Let's just ignore the irony of the folks with "don't tread on me stickers" next to their "thin blue line" stickers marching on the capital chanting about and barely failing to kill the Vice President of the United States, or sitting Senators, as we know they were within a hallway of them as they (our elected representatives) were fleeing and huddled for protection. But I guess the core of their protest, over-turning a democratic election, is really admirable.
But charge them? Make them stand trial? How repressive indeed.
edit: "who got caught up", too cute.
Yet what repression do you see in the Jan 6th cases? Wouldn't you expect to get arrested for breaking into any (super important) federal building and disrupting any (super important) government meeting? Is the government taking excessive action beyond fines and a few year's imprisonment?
Moreover, from a geopolitical and law/order standpoint, wouldn't you see it as imperative for the government to take legal action in the wake of insurrections? Hasn't this been a weakness of costal cities (like with CHAV)? While I'm all for restraining government power, there are situations where it must be used or you effectively have anarchy.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court was/is (and FISA more generally was/is) a constraint established on formerly-unconstrained executive-branch power after the Church Committee report, not an expansion of government powers (the War on Terror-era amendments to FISA loosened some of those restrictions, but still not to the pre-FISA state.)
So, this is a particularly bad example for your claim.