January 6th Protest/Stolen Election Thread (Was: Trump Nuts Storm the Capitol)

[CHEEZY17]

Dodgin' dot makes another appearance!

Not a single response from you has addressed the facts of what January 6 was. You pivoted and always have only to charges filed, because the facts are not on your side. That's literally dodging from you, out the gate. So yet again, the reality is January 6 was an insurrection. The reality is charges filed is not the same thing as the crime being committed. That you refuse to acknowledge facts and resort to changing the argument is all the proof needed that you were never going to be honest about this. Let me know when you're either dropping your Biden corruption claims because there's no charges or you're ready to honestly discuss the facts of January 6. Delusional disingenuous intellectually dishonest functionally retarded partisan hack.

Every response of mine has addressed it. I dont need to dodge anything because my thoughts on that day are the same as the Justice Departments.
The literal legal people who decide what we're discussing dont agree with you which is why you dont want to address their thought process on reaching their conclusion that it wasnt an insurrection. Thats why you are and always will be Dodgin' Dot. Let me know when youre opinion of that day reconciles with the government authority. Until then I'll take comfort in the absolute and undeniable fact that my opinion on the matter is on the same side as the Justice Departments and yours is not.

[dot]

Every response of mine has addressed it.

If that were true, you wouldn't have needed to pivot to argue something else. Dishonest.

I dont need to dodge anything because my thoughts on that day are the same as the Justice Departments.

See? Pivot. Functionally retarded. Thanks for proving me right.

[Homebrew]

[CHEEZY17]

Every response of mine has addressed it.

If that were true, you wouldn't have needed to pivot to argue something else. Dishonest.

I dont need to dodge anything because my thoughts on that day are the same as the Justice Departments.

See? Pivot. Functionally retarded. Thanks for proving me right.

Nope, no pivot. Discussing HOW the DOJ reached their decision is in the same realm as the decision itself. In fact, I'd say its a critical component. Its so critical and damaging to your misguided opinion you want to ignore it. Know why you want to ignore it? Because we all know the DOJ referenced legal definitions and standards to reach their conclusion on how best to categorize and prosecute the events of that day. Its literally their job. And unfortunately for you the legal authorities decided, based on the definition and legal standard, that "insurrection" was not applicable. Thats just the simple facts, bud.

[Biker]

I think I just doxxed Dodging' Dot

[dot]

Nope, no pivot.

Except it is. Because you don't acknowledge the facts of the insurrection and instead change the argument to something else. An admission that you know, you realize, that the facts are not on your side. Thanks for continuing to prove me right.

[stonedmegman]

[CHEEZY17]

Nope, no pivot.

Except it is. Because you don't acknowledge the facts of the insurrection and instead change the argument to something else. An admission that you know, you realize, that the facts are not on your side. Thanks for continuing to prove me right.

Your entire argument is the definition. The legal authorities of the United States government used the definition and legal standard to determine that it was not applicable. Thats the bottom line, bud.

[dot]

Your entire argument is the definition.

And to this moment, you still can't refute it. Either the definition or the insurrection itself. Instead, you pivot to change the argument every time. Keep proving me right, hack.

[Antknot]

Your entire argument is the definition.

And to this moment, you still can't refute it. Either the definition or the insurrection itself. Instead, you pivot to change the argument every time. Keep proving me right, hack.

If it was an insurrection, why wasn’t anybody charged with insurrection?

[CHEEZY17]

Your entire argument is the definition.

And to this moment, you still can't refute it. Either the definition or the insurrection itself. Instead, you pivot to change the argument every time. Keep proving me right, hack.

I'm not refuting it, the legal authority of the United States government is.

[Animal]

dot is stuck on the single point that he thinks wins the argument and he looks like a fool.

[Biker]

Worse than 9/11

[dot]

One, two, three, four different replies. Not a single one can argue the facts, each one changes the argument. Charges filed and commission of the crime are two separate things. Proving for all four of you, if you have to pivot to argue anything else but what happened on January 6, the facts are not on your side. Thanks for continuing to prove me right.

[Biker]

Yet, you still cannot explain why there is not a single insurrection charge. Keep thinking you won this, ese

[CHEEZY17]

One, two, three, four different replies. Not a single one can argue the facts, each one changes the argument. Charges filed and commission of the crime are two separate things. Proving for all four of you, if you have to pivot to argue anything else but what happened on January 6, the facts are not on your side. Thanks for continuing to prove me right.

The DOJ looked at hundreds of hours of video. The DOJ has investigated for 3 years. The DOJ has interviewed and received testimony from hundreds of different people. They dont agree with you. What facts are you talking about EXACTLY that you think the DOJ has not seen or is unaware of that makes YOU right and them wrong?

[Animal]

One, two, three, four different replies. Not a single one can argue the facts, each one changes the argument. Charges filed and commission of the crime are two separate things. Proving for all four of you, if you have to pivot to argue anything else but what happened on January 6, the facts are not on your side. Thanks for continuing to prove me right.

The DOJ looked at hundreds of hours of video. The DOJ has investigated for 3 years. The DOJ has interviewed and received testimony from hundreds of different people. They dont agree with you. What facts are you talking about EXACTLY that you think the DOJ has not seen or is unaware of that makes YOU right and them wrong?

the DEFINISHUNNNNN!!!N!N!N!!!!!

[dot]

Yet, you still cannot explain why there is not a single insurrection charge.

The DOJ looked at hundreds of hours of video.

the DEFINISHUNNNNN!!!N!N!N!!!!!

One, two, three, again not a single one daring to touch the facts of the insurrection. Each one pivoting to change the argument. Such confidence in your premise that you can't even begin to defend it without arguing something else instead.

[CHEEZY17]

Yet, you still cannot explain why there is not a single insurrection charge.

The DOJ looked at hundreds of hours of video.

the DEFINISHUNNNNN!!!N!N!N!!!!!

One, two, three, again not a single one daring to touch the facts of the insurrection. Each one pivoting to change the argument. Such confidence in your premise that you can't even begin to defend it without arguing something else instead.

Simple question, bud

What facts are you talking about EXACTLY that you think the DOJ has not seen or is unaware of that makes YOU right and them wrong?

[dot]

Simple question, bud

If you can't address the facts of the insurrection itself, if you have to change the argument every time, just admit you've got nothing. Your premise is wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

[CHEEZY17]

Simple question, bud

If you can't address the facts of the insurrection itself, if you have to change the argument every time, just admit you've got nothing. Your premise is wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

Im asking about and addressing the facts right now, retard.
So lets talk about the facts!
What facts are you talking about EXACTLY that you think the DOJ has not seen or is unaware of that makes YOU right and them wrong?

[Animal]

Simple question, bud

If you can't address the facts of the insurrection itself, if you have to change the argument every time, just admit you've got nothing. Your premise is wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

Im asking about and addressing the facts right now, retard.
So lets talk about the facts!
What facts are you talking about EXACTLY that you think the DOJ has not seen or is unaware of that makes YOU right and them wrong?

he's busy down at the Gold & Silver exchange arguing that a cub scout pin he got is real gold. He has the definition of gold with him (a yellow precious metal used especially in jewelry and decoration and to guarantee the value of currencies), so I'm pretty sure he will win.

[dot]

Im asking about and addressing the facts right now, retard.

If that were the case, you wouldn't need to hinge your argument on something else. So either argue the insurrection was not an insurrection as defined, or that the definition of the word is wrong. Charges filed is not the same as committing the crime. If you have to change the argument, you've lost and admitted your premise is wrong.

[CHEEZY17]

Im asking about and addressing the facts right now, retard.

If that were the case, you wouldn't need to hinge your argument on something else. So either argue the insurrection was not an insurrection as defined, or that the definition of the word is wrong. Charges filed is not the same as committing the crime. If you have to change the argument, you've lost and admitted your premise is wrong.

None of us have "changed the argument" or "moved the goalposts". Thats you pathetically trying to save face because your view of that day does not align with the government prosecutorial authority.
You want to talk about the facts so lets do it! My question is specifically about the facts of that day. What facts do you want to discuss? Be specific please. What facts are you talking about EXACTLY that you think the DOJ has not seen or is unaware of that makes YOU right and them wrong?
What you refuse to accept is that if the DOJ, after 3 years of investigation and testimony, thought it fit the definition and legal standard of "insurrection" then thats how they would have categorized it. Unfortunately for you, they did not. Seems like your beef is with the DOJ, bud.

[stonedmegman]

I see one poster calling it an insurrection.