Sure, now compare that to the treatment of other J6ers and your 'reasonable' take is actually just more glowie bullshit.
https://twitter.com/FreeStateWill/status/1742340872115744796
ByteWizard
joined 1 year ago
Literary definitions are irrelevant in the court of law.
Legally, it's not the same thing.
-
Trump has not been found guilty of "insurrection."
-
No one participating in the events of January 6 was convicted of "insurrection."
-
Trump was never accused of "insurrection."
-
No one involved in the January 6 events was accused of "insurrection."
-
Trump was exonerated in the second impeachment trial, which concerned the events of January 6.
-
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to the President according to settled doctrine.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title18-section2384&num=0&edition=1999 is not the same as https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383
No one has been charged with insurrection. No one.
Oh, here's a game. Let's see how long it takes to prove you're only using this hammer against actual conservatives! I give it one week.
An the Associated Press/wikipedia is hardly delusional propaganda.
Wikipedia has been captured by left wing nuts for over a decade.
Why do people watch this trash anyway? UFC and boxing is all rigged. It's not even exciting to watch. It's all marketing making you think it's exciting. I hate people.
Who watches media with commercials? If you are, you're doing it wrong.
This post itself is a commercial, and they got you to do it for free. (or not. getting paid would at least make you a smart corporate whore)