unfolded Jew. We are sick of Jew rule. We aren't crazy.

Just now, Redoctober said:

Yes, That isn't an insurrection. That is a specific charge of interrupting congress of its official business. you can see that in many of the charges in the link I provided. 


Cool, so describing it as an insurrection is correct, thanks for making our point for us. 

Awesome to have you at the negotiation process. 

/thread

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LaughinAtLefty said:

If you lie enough, you can make it your reality.

He has already show he didn't know what he is talking about. The core of his argument is that I disagree with the definition of "insurrection". I never argued the definition. I argued the word does not apply to the riot at the capitol. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Redoctober said:

He has already show he didn't know what he is talking about. The core of his argument is that I disagree with the definition of "insurrection". I never argued the definition. I argued the word does not apply to the riot at the capitol. 


You demonstrated you're good at projecting. That's about it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zagdul said:


Cool, so describing it as an insurrection is correct, thanks for making our point for us. 

Awesome to have you at the negotiation process. 

/thread

 

LOL! You are bad at this. you read my post and completely got it wrong on purpose, because you have been losing this "debate" from the start. 

 

Interrupting government business isn't an insurrection. It is just interrupting government business.  You don't even know your own attempt at an argument. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Redoctober said:

He has already show he didn't know what he is talking about. The core of his argument is that I disagree with the definition of "insurrection". I never argued the definition. I argued the word does not apply to the riot at the capitol. 

Saw that....another dullard cultist that can’t handle the truth......and forget about facts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zagdul said:

You can disagree with reality as much as you'd like, that won't change things though. 

Sorry. 

Well that's one way to run away from a losing argument. LOL!

 

 

This guy was trying to make the argument that interrupting government business is insurrection. I pointed out that people were charged with interrupting with government business and it wasn't sedition or an insurgency. LMAO! Who's sok is this guy? Is that you Zaro?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LaughinAtLefty said:

Saw that....another dullard cultist that can’t handle the truth......and forget about facts.

LOL Right!? He thinks that if he talks about the definition long enough, he can make everyone think (or at least himself) that I deny the definition of insurrection. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Redoctober said:

Well that's one way to run away from a losing argument. LOL!

 

 

This guy was trying to make the argument that interrupting government business is insurrection. I pointed out that people were charged with interrupting with government business and it wasn't sedition or an insurgency. LMAO! Who's sok is this guy? Is that you Zaro?

 

Just now, Redoctober said:

No need for Mr.

I'll just call you jew. More accurate?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zagdul said:

If I say the word socialism, does your heartrate increase and do you become fearful of the things around you? 

LOL! you are running further from the argument. 

 

Show me ONE person charged with sedition or insurrection. The reason why we haven't seen any is because it is so hard to build that case. You can't just throw those terms out there willy nilly and have it stick in a court of law. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LaughinAtLefty said:

He’s not dullard.....each has its own definition. He’s stating his position, you’re attempting to change it to yours.

 

 

My position aligns with the book definition of the word. A.K.A., I'm on the side of reality. 

What side is he on? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...