Attempts to overturn the election (was: Aging)

[Patti Beadles]

Pickels writes:

> Patti, I am going to assume (I know) that you believe that "Donald
> Trump" "and his associates" [again I assume you mean those that entered
> the Capitol and made a disturbance, Proud Boys, etc.] ... [intended] and
> "attempted to subvert the will of the voters" [and "voters" do not
> include anyone who did not vote for Biden or illegal votes for Biden]. 
> I hope I am clear.


I meant the Trump associates like Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Kenneth Cheesebro (best ever name for a sleazeball), Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, Michael Flynn, and the extended cast of characters. I'm talking about the people who organized fake slates of electors, mounted unsubstantiated legal challenges to election results, spread lies about election fraud, tried to confiscate voting machines, and otherwise attempted to change the outcome of the election or prevent it from being certified.


> Do you think there was anything about the entire affair that actually
> worked to the advantage of anyone involved in that "attempt"?

In the end, mostly no... the election was certified and Biden was sworn in on schedule. However, I feel like we came terrifyingly close to getting a different outcome. Our democracy held, but it feels like it just barely did. What if Raffensperger had acted differently? What if Barr hadn't thwarted Trump's executive order to seize voting machines? What if Pence had caved to the pressure campaing?

The January 6 attack was definitely part of this strategy, and it was the most visible one, but I am more concerned by the full frontal assault on the results of the election. I'm concerned about the long-term impacts of the unrelenting series of lies that Trump told people about the 2020 election. There are plenty of people in the country who still believe that millions of people voted illegally, that voting machines changed votes, and all of the other blatant lies that were repeated incessantly by the POTUS. I think these lies will reverberate through the country for years and maybe for decades.

The mostly-no comes from exactly this. Trump benefits by making his base even more deeply entrenched, and by convincing them that they can't trust the results of any election that he doesn't win.

Is that clearer?

-P

[John Pickels]

Thank you for your response, Patti. You obviously are intimately aware
of the truth in these matters. My response in more detail below.

On 7/16/2023 7:26 PM, Patti Beadles wrote:
> Pickels writes:
>
>> Patti, I am going to assume (I know) that you believe that "Donald
>> Trump" "and his associates" [again I assume you mean those that entered
>> the Capitol and made a disturbance, Proud Boys, etc.] ... [intended] and
>> "attempted to subvert the will of the voters" [and "voters" do not
>> include anyone who did not vote for Biden or illegal votes for Biden].
>> I hope I am clear.
>
> I meant the Trump associates like Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Kenneth Cheesebro (best ever name for a sleazeball), Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, Michael Flynn, and the extended cast of characters. I'm talking about the people who organized fake slates of electors, mounted unsubstantiated legal challenges to election results, spread lies about election fraud, tried to confiscate voting machines, and otherwise attempted to change the outcome of the election or prevent it from being certified.

I am sure the details of the "facts" you submit are available in
convictions, if the actions resulted in guilty verdicts.  Are you aware
of any activities of any democrat in any election that you would
consider improper?

We have mostly Democrats in most non federal offices in Louisiana (I am
a registered Democrat) and although I am not intimately aware of recent
election "stuff" in our area, my father was well aware of the rise of
one famous one ... Huey Long.  We have a long history of "stuff" here. 
Maybe California solved the problems of the past, but it seems to me
that limiting the "bad actions" to one side or the other does not hold
on tight to the "facts" ... but I do not "know" the truth in every case
but that is just one opinion.

All of the actions you mention are likely true to some extent and they
are likely to continue in the future.  Limiting them to one side means
that you might be less central in your choices of sources of
information.  Maybe.

>> Do you think there was anything about the entire affair that actually
>> worked to the advantage of anyone involved in that "attempt"?
> In the end, mostly no... the election was certified and Biden was sworn in on schedule. However, I feel like we came terrifyingly close to getting a different outcome. Our democracy held, but it feels like it just barely did. What if Raffensperger had acted differently? What if Barr hadn't thwarted Trump's executive order to seize voting machines? What if Pence had caved to the pressure campaing?

You did not answer the question.  How could the stupid "demonstration"
ever have amounted to anything but the result that happened?  You really
think that stupid people could come in and "make it happen"?  Really?

Exactly how could there have been ANY OTHER OUTCOME?  Really?

If Trump was President, he could do anything he wanted ... oops, even
the President is not a Dictator.  What if the Democrats did steal he
election because their illegal activities were just better than the
opposition?  What if the "centrists" who were responsible for the
election of Trump were just fed up with him this time.  They may be as
fed up with the Trump is a Nazi stuff this time.  Our democracy is
indeed in trouble, but it is not a one sided problem ... it is a "two"
sided (if we are limited to only two) problem.  Hell, we need to elect
Bernie Sanders ... at least he could be controlled and go completely
Communist on us.

I disagree with your "mostly no" ... it was a stupid disaster for
everyone, especially the fact that so many think that it was a real
threat to our democracy.  If it results in more folks thinking that
anyone who does not toe the party line (choose any one), we will lose
our democracy.  The Proud Boys "side" is a dangerous but obviously
stupid and unsuccessful side.  The other possible "side" in its extreme
is just as dangerous.

> The January 6 attack was definitely part of this strategy, and it was the most visible one, but I am more concerned by the full frontal assault on the results of the election. I'm concerned about the long-term impacts of the unrelenting series of lies that Trump told people about the 2020 election. There are plenty of people in the country who still believe that millions of people voted illegally, that voting machines changed votes, and all of the other blatant lies that were repeated incessantly by the POTUS. I think these lies will reverberate through the country for years and maybe for decades.

I am not sure what "this strategy" might be?  The January 6
Demonstration was grossly unsuccessful in changing the view of any
middle of the road centrist.  It is as bad as the constant chanting from
the other (all the other) side(s) that "they" have the truth and need to
be in charge-of-everything so we can get it "right-correct-truth-best"
... your "side", Patti ... any other side that wants more and more
control without challenge.

I like divided government as attempted with our Constitution ... I like
multiple "sides-waysofthinking" competing in the House, Senate,
President, Supreme Court ... and the rest left to the States ... yes,
the States.

Too much federal government control leads to a bad result.  No more
escaping to the State of your choice ... no more choice at all.

> The mostly-no comes from exactly this. Trump benefits by making his base even more deeply entrenched, and by convincing them that they can't trust the results of any election that he doesn't win.
>
> Is that clearer?
>
> -P

Unfortunately not.  I do not like Trump.  I disagree that Proud Boys
make him more likeable to anyone else who votes at all.  I do not think
that those who would do "anything" to make sure no one votes for him are
any better than those other extremists.  It is obvious, to me, that
Biden is not in "control" of anything ... I fear who might be.

It is a difficult time.  It is a good thing folks like Nolan were not in
charge and a thousand protestors were slaughtered at the Capitol.  The
results might have been more horrible than anyone could imagine.  Maybe,
if you agree with Nolan, we can send in the troops to kill the Proud
Boys and anyone else who says anything good about Trump.  That might
solve the problem.

[Patti Beadles]

Mr Pickels writes:

> I am sure the details of the "facts" you submit are available in
> convictions, if the actions resulted in guilty verdicts.  Are you aware
> of any activities of any democrat in any election that you would
> consider improper?

I have no doubt that politicians on both sides of the aisle have done improper things in elections in the past, but that is not the topic of discussion. I am unaware of any American president of any party who attacked our election systems in the way that Trump did. This is not "doing stuff", it was a full frontal assault on the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Many of the facts about this are not in dispute, and many have been laid out in indictments and other documents. We have been provided with ample well-researched and well-documented evidence about many of Trump's attempts to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

> You did not answer the question.  How could the stupid "demonstration"
> ever have amounted to anything but the result that happened?  You really
> think that stupid people could come in and "make it happen"?  Really?

The capitol rioters could quite easily have prevented the election from being certified on January 6. That would have put us into unprecedented territory, and while I believe that our systems would have found ways to handle the issue it's entirely possible that the process would have dragged on past January 20.

> What if the Democrats did steal he
> election because their illegal activities were just better than the
> opposition?

What if Martians changed all the ballots?

I live in an evidence-based world. Because of the post-election shenanigans the 2020 election has been scrutinized more closely than any other election during our lifetimes, and possibly ever. There is ample irrefutable evidence that Trump and his associates (professional, not rioting) used a variety of tactics in an attempt to change the outcome of the 2020 presidential election despite there being no credible evidence of systemic wrongdoing. (Note: In any election that involves millions of voters there will be the occasional one-off voter fraud case, clerical, error, etc.)

> The Proud Boys "side" is a dangerous but obviously
> stupid and unsuccessful side.  The other possible "side" in its extreme
> is just as dangerous.

We know from multiple sources that Trump associates (e.g. Roger Stone) worked very closely with the Proud Boys, Oathkeepers, etc. to organize the events of January 6. We know that several people have been convicted of seditious conspiracy, which is pretty strong evidence that there was an actual seditious conspiracy.

If you are aware of high-level Democrats who worked closely with militia groups in order to overturn the results of a presidential election then please share your evidence. I'm all ears.

> The January 6 attack was definitely part of this strategy, and it was the most visible one, but I am more concerned by the full frontal assault on the results of the election. I'm concerned about the long-term impacts of the unrelenting series of lies that Trump told people about the 2020 election. There are plenty of people in the country who still believe that millions of people voted illegally, that voting machines changed votes, and all of the other blatant lies that were repeated incessantly by the POTUS. I think these lies will reverberate through the country for years and maybe for decades.

> I am not sure what "this strategy" might be?

Trump's strategy to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and remain in office.



Let me ask you this: How closely have you followed the details of the 2020 election aftermath? Did you read the report of the January 6 committee and/or watch all of the hearings? Can you tell me what happened in the call with Raffensperger, and apparently also with Ducey in Arizona? Are all of the names that I've used famliar to you and could you give a short summary of their roles in the aftermath of the 2020 election?


-P

[John Pickels]

Patti, do you think the extreme right or the extreme left actually
decide presidential elections?

Do you believe that there might indeed be a "deep state" that has a lot
of control of our government in many, many different ways?

I believe the "centrists" are the most important in any election.  At
present, our country is getting worse and worse IMO with the "extremes"
fighting for the vote.

I wish there was a Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan available and not just
Trump and Biden as choices.

The Constitution was written specifically to avoid exactly what is
happening in our country today.  The Constitution is written to protect
the States.  [That is why Roe v Wade was so important even though it was
unconstitutional when written.  It stopped the execution without trial
of real live human beings in every single state ... even though it also
mandated that States could not prevent the executions at the early stage
of life for real live human beings.  A horrible but IMO necessary
compromise.]

We are indeed moving toward a one size fits all country with one group
in charge.  I agree that preventing that from happening is important but
I do not believe that it is a one sided situation.

All sticks have two ends ... I do not want to be hit with either end.

[Paul Zuzelo]

John wrote:

"Our democracy is indeed in trouble, but it is not a one sided problem ..."

John’s comment above got me thinking about this topic in more generality.  Let me start with my specific take on his comment.

 

Specifically, I don’t see the evidence for this assertion -- i.e., that it is not a one-sided problem.  Even if I accept a generously broad definition of what constitutes the “violent left,” I’m unable to find any incidents in the past four years that are remotely equivalent (in terms of organized and orchestrated violence, seriousness, and threats to our democracy) to the January 6^th attack on the Capitol. 

 

Thus I don’t personally find there are threats to our democracy from both sides of the political spectrum.  While I do feel there are serious threats to our democracy, I don’t see any of them coming from Democrats or any segment of the extreme left.

 

My more general thoughts about this topic are that inevitably, Republicans and Trump supporters will resort to whataboutism and false equivalencies to create an opposite side to anything they consider an attack on Trump, but these attempts strike me as transparently delusional and disingenuous. There are not always two sides to every issue, as Trump supporters would have you believe.  E.g., there are not two sides to the question of whether human activities are increasing global climate change/warming – they are.  There aren’t two sides to the issue of whether Republicans are trying to suppress the votes of those who would vote for Democrats – if there are any Democratic efforts to suppress Republican voters, feel free to point them out but I’m sure I can respond with 10X Republican efforts to suppress Democratic votes.

 

Republicans and Trump supporters bring up the “both sides” argument simply as a strawman to deflect and dilute the seriousness of their not-so-hidden effort to subvert our democracy.  They’ve discovered that democracy doesn’t work for them any more – they’re not getting their candidates elected as easily and frequently as they used to – so they’ve shifted to instituting autocratic rules, laws, and procedures to ensure they remain in power despite a minority of the voters actually voting for them.  The January 6^th insurrection was a failed example of a forcible attempt to overturn the will of the voters, but my concern is that they’ve learned from this mistake and are focused on doing a much better job of subverting democracy currently and in the future.

 

[Rick Charles]

Minneapolis

Portland

Seattle

New York

Atlanta

Hey, rather than me listing all of them, I'll let this LEFT WING SITE that tries to explain them all away and make excuses for the RIOTS and "demonstrations" that turned violent show you their map...I'll also leave the url bar in and provide it here so you can just click on the site yourself.

https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/

I'm very, very tired of hearing about one day and NOT hearing about an entire SUMMER of the left trying to destroy our "democracy" (which is a REPUBLIC, btw) look at the map provided.  It's from your own side!  They don't deny it, they just try to excuse it.  Enough already!

RC

Chuck Breuninger a.k.a. Rick Charles

http://facebook.com/voiceofpoker 

Twitter: @voiceofpoker

Las Vegas, NV

702-689-4397

A++ G+++ PKR+ !PEG B+ TB ADB+ M+

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/7a3953c0-fe77-47d0-8a29-bc59df3cd4d3n%40barge.org.

[Paul Zuzelo]

Rick wrote:

"Hey, rather than me listing all of them, I'll let this LEFT WING SITE that tries to explain them all away..."

I reiterate what I wrote in my post above:

"My more general thoughts about this topic are that inevitably, Republicans and Trump supporters will resort to whataboutism and false equivalencies to create an opposite side to anything they consider an attack on Trump, but these attempts strike me as transparently delusional and disingenuous."

Your post simply proves my point.  Feel free to actually point out, specifically, any incident from the violent left that is remotely equivalent to the Jan. 6th insurrection.  Be sure to support your logic if you do. While you're at it, feel free to provide violent left equivalents of the gun massacres against Jews in synagogues, and against LBGTQ nightclubs.

I will state again: there is no real threat to our democracy from the violent left.  You may be able to pretend there's a threat to the violent right from the violent left, but not to our democracy.

[Rick Charles]

I'll reply with a simple...YOU'RE HIGH

Chuck Breuninger a.k.a. Rick Charles

http://facebook.com/voiceofpoker 

Twitter: @voiceofpoker

Las Vegas, NV

702-689-4397

A++ G+++ PKR+ !PEG B+ TB ADB+ M+

[LMB]

Rick, can you please stop with the Jim Jordan /hannity provocateur non-response. There's enough of that on TV. If you can't address the question directly, throw your hands up and just admit it.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/CALgMZTDX_GZmTQT79_mugiovqOD%3DE1F69Z0kmY8V0iD%2BgPJORw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Paul Zuzelo]

Here's the issue: I genuinely do not think that our democracy is in trouble from any group other than the far right, MAGA Republicans, and moderate Republicans.  

Obviously, Rick and John disagree, but I don't see any evidence supporting the belief that anyone on the left -- whether it's the violent left, or even progressives and run-of-the-mill Democrats -- is trying to subvert and undermine our democracy and turn it into an ignore-the-rule-of-law autocracy.  Demonstrations by the left -- violent or not -- are not per se evidence that the left is trying to overthrow our democracy or even take actions that are remotely equivalent to the actions of the political right wing in the last 4+ years. 

Are there Democratically dominated state legislatures that are passing laws making it harder for Republican-leaning voters to vote?

Are there Democratic groups trying to expunge mostly Republican voters from their state voting rolls?

Are there Democratic state legislatures restricting the authority of their state's elected governor to be nothing more than a figurehead?

Are there Republican lawsuits pending against Democratic gerrymandering in multiple states?

Are there violent left wing paramilitary organizations planning attacks on Republican D.C. legislators to prevent their voting against Democrats' policies and reelection?

Are there six left-wing politicians posing as judges on the U.S. Supreme Court?

The list of such anti-democratic, pro-autocratic actions from the far right and not-so-far right is seemingly endless.  Where's the list of similar -- and equivalently serious -- far left and not-so-far left anti-democratic actions?

In the last eight presidential elections, the Republicans have won the popular vote exactly ONCE, in 2004 when G.W. Bush beat John Kerry by a little over 3M votes.  This is the proverbial canary in the coal mine, and Republicans know this.  There is no going back to the majority-white dominated country of the late 20th century and very early 21st century.  The only way for Republicans to hold onto their power is to lie, cheat and steal, and that's exactly what they're doing, and exactly what endangers our democracy.

[Peter Secor]

You kind of speak as though there weren’t thousands of arrests resulting from those riots. 

Also, please point out on your map which of these was intended to overthrow our government, so we can make a direct comparison. 

Thanks. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/CALgMZTB%3D%2BYjsPaJ%3DusvuNM9fZAEHUo8Zs%3D8pwC4fOJfj-cNn3A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rick Charles]

Okay, here we go:

Are there Democratically dominated state legislatures that are passing laws making it harder for Republican-leaning voters to vote?

No, but there aren't any Republican dominated state legislatures doing that to Democrats, either.

Are there Democratic groups trying to expunge mostly Republican voters from their state voting rolls?

There aren't Republican groups trying to expunge any targeted group from voter rolls.  There are groups trying to remove DEAD people, those who have moved out of the state, and other people who aren't allowed to vote.  Many states are also sending out cards to voters who haven't voted in the past 4 cycles to inquire if they would still like to be on the rolls (maybe they've become incapacitated).  They are just trying to clean up the rolls.  It's not targeting any party, race, creed, religion, or any other group. That's just a talking point.

Are there Democratic state legislatures restricting the authority of their state's elected governor to be nothing more than a figurehead?

One of the beautiful things about the United States is that we are a group of INDIVIDUAL STATES that are laboratories of democracy and with our Federalist founding each state has it's own constitution and can set its government up the way it deems fit.  For instance some states have elected Supreme Court Justices, some have appointed.  Some, like TEXAS have a very *weak* governorship (executive) and a very strong legislature.  The Federal Government has no control over the individual states and the way they are constituted as long as they are within the bounds of the U.S. Constitution.

Are there Republican lawsuits pending against Democratic gerrymandering in multiple states?

There are, and there are Dem suits against Republican gerrymandering.  That's politics.

Are there violent left wing paramilitary organizations planning attacks on Republican D.C. legislators to prevent their voting against Democrats' policies and reelection?

January 6th was an abomination.  I said it then, and I'll say it again for the umpteenthousandth time now.  Those who were members of the paramilitary organizations who planned violence or did violence should be arrested, tried, when convicted sentenced to the maximum allowable penalty.  They do NOT represent MAGA Republicans.  They may try to co-opt the movement, but they do NOT represent it.

Are there six left-wing politicians posing as judges on the U.S. Supreme Court?

Nope, only 3.  Can you define a woman?  Gimme a break!  If you're calling Thomas, Alito, Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett "right-wing politicians" then the same must be said of the "Left-wingers" Sotmayor, Kagan, and Brown-Jackson.  Name calling and stone throwing doesn't get us anywhere.  There have been plenty of 9-0 decisions by this group...I suppose the 6 drugged or held the 3 at gunpoint? Or was it the other way around?

The last "question" was a statement so I'm not going to justify it, and then the statement you made was just you opining about the "death of the Republican party"...I've heard it since I was a teen.  The Republican party is going through a transformation.  The Lindsey Grahams and Mitch McConnell's of the world are *not* going to be welcome in the leadership.

You wanted answers, there ya go!

RC

Chuck Breuninger a.k.a. Rick Charles

http://facebook.com/voiceofpoker 

Twitter: @voiceofpoker

Las Vegas, NV

702-689-4397

A++ G+++ PKR+ !PEG B+ TB ADB+ M+

[Rick Charles]

Arrests that turned into NON-prosecutions!  C'mon Peter.  You're better than this.

RC

Chuck Breuninger a.k.a. Rick Charles

http://facebook.com/voiceofpoker 

Twitter: @voiceofpoker

Las Vegas, NV

702-689-4397

A++ G+++ PKR+ !PEG B+ TB ADB+ M+

[Paul Zuzelo]

I wrote: Are there Democratically dominated state legislatures that are passing laws making it harder for Republican-leaning voters to vote?

Rick responded. No, but there aren't any Republican dominated state legislatures doing that to Democrats, either.

Let's cite some research:  At least 19 states have enacted at least 33 laws that make it harder to vote.  Here's a partial list of those efforts:

New Restrictive Laws

Shorten window to apply for a mail ballot
AL H.B. 538, AR S.B. 643, GA S.B. 202, IA S.F. 413, KY H.B. 574, NY S.B. 264, OK H.B. 2663
Shorten deadline to deliver mail ballot
AR S.B. 643, IA S.F. 413
Make it harder to remain on absentee voting lists
AZ S.B. 1485, FL S.B. 90
Eliminate or limit sending mail ballot applications to voters who do not specifically request them
GA S.B. 202, IA S.F. 413, KS H.B. 2332, TX S.B. 1
Eliminate or limit sending mail ballots to voters who do not specifically request them
FL S.B. 90
Restrict assistance in returning a voter’s mail ballot
AR H.B. 1715, FL S.B. 90, IA S.F. 413, IA S.F. 568, KS H.B. 2183, KY H.B. 574, MT H.B. 530, TX S.B. 1
Limit the number, location, or availability of mail ballot drop boxes
FL S.B. 90, GA S.B. 202, IA S.F. 413, IN S.B. 398
Impose stricter signature requirements for mail ballots
AZ S.B. 1003, ID H.B. 290, KS H.B. 2183, TX S.B. 1
Impose harsher voter ID requirements
AR H.B. 1112, AR H.B. 1244, FL S.B. 90, GA S.B. 202, MT S.B. 169, NH H.B. 523, TX S.B. 1, WY H.B. 75
Expand voter purges or risk faulty voter purges
AZ S.B. 1819, IA S.F. 413, KY H.B. 574, LA H.B. 167, NH S.B. 31, TX S.B. 1111, UT H.B. 12
Increase barriers for voters with disabilities
AL H.B. 285, IA S.F. 568, TX H.B. 3920, TX S.B. 1
Ban snacks and water to voters waiting in line
FL S.B. 90, GA S.B. 202
Eliminate Election Day registration
MT H.B. 176
Reduce polling place availability (locations or hours)
IA S.F. 413, MT S.B. 196, TX S.B. 1
Increase number of voters per precinct
NV S.B. 84
Limit early voting days or hours
GA S.B. 202, IA S.F. 413, TX S.B. 

I wrote:Are there Democratic groups trying to expunge mostly Republican voters from their state voting rolls?

Rick responded: There aren't Republican groups trying to expunge any targeted group from voter rolls.

Let's cite some research:

"APM Reports found that at least nine states — most of them with Republican leadership, including the key battlegrounds of Georgia and Ohio — have purged an estimated hundreds of thousands of people from the rolls for infrequent voting since the 2014 general election. States with these policies are removing voters at some of the highest rates in the nation, no matter the reason.

Voter purges are not necessarily controversial or unusual. Hundreds of thousands of Americans who have moved, died, or gone to prison get kicked off voter lists across the country every year. In fact, federal law requires states to cull people from rolls who are no longer eligible to vote. But in the states that employ "use it or lose it" policies, U.S. citizens in good standing who haven't moved, committed a crime or otherwise jeopardized their right to vote, can trigger the removal process because they didn't show up at the polls.  For instance, the APM Reports investigation found that such purges in Ohio disproportionately affected urban, Democratic-leaning counties."

I wrote:Are there Republican lawsuits pending against Democratic gerrymandering in multiple states?

Rick responded: There are, and there are Dem suits against Republican gerrymandering.  That's politics.

Let me cite your specific list of these "Dem suits:" [Blank]  Either do the research to list some specific examples or admit there aren't any.

I wrote: "Are there violent left wing paramilitary organizations planning attacks on Republican D.C. legislators to prevent their voting against Democrats' policies and reelection?."

Rick responded: [I paraphrase:] "January 6th was an abomination.  I said it then, and I'll say it again for the umpteenthousandth time now.  Those who were members of the paramilitary organizations who planned violence or did violence should be arrested, tried, when convicted sentenced to the maximum allowable penalty.  They do NOT represent MAGA Republicans.  They may try to co-opt the movement, but they do NOT represent it."

That's my point, of course.  There are no left-wing insurrections against U.S. democracy to cite.  The danger to our democracy emanates from the right, not the left.

[Peter Secor]

There were over 200 successful federal prosecutions. I don’t know how to figure out local ones, but it has to be many times that number. 

Trying to equate these things is very similar in my mind to saying their were “good people on both sides” in Charlottesville.