Talk:January 6 United States Capitol attack

Failed attempt to assassinate

User:Slatersteven, what does "hang Mike Pence" mean? They didn't breach just to change the results, they would have attacked and killed the active members in both houses in order to do so. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

It might mean "Look at us, we are shouty". Nor do I agree that did not break just to change the results, in fact, I am unsure they really knew what they wanted beyond being gobby. Slatersteven (talk) 15:17, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

But the threats were serious enough that did in fact break in and they probably would have done so to kill. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I think you both have a point. I do think the mob was out of control and would have done harm to Mike Pence, Nancy Pelosi, and various other members if they had gotten their hands on them. However, I do not think an angry mob tearing someone apart from their anger is quite the same thing as an assassination, and I would not characterize January 6 as a failed assassination attempt. Are there sources that characterize it as such? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm with ONUnicorn here. While it's fine in a colloquial sense to call it an "assassination attempt," I don't think it's in WP:BLUESKY territory, and so would like to see it represented in the sources. As ever, though, reasonable minds may differ. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 15:32, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

This PBS article days after the attack reported that Federal investigators were not calling it assassination attempt. But this Guardian article from June of 2022 states that Mike Pence's life was in danger as he was 40ft from the mob as reveled by the Committee investigation into the attack. If danger means threat then the whole "hang Mike Pence" chant was more than just talk. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Do you have an RS that says it was a failed assassination? Slatersteven (talk) 15:44, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Again WikiCleanerMan, I think you're very much correct in a general sense, but for me, I don't think the dots are quite connected in a Wikipedia sourcing way. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 15:47, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Newsweek "Impeachment Manager Says Trump Tried to 'Assassinate' Pence". That is the first half of the headline. NY Mag EARLY AND OFTEN JUNE 10, 2022 Trump Wanted Mike Pence Hanged, Liz Cheney Says. The Jan 6 Committee is reliable enough since they specified that the mob intended to kill Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi. Since they didn't, that means they failed to do so. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

NBC Jan. 6 rioter who talked of shooting Nancy Pelosi is sentenced to 60 days. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

60 days, for attmepted murder? Seriously? None of those sources say it was an assassination, they all say "X said it was", and no the jan 6th committee did not say it was, one member did. Slatersteven (talk) 15:54, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

So until you find an RS that says this was an assassination, attempt I will stop replying here as my objection stands, and will do so until I say it does not. Slatersteven (talk) 15:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Prosecutors called her comments about killing Pelosi “among the most graphic statements uttered by any rioter on Capitol grounds that day,” but acknowledged there was no evidence she intended to carry it out. I'm pretty sure attempted assassination of the Speaker of the House would merit more than a 60 day sentence. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Bancroft pleaded guilty in September to a misdemeanor count of parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building. That is not attempted murder. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

It is worth noting that, effectively, the news media only ever used one picture of the gallows, that being the forced-perspective one that wikipedia uses as the topic image for this page. If you search for any other picture of the gallows, you'll see that it is about 9 feet tall total and has a sign on it that says "This is art". I make no claims as to whether it should be regarded as art, rather the observation I am making is that it was not large enough to hang a toddler on, let alone Mike Pence. Furthermore there did not appear to be a trap door, and the noose was improperly tied. It would have been impossible to kill anyone with the miniature gallows except by beating them to death with the wooden timbers. Hunter12396 (talk) 00:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Lots of people kill themselves by hanging from a height of less than 9 feet with a rope that is not tied in a proper noose.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 22:06, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 31 January 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. WP:SNOW oppose. — Czello 20:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC) Rreagan007 (talk) 20:44, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

---

January 6 United States Capitol attack → 2021 United States coup d'état attempt – I think we should label this event for what it was: an attempted coup. The sitting president was trying to overthrow the constitutional provision and prevent his term from terminating when constitutionally mandated. GOLDIEM J (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC) GOLDIEM J (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

• When he is prosecuted for insurrection, maybe. Slatersteven (talk) 13:24, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. Per WP:COMMONNAME. Esolo5002 (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Iamreallygoodatcheckers^t@lk 15:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. While there is no single "name that is most commonly used" for this event and thus, strictly speaking, WP:COMMONNAME doesn't apply, we have to follow WP:CRITERIA, and the proposed new title clearly isn't the best fit. Besides, the "new" title has been requested and rejected on January 6 2021 itself, and there have been many other discussions about the term 'coup' since. Unless someone presents evidence that WP:RS use the term much more often now, I think this discussion can be closed quickly according to the rules for move requests. — Chrisahn (talk) 18:05, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
• Strong oppose clear POV and violates WP:COMMONNAME — Czello 18:11, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
• Strong oppose and WP:SNOW close. This politically-motivated request stands a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding. O.N.R. ^(talk) 18:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
• Regrettable oppose Although I agree it was, under various definitions, a coup attempt, COMMONNAME controls.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
• Speedy close given string of opposes. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

January 6 newly released video.

This post needs to be fact checked according to newly released January 6 video on Tucker Carlson Tonight aired March 6, 2023.the There is a lot of disinformation in your article that needs to be corrected/updated as soon as possible. 69.14.41.220 (talk) 01:37, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

When reliable sources report on the video, it will be reflected in the article. Tucker Carlson himself is not a reliable source. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 01:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

In other words, if the Washington Post reports on the exact same video, then the video can be referenced on Wikipedia. But because Tucker Carlson is the one reporting on the video, it can't be used. Noctis83 (talk) 01:45, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this is an accurate description per Wikipedia policies. Feel free to have a look at the sourcing policy and/or the list of perennially discussed sources. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 01:56, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

This topic is one of Carlson's favorite misinformation/conspiracy theory topics. If it's from him, you can't trust it. He's doing this to please Trump's deluded followers. "Video that Carlson didn’t air shows police and rioters engaged in hours of violent combat that resulted in the injury of hundreds of police officers." -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 06:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

No article will contain any purported findings from selectively edited videos presented by Tucker Carlson unless they are fully corroborated by reliable sources. Should we presume you have not heard of the recent Dominion court filing? Fox News hasn't reported on it, after all, but the rest of the world has. soibangla (talk) 06:47, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Completely biased and false

This page is biased from start to finish. Full footage from Jan 6th 2021 has come out, and it puts the lie to the claim that there was an "attack" on the U.S. Capitol. Pages like this one, full of lies and hateful bias, are the reason I will NEVER contribute to Wikipedia. 76.147.231.116 (talk) 05:56, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

And I will NEVER go back to Mardi Gras in New Orleans, but that's just for fear that someone will remember my last attendance. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 06:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

It's a big joke to you Dumuzid. Your Wiki Power must be intoxicating. Tom Donnelly (talk) 08:44, 7 March 2023 (UTC)