You wait about three weeks to respond to a post and then all you want to do is quibble over the definition of Insurrection? You seem to have the mistaken belief that the only way something can qualify as an insurrection is if a new government subdues and existing government by force. Now I could just tell you that you are wrong but instead of doing that lets look at the actual definition of Insurrection according to established dictionaries of the English language.
Merrium-Webster
: an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government.
Britannica
: an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects.
Cambridge Dictionary
: an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence.
Dictionary.com
: an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.
Vocabulary.com
:an uprising against a larger force that's in power.
Collins Dictionary
: An insurrection is violent action that is taken by a large group of people against the rulers of their country, usually in order to remove them from office.
The Free Dictionary
: A rising or rebellion of citizens against their government, usually manifested by acts of violence.
So there you have it, seven definitions from 7 different dictionaries and not a single one says anything about it needing to be a new government trying to subdue and existing or old government. Now to be clear if a group of citizens declared themselves to be a new government and tried to subdue the old government that would also be an insurrection. In the cas of January 6, since it was a group of Trump supporters commiting the insurrection you could actually make the arguement that it was the old government (Trump's aka a self coupe) trying to subdue a new government (Biden's) but technically that wouldn't be correct since Biden was not yet sworn in. The process the insurrectionists were trying to stop or interfere with though was the electoral count that once completed made Biden's election to the office of President official.
Now I'm not sure what echo chamber you got the idea that it has to be a new government subduing an old government to qualify as an Insurrection, from? Fox News, OAN, The Steve Bannon Podcast, etc. Clearly though they were counting on you and whoever else was listening to not really know what is and isn't an insurrecction and that you would just take their word for it and not bother to do some of your own research to see if the way they defined it had an merit, because clearly you did just take their word for it and didn't bother to do even the most basic research of looking up how insurrection is defined.
Not only that but their whole arguement of a new government against an old government isn't where the debate on if Jan. 6th was an insurrection actually rests by people seriously trying to argue it. The actual arguement centers around whether what happened on Jan 6th involved acts of violence. Which it clearly did from the moment they started attacking police with flag poles, mace, pepper spraau, baseball bats, bear spray, etc. To when they smashed in windows to circumvent locked door, to when they erected a gallows and began chanting "Hang Mike Pence" as they roamed the halls of the capital they violently entered. Thank god that the police and secret service were successful in protecting Mike Pense or Nancy Pelosi or virtually any politician they might have gotten their hands on.
suffer, motherfuckers!
