What part of attempting to block a Constitutionally mandated process through the use of force is not a terrorist act?
But didn't BLM demonstrate that political violence is effective at achieving your political goals? Or is it justified when it's your side committing the terrorism?
Perhaps financing the successful Democrat campaign by laundering BLM donations through the ActBlue portal? I don't think all the reports for the last election cycle are in yet. If not that, at least capturing data about progressive donators who could be solicited for contributions...?
As far as I can tell based on the 24 hour news cycle it's whether you personally agree with the protestors/terrorists.
Antifa showed up at several state capitals with much worse than zipties. They firebombed Federal buildings and police districts. Chanted for the removal of elected officials. Constructed guillotines.
Do you call them terrorists?
More importantly, how many elected Democrats have been signing the praises of antifa rioters all summer, telling us we need to leave room for them to express their rage, that we are supposed to be uncomfortable, that property violence isn’t violence....
And now they’ve gotten exactly what they’ve been asking for the last 4 years, Trump’s account suspended.
The woman who was shot (elsewhere I posted the very graphic video of it happening) was surrounded on both sides of the door by police.
My best guess is she was fully enthralled in a mob mentality and obviously not thinking clearly. Violent mobs are dangerous for this exact reason. We saw this play out again and again over the summer, and a lot of people died.
From the video I saw there was no need to kill her, she was trying to gain access to a long hallway with a half dozen police in the far side of the door, and the snot fired could have very easily hit the police officer that was standing right by her on her side of the door at the time.
I think all we can do is purely speculate on her mental state and her goals.
There will be a lot of evidence if she actually went to the capital in order to hurt or capture public officials. None has yet to be shown. All we know basically is that she was a military vet.
"Terrorism, the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective"
Not seeing it. They were going to bring about a general climate of fear in the population to prevent something that was happening that day?
> ... acts dangerous to human life ... [intending] ... to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion ...
(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that— (A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
B) appear to be intended— (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;
So, under that criminal code that you quoted, were the actions on Capitol Hill international terrorism?