*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[oskar]

I remember when you guys were calling looters "protesters". Now we have people storming a government building and you're outraged. It's quite funny, to be honest.

In the BLM protests the overall goal was to pressure lawmakers into holding police accountable. While there was vandalism, the vandalism wasn't the object of the protest and for every protester who chose to destroy property there were thousands who chose not to.

In the march on the capitol, the object was to break into the capitol. The insurrection wasn't a byproduct, it was the objective.

[Poopadoop]

In the BLM protests the overall goal was to pressure lawmakers into holding police accountable. While there was vandalism, the vandalism wasn't the object of the protest and for every protester who chose to destroy property there were thousands who chose not to.

In the march on the capitol, the object was to break into the capitol. The insurrection wasn't a byproduct, it was the objective.

There were also numerous documented cases of the police using violent force on peaceful protesters as well as the media.

The sweetest irony of this is that Ong calls US hypocrites, but if Remainers had stormed Parliament while the Brexit bill was being passed because some Remainer loony and the loony media had convinced them the referendum was rigged, he'd have been calling for them all to be shot in the face on the spot for opposing democracy. He wouldn't be making arguments about how they had a right to act on their deluded beliefs.

Keeping order is only important when it's to support the kind of order you personally voted for apparently.

[OngBonga]

In the BLM protests the overall goal was to pressure lawmakers into holding police accountable. While there was vandalism, the vandalism wasn't the object of the protest and for every protester who chose to destroy property there were thousands who chose not to.

In the march on the capitol, the object was to break into the capitol. The insurrection wasn't a byproduct, it was the objective.

This still doesn't answer my question. Poop conveniently decided to ignore me, so let's see if you can answer... why is occupying the Capitol such a problem? Why is this not a legitimate act of protest?

[Poopadoop]

This still doesn't answer my question. Poop conveniently decided to ignore me, so let's see if you can answer... why is occupying the Capitol such a problem? Why is this not a legitimate act of protest?

When people storm a building, you generally don't assume it's with peaceful intentions. They could peacefully protest outside without posing a threat to anyone or their property. Instead they went inside and (gasp) looted the Capital building. So why don't you want them shot too?

[oskar]

This still doesn't answer my question. Poop conveniently decided to ignore me, so let's see if you can answer... why is occupying the Capitol such a problem? Why is this not a legitimate act of protest?

People are protesting inside the halls of congress all the time. That alone is not a problem. Having a rally where the incumbent president says: this election was stolen from us... you can't let this happen... If Pence doesn't stop this, it is on you... and then to have his mob forcefully break into the halls of congress to stop the certification of the election in which the incumbent lost... that is a coup! That is the textbook definition of a coup. They are completely unorganized and they are following the incoherent directions of a lunatic, so they predictably failed, but it was a coup attempt.
If government does not have the monopoly on violence, it is not a government. When mobs can take control of a government building, you by definition no longer have a government.

Let me restate this again: the loser of the election directed a mob to storm the halls of congress to stop the certification of his successor. That is not protest. That is a coup.