Rise of Domestic US terrorism fueled mostly by far right

[Neanderthaland]

Don’t you know, it’s only terrorism when Muslims and the left do it. Many right-wingers in America believe they’re incapable of terrorism because they believe “love America” and their acts of violence are either justified or at the very least “understandable”.

Dude you have a very wrong perception of us, because that is not what I believe and we believe.

You don't speak for anyone other than yourself.

[Greater Miami Shores]

Dude you have a very wrong perception of us, because that is not what I believe and we believe.

You don't speak for anyone other than yourself.

Dude, you only speak for yourself too, we all do. But since I know them and I talk to them, I know their views, at the Trump Rallies, at the Trump Campaign meetings and at the right wing news sites I read and post to them.

10 Detailed Reasons I just gave You in one Post, I broke them down for you to make it easier to read:
01 - But since I know them.
02 - Since I talk to them.
03 - I know their views.
04 - At the Trump Rallies I attended every Sunday and a few Saturdays'
05 - At the Trump Campaign Meetings I attended every Wednesday Nights
06 - At the Right Wing News Sites I read their Posts on.
07 - At the Right Wing News Sites I Post to them on.
08 - At the Right Wing News Sites they Post to me on.
09 - What a coincidence we strongly agree with each other?
10 - What a coincidence we strongly disagree with you guys?
XX - Dude, I just gave you 10 detailed reasons in one Post? I broke them down for you to make it easy to understand.

[Neanderthaland]

You don't speak for anyone other than yourself.

Dude, you only speak for yourself too, we all do. But since I know them and I talk to them, I know their views, at the Trump Rallies, at the Trump Campaign meetings and at the right wing news sites I read and post to them.

10 Detailed Reasons I just gave You in one Post:
01 - But since I know them.
02 - Since I talk to them.
03 - I know their views.
04 - At the Trump Rallies I attended every Sunday and a few Saturdays'
05 - At the Trump Campaign Meetings I attended every Wednesday Nights
06 - At the Right Wing News Sites I read their Posts on.
07 - At the Right Wing News Sites I Post to them on.
08 - At the Right Wing News Sites they Post to me on.
09 - What a coincidence we strongly agree with each other?
10 - What a coincidence we strongly disagree with you guys?
XX - Dude, I just gave you 10 detailed reasons in one Post?

All of those reasons are just one reason: "I have anecdotal evidence." And furthermore, "I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me."

[Greater Miami Shores]

Dude, you only speak for yourself too, we all do. But since I know them and I talk to them, I know their views, at the Trump Rallies, at the Trump Campaign meetings and at the right wing news sites I read and post to them.

10 Detailed Reasons I just gave You in one Post:
01 - But since I know them.
02 - Since I talk to them.
03 - I know their views.
04 - At the Trump Rallies I attended every Sunday and a few Saturdays'
05 - At the Trump Campaign Meetings I attended every Wednesday Nights
06 - At the Right Wing News Sites I read their Posts on.
07 - At the Right Wing News Sites I Post to them on.
08 - At the Right Wing News Sites they Post to me on.
09 - What a coincidence we strongly agree with each other?
10 - What a coincidence we strongly disagree with you guys?
XX - Dude, I just gave you 10 detailed reasons in one Post?

All of those reasons are just one reason: "I have anecdotal evidence." And furthermore, "I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me."

No these are 10 detailed logical reasons I gave you and all Persons. I think no one will believe any persons who say to them, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I think you will never believe any persons who tell you, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I know I will never believe any persons who tell me, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I think this is the logical human nature reactions of all Persons? Please answer the questions if you wish to?

[Picairn]

No these are 10 detailed logical reasons I gave you and all Persons. I think no one will believe any persons who say to them, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I think you will never believe any persons who tell you, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I know I will never believe any persons who tell me, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I think this is the logical human nature reactions of all Persons? Please answer the questions if you wish to?

45% of Republicans supported the insurrection, so no you don't know them as much as you think.

[Neanderthaland]

All of those reasons are just one reason: "I have anecdotal evidence." And furthermore, "I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me."

No these are 10 detailed logical reasons I gave you and all Persons.

No. They're all anecdotes. You haven't actually given anything that isn't a variation of "because I say so." And I don't trust you.

I think no one will believe any persons who say to them, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I think you will never believe any persons who tell you, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I know I will never believe any persons who tell me, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I think this is the logical human nature reactions of all Persons? Please answer the questions if you wish to?

This entire portion of the post is unnecessary and meaningless. The guy who posted after cited statistics. That's what a "logical reason" looks like.

[Grave_n_idle]

To a certain extent, you are correct. However it would be foolishly naive to suggest that the months of deadly and destructive rioting by leftists in lawless Democrat enclaves was not motivated and guided by political ends. Indeed, many of the most violent and chronic offenders migrate from riot to riot with the intention of promoting a leftist ideological end.

"BLM is rioting" usually comes with a lower death toll than "neo-Nazi goes on a shooting spree."

I would include BLM riots as domestic terrorism, but even if you do that, the death tolls just aren't that high. They draw big crowds and they make a lot of noise and they make a mess -- and sometimes they go too far -- but they don't kill hundreds of people.

And, as I've already shown, the violence at BLM protests tends to either be from non-affiliated others, or extreme rightwing false-flag rioters.

[North Washington Republic]

"BLM is rioting" usually comes with a lower death toll than "neo-Nazi goes on a shooting spree."

I would include BLM riots as domestic terrorism, but even if you do that, the death tolls just aren't that high. They draw big crowds and they make a lot of noise and they make a mess -- and sometimes they go too far -- but they don't kill hundreds of people.

And, as I've already shown, the violence at BLM protests tends to either be from non-affiliated others, or extreme rightwing false-flag rioters.

I’ve noticed unlike far-left or Islamist terrorist groups, the far-right terrorists are NOT as eager to claim responsibility for their terrorist attacks. They like to infiltrate and blend in other groups, particularly legitimate BIPOIC civil rights groups.

[Genivaria]

"BLM is rioting" usually comes with a lower death toll than "neo-Nazi goes on a shooting spree."

I would include BLM riots as domestic terrorism, but even if you do that, the death tolls just aren't that high. They draw big crowds and they make a lot of noise and they make a mess -- and sometimes they go too far -- but they don't kill hundreds of people.

And, as I've already shown, the violence at BLM protests tends to either be from non-affiliated others, or extreme rightwing false-flag rioters.

Multiple 'riots' identified local police in the crowd who were trying to provoke violence.

[Fauzjhia]

No these are 10 detailed logical reasons I gave you and all Persons. I think no one will believe any persons who say to them, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I think you will never believe any persons who tell you, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I know I will never believe any persons who tell me, I have anecdotal evidence that is not available to you, so you'll just have to believe me? I think this is the logical human nature reactions of all Persons? Please answer the questions if you wish to?

45% of Republicans supported the insurrection, so no you don't know them as much as you think.

that's nearly half of the republicans who support TRUMP taking over control of white house with a coup.
I really don't get it. WHAT have they lost with Biden election ?

[Grave_n_idle]

And, as I've already shown, the violence at BLM protests tends to either be from non-affiliated others, or extreme rightwing false-flag rioters.

I’ve noticed unlike far-left or Islamist terrorist groups, the far-right terrorists are NOT as eager to claim responsibility for their terrorist attacks. They like to infiltrate and blend in other groups, particularly legitimate BIPOIC civil rights groups.

This is true - groups like Antifa may engage in confrontation, destructive and even violent action - and they do so often under the banner of personal anonymity - but they don't hide their affiliation when they do it.

Rightwing terrorism isn't just violent and destructive, it's sneaky.

[Grave_n_idle]

And, as I've already shown, the violence at BLM protests tends to either be from non-affiliated others, or extreme rightwing false-flag rioters.

Multiple 'riots' identified local police in the crowd who were trying to provoke violence.

Interesting, show me.

I'm serious - I started looking into the 'false-flag idea early last year when Portland police released evidence of rightwing agitators they had spotted in the protests, so I'd be interested to see the evidence that Portland PD were also in that same crowd, trying to cause the same trouble - because (seriously) that just sounds like a nutball conspiracy theory. Why would they need to agitate when there were ALREADY external agitators?

[North Washington Republic]

I’ve noticed unlike far-left or Islamist terrorist groups, the far-right terrorists are NOT as eager to claim responsibility for their terrorist attacks. They like to infiltrate and blend in other groups, particularly legitimate BIPOIC civil rights groups.

This is true - groups like Antifa may engage in confrontation, destructive and even violent action - and they do so often under the banner of personal anonymity - but they don't hide their affiliation when they do it.

Rightwing terrorism isn't just violent and destructive, it's sneaky.

I think they to this to try to make legitimate BIPOC civil rights organizations look violent and radical, and push whites who are non-racist, or apathetic to more radical and extremist ideologies. They think that this will incite a race war, which they want more badly than a dog wants a bone.

[Greater Miami Shores]

"BLM is rioting" usually comes with a lower death toll than "neo-Nazi goes on a shooting spree."

I would include BLM riots as domestic terrorism, but even if you do that, the death tolls just aren't that high. They draw big crowds and they make a lot of noise and they make a mess -- and sometimes they go too far -- but they don't kill hundreds of people.

And, as I've already shown, the violence at BLM protests tends to either be from non-affiliated others, or extreme rightwing false-flag rioters.

It the amount of violence does not matter, violence is violence and are crimes. a logical Fact.

[Azalfia]

Who would have thought.

[Greater Miami Shores]

Who would have thought.

Why are you telling me this, they are the ones who keep disagreeing with me on this point.

[Azalfia]

Who would have thought.

Why are you telling me this, they are the ones who keep disagreeing with me on this point.

Oh, apologies, I am not directly talking to you. Just saying in general.

[Greater Miami Shores]

Why are you telling me this, they are the ones who keep disagreeing with me on this point.

Oh, apologies, I am not directly talking to you. Just saying in general.

Yes, no apologies needed, but thank you. Yes, I keep making the point and most of them keep disagreeing with me, I wonder why" It is such a logical sounding Fact.

[Grave_n_idle]

And, as I've already shown, the violence at BLM protests tends to either be from non-affiliated others, or extreme rightwing false-flag rioters.

It the amount of violence does not matter, violence is violence and are crimes. a logical Fact.

I totally agree with you.

Violence is violence. The January 6th insurrectionists should pay for their sins, as should the people who turned peaceful protests into riots.

The interesting thing is - and this is arguably the entire point of the thread - these two groups of people are the same.

[Greater Miami Shores]

It the amount of violence does not matter, violence is violence and are crimes. a logical Fact.

I totally agree with you.

Violence is violence. The January 6th insurrectionists should pay for their sins, as should the people who turned peaceful protests into riots.

The interesting thing is - and this is arguably the entire point of the thread - these two groups of people are the same.

This post is not copy pasted for real, this post is all typed and posted as it was typed. It is possible you have not seen one of my previous post on it. so now you get to see one of them. I totally agree with you Violence is Violence, The January 6th right wing protestors who protested violently need to all be arrested, charged in a US Court of Law and if found guilty which seems very likely need to be locked up in Jail. As I keep posting many times.

Just like the minority of violent leftists who have torn down statues and monuments, looted stores, certain ones owned by minority ethnic groups, burned down stores and buildings, tried to burn down the Federal Court House of Portland Oregon, throw projectiles at Cops, provoking the Cops, killed innocent persons, killed 2 good innocent Police Officer Cops sitting in their Patrol Car, and still commit leftist violence from time to time, need to be identified, charged with a crime in a US Court of Law and if found guilty need to be locked up in Jail. They are still committing leftist violence from time to time. I know you said on a previous post you strongly agree. But If you would like to make new and similar comments condemning the right wing violence and leftist violence again, please do so? Those of you who have not condemned the right wing violence and leftist violence please do so no with your posts and comments? If you have already condemned the right wing violence and leftist violence please do so now with your posts and comments? If you have done so, please do so again? There are bad Cops and Good Police Officer Cops like my Cuban Cousin Police Officer Cop. I have posted about a few times.

But President Trump of the USA, is not responsible for the leftist violence in Democrat run cities with Democrat Mayors. But President Trump said Fight Like Hell and Protest Peacefully and Patriotically to defend honest and fair elections, to defend Democracy and Freedoms of Speech in the USA. As most right wingers did and are doing today across the USA. I have explained in details how ridiculous it is to believe President Trump planned a successful Coup D'Etat against the Capitol Police the Armed Forces of the USA and the government of the USA, with 500, 1,000 or even 5,000 right wingers, my numbers went up by 2,000 more. As you all know I had Cuban And American Friends at the Trump Rally, Proud American Patriots of the USA, Army, Navy, Air Force and the US Marines, and they heard the same speech where President Trump said Protest Peacefully and Patriotically and they were not influenced to commit any acts of violence either.. I wish I could have gone with them. This Post has not been copy pasted, it has all been typed and posted,

Republican President Trump of the USA to make it very clear is not responsible and guilty of the biased, partisan, democrat charges against him, and was proven not guilty by his lawyers and my video link posts.

[Vassenor]

Also I'm laughing at the idea that treating looting a WalMart as being less of a crime than shooting 46 people in a WalMart is somehow denying the person who shot 46 people equal protection under the law.

Strawman.

Produce the post in which I stated that perpetrators of violent crime should be coddled or treating differently.

I'll wait and while you're at it, join me in advocating the mandatory death penalty for perpetrators of mass murder.

I'll wait on your response to that as well.

You are correct.

In addition, I have been perusing crime statistics related to terrorism and I don't believe that much of the rioting across the Republic by leftists is counted as "terrorism".

I find this unusual because the rioters are committing ideologically motivated violence designed to intimidate and coerce both civil society and government to submitting to their views.

Why shouldn't this be considered terrorism? Indeed, it appears the federal bureaucracy has been intimidated into "wokeness" at the expense of equal protection under the law and due process.

[Kubra]

This Part of Peaceful and Voluntary Exchange's post, is related to this thread: Thankfully, the Oklahoma City bombing was a one-time tragedy and the offenders were either executed or imprisoned for life. In contrast, over 100 more innocents were murdered in Chicago this year alone then died in the Oklahoma bombing. ANd this will continue and continue and continue without any appreciable condemnation or action from progressives. However, you can bet there will be much more handwringing on "rightwing terrorism" from leftists even as thousands more citizens are murdered in hellholethat have been governed exclusively by Democrats for decades. He briefly mentions the Chicago crime incidents and states then died in the Oklahoma bombing, which is the central point of his post, then he talks about the leftist violence in Democrat run cities with Democrat Mayors but he does not directly stated as so. Is this correct my right wing Friend?

You are correct.

In addition, I have been perusing crime statistics related to terrorism and I don't believe that much of the rioting across the Republic by leftists is counted as "terrorism".

I find this unusual because the rioters are committing ideologically motivated violence designed to intimidate and coerce both civil society and government to submitting to their views.

Why shouldn't this be considered terrorism? Indeed, it appears the federal bureaucracy has been intimidated into "wokeness" at the expense of equal protection under the law and due process.

to make a long story short, because "terrorism" charges are considered as the same severity as, say, treason or old school regicide, and tend to assume a certain degree of organisation and pre-meditation. Those latter qualities tend to be lacking in riots, which tend to simply, you know, happen.

[His Excellence]

Don’t you know, it’s only terrorism when Muslims and the left do it. Many right-wingers in America believe they’re incapable of terrorism because they believe “love America” and their acts of violence are either justified or at the very least “understandable”.

Conversely, many left-wingers in America believe they’re incapable of terrorism because they're “fighting racism and systemic oppression” and their acts of violence are either justified or at the very least “understandable”. It's only terrorism when right-wingers do it.
Domestic extremism in America can't be discussed in a fair reasonable manner because the people reporting on or prosecuting it are blatantly and consistently biased in favor of the left. Maybe right-wingers would be more apt to discuss combatting right-wing violence if left-wingers were more apt to admit that left-wing violence even happens. Demanding other people be held accountable for the actions on "their side" while refusing to let anybody on your own side be held accountable for their own actions is being a hypocrite. There's certainly plenty of this hypocrisy on the right as well, I won't say there isn't, but I will say it's a more blatant pervasive issue on the left, that many of you in this very thread are complicit in. Most of you aren't actually opposing political extremism or terrorism, you're just opposing the right-wing.

The great majority of right-wingers in the U.S believe that the January 6 terrorist attack on the Capitol was really “antifa”, and if they do acknowledge that it was Trump supporters, they support it.

I’ve noticed unlike far-left or Islamist terrorist groups, the far-right terrorists are NOT as eager to claim responsibility for their terrorist attacks. They like to infiltrate and blend in other groups, particularly legitimate BIPOIC civil rights groups.

I think they to this to try to make legitimate BIPOC civil rights organizations look violent and radical, and push whites who are non-racist, or apathetic to more radical and extremist ideologies. They think that this will incite a race war, which they want more badly than a dog wants a bone.

This sure doesn't sound like rabid conspiracy theorist mental gymnastics. Another constant trend, "all left-wing associated violence is actually right-wing infiltrators, but those crazy right-wingers blaming their violence on left-wing infiltrators are lying!" How do you spew this hysterical nonsense and expect it to result in constructive dialogue? You also accuse right-wing extremists of desperately wanting a race war, but it's the left-wing who keeps pushing this mass cultural delusion that right-wing vs left-wing neatly boils down to "bigotry vs equality," reinforced with selective outrage against police violence, interracial crime, and mass shootings, which are only acknowledged when it can serve that narrative. Double standard harder.

Violence is violence. The January 6th insurrectionists should pay for their sins, as should the people who turned peaceful protests into riots.
The interesting thing is - and this is arguably the entire point of the thread - these two groups of people are the same.

Ditto this. "The entire point of the thread" is shifting blame.
Interesting how the people who supposedly hate the systemically oppressive leadership and claim to stand up for disenfranchised communities, are so upset by an attempted attack on politicians, while defending mobs (largely consisting of people who aren't even local) in disenfranchised communities continually exacerbating violence and economic depression in the area.

You don't speak for anyone other than yourself.

Right-wing supporters have more room to speak for the right-wing than vitriolic anti-right crusaders.
Person A: "All right-wingers are racist nazis!"
Person B: "Well I'm right-wing, I'm not a racist nazi, and I know plenty of people who are in the same boat."
You: "YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ANYONE OTHER THAN YOURSELF!"
What does this contribute? It's like you just want to be part of the discussion without actually having anything to say, so you're not speaking for anybody.

to make a long story short, because "terrorism" charges are considered as the same severity as, say, treason or old school regicide, and tend to assume a certain degree of organisation and pre-meditation. Those latter qualities tend to be lacking in riots, which tend to simply, you know, happen.

Wow, that sure sounds like it could just as well describe Jan 6th, considering the massive crowd of Trump supporters there that day. If that was actually the planned insurrection so many try to paint it as, would it have been over as quickly as it was? Hell no. Trump asked people to peacefully and patriotically show their support for democracy, which is what the vast majority of people there did. Then Pence made the decision to not even discuss allegations of election fraud, and instead just ratify votes that many people weren't confident in, so a portion of that crowd lost their shit and invaded the Capitol, which lasted what, a few hours? Some had intentions of inflicting violence on government officials, but even the most inflated death toll for that day is only 5 deaths, most of which were Trump supporters. The police officer who died was hospitalized by pepper spray, but that was falsely reported as him being bludgeoned, for weeks. Totally sounds like completely fair and balanced reporting on an incident that was definitely an organized terrorist attack.

But when cities like Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, etc were/are having nightly riots, that just sort of happens, right? Crowds chanting mottos about murdering police officers, or "no justice, no peace" in conjunction with these riots associated with their cause, isn't an attempt to scare people into supporting a particular political cause (and no, that cause isn't for civil rights or equality, it's simply an anti-police movement disguised as such)? When crowds of people are shooting fireworks into the faces of police officers, there was no organization or premeditation, right? When those 'autonomous zones' pop-up, claiming a few city blocks to be under the control of a particular group that does not recognize the existing authorities, that just, sort of happens? And continues to happen for weeks sometimes, with the tacit support of local leadership?

45% of Republicans supported the insurrection, so no you don't know them as much as you think.

Also points out that 43% opposed it. Standard anti-right argument of selective acknowledgment.
The 2020 election was sketchy as hell, and most of the people with the authority to investigate the matter refuse to do so, while the people who conducted it stonewall those who try, and the left-wing elites just keep harping on about how safe and secure the election was, while making no effort to prove it and labelling anyone who questions it as treasonous lunatics. Anybody who actually gives a shit about democracy or free fair elections should be just as upset at this response as anybody on the right.

(This part is aimed more at others than you in particular) Compare that to the response to Trump's victory in 2016, in which claims from Hillary Clinton (among others) that Trump cheated weren't universally vilified/silenced by mass media, and resulted in investigations, because election integrity is only questionable when a left-wing candidate loses. Rioting by Hillary supporters didn't get her deplatformed for those claims, nor do people get deplatformed for "indirectly" encouraging violence against the right-wing via constant false conflation with white supremacy and nazism. Though people on the left seem to have no problems identifying themselves with communist/socialist ideology, despite it being responsible for atrocities on the same scale. So fair.

Most people who "support the insurrection" are actually (in their view, whether or not you agree with it) supporting election integrity, which they feel they were failed on. But people who don't trust the authorities/system on any other matter apparently have a lot of blind faith that this particular thing was handled properly.

[Vassenor]

Don’t you know, it’s only terrorism when Muslims and the left do it. Many right-wingers in America believe they’re incapable of terrorism because they believe “love America” and their acts of violence are either justified or at the very least “understandable”.

Conversely, many left-wingers in America believe they’re incapable of terrorism because they're “fighting racism and systemic oppression” and their acts of violence are either justified or at the very least “understandable”. It's only terrorism when right-wingers do it.
Domestic extremism in America can't be discussed in a fair reasonable manner because the people reporting on or prosecuting it are blatantly and consistently biased in favor of the left. Maybe right-wingers would be more apt to discuss combatting right-wing violence if left-wingers were more apt to admit that left-wing violence even happens. Demanding other people be held accountable for the actions on "their side" while refusing to let anybody on your own side be held accountable for their own actions is being a hypocrite. There's certainly plenty of this hypocrisy on the right as well, I won't say there isn't, but I will say it's a more blatant pervasive issue on the left, that many of you in this very thread are complicit in. Most of you aren't actually opposing political extremism or terrorism, you're just opposing the right-wing.

The great majority of right-wingers in the U.S believe that the January 6 terrorist attack on the Capitol was really “antifa”, and if they do acknowledge that it was Trump supporters, they support it.

I’ve noticed unlike far-left or Islamist terrorist groups, the far-right terrorists are NOT as eager to claim responsibility for their terrorist attacks. They like to infiltrate and blend in other groups, particularly legitimate BIPOIC civil rights groups.

I think they to this to try to make legitimate BIPOC civil rights organizations look violent and radical, and push whites who are non-racist, or apathetic to more radical and extremist ideologies. They think that this will incite a race war, which they want more badly than a dog wants a bone.

This sure doesn't sound like rabid conspiracy theorist mental gymnastics. Another constant trend, "all left-wing associated violence is actually right-wing infiltrators, but those crazy right-wingers blaming their violence on left-wing infiltrators are lying!" How do you spew this hysterical nonsense and expect it to result in constructive dialogue? You also accuse right-wing extremists of desperately wanting a race war, but it's the left-wing who keeps pushing this mass cultural delusion that right-wing vs left-wing neatly boils down to "bigotry vs equality," reinforced with selective outrage against police violence, interracial crime, and mass shootings, which are only acknowledged when it can serve that narrative. Double standard harder.

Violence is violence. The January 6th insurrectionists should pay for their sins, as should the people who turned peaceful protests into riots.
The interesting thing is - and this is arguably the entire point of the thread - these two groups of people are the same.

Ditto this. "The entire point of the thread" is shifting blame.
Interesting how the people who supposedly hate the systemically oppressive leadership and claim to stand up for disenfranchised communities, are so upset by an attempted attack on politicians, while defending mobs (largely consisting of people who aren't even local) in disenfranchised communities continually exacerbating violence and economic depression in the area.

You don't speak for anyone other than yourself.

Right-wing supporters have more room to speak for the right-wing than vitriolic anti-right crusaders.
Person A: "All right-wingers are racist nazis!"
Person B: "Well I'm right-wing, I'm not a racist nazi, and I know plenty of people who are in the same boat."
You: "YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ANYONE OTHER THAN YOURSELF!"
What does this contribute? It's like you just want to be part of the discussion without actually having anything to say, so you're not speaking for anybody.

to make a long story short, because "terrorism" charges are considered as the same severity as, say, treason or old school regicide, and tend to assume a certain degree of organisation and pre-meditation. Those latter qualities tend to be lacking in riots, which tend to simply, you know, happen.

Wow, that sure sounds like it could just as well describe Jan 6th, considering the massive crowd of Trump supporters there that day. If that was actually the planned insurrection so many try to paint it as, would it have been over as quickly as it was? Hell no. Trump asked people to peacefully and patriotically show their support for democracy, which is what the vast majority of people there did. Then Pence made the decision to not even discuss allegations of election fraud, and instead just ratify votes that many people weren't confident in, so a portion of that crowd lost their shit and invaded the Capitol, which lasted what, a few hours? Some had intentions of inflicting violence on government officials, but even the most inflated death toll for that day is only 5 deaths, most of which were Trump supporters. The police officer who died was hospitalized by pepper spray, but that was falsely reported as him being bludgeoned, for weeks. Totally sounds like completely fair and balanced reporting on an incident that was definitely an organized terrorist attack.

But when cities like Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, etc were/are having nightly riots, that just sort of happens, right? Crowds chanting mottos about murdering police officers, or "no justice, no peace" in conjunction with these riots associated with their cause, isn't an attempt to scare people into supporting a particular political cause (and no, these protests aren't for civil rights or equality, they're simply anti-police)? When crowds of people are shooting fireworks into the faces of police officers, there was no organization or premeditation, right? When those 'autonomous zones' pop-up, claiming a few city blocks to be under the control of a particular group that does not recognize the existing authorities, that just, sort of happens? And continues to happen for weeks sometimes, with the tacit support of local leadership?

45% of Republicans supported the insurrection, so no you don't know them as much as you think.

Also points out that 43% opposed it. Standard anti-right argument of selective acknowledgment.
The 2020 election was sketchy as hell, and most of the people with the authority to investigate the matter refuse to do so, while the people who conducted it stonewall those who try, and the left-wing elites just keep harping on about how safe and secure the election was, while making no effort to prove it and labelling anyone who questions it as treasonous lunatics. Anybody who actually gives a shit about democracy or free fair elections should be just as upset at this response as anybody on the right.

(This part is aimed more at others than you in particular) Compare that to the response to Trump's victory in 2016, in which claims from Hillary Clinton (among others) that Trump cheated weren't universally vilified/silenced by mass media, and resulted in investigations, because election integrity is only questionable when a left-wing candidate loses. Rioting by Hillary supporters didn't get her deplatformed for those claims, nor do people get deplatformed for "indirectly" encouraging violence against the right-wing via constant false conflation with white supremacy and nazism. Though people on the left seem to have no problems identifying themselves with communist/socialist ideology, despite it being responsible for atrocities on the same scale. So fair.

Most people who "support the insurrection" are actually (in their view, whether or not you agree with it) supporting election integrity, which they feel they were failed on. But people who don't trust the authorities/system on any other matter apparently have a lot of blind faith that this particular thing was handled properly.

So how prevalent is actual Left Wing terrorism then?

[Kubra]

to make a long story short, because "terrorism" charges are considered as the same severity as, say, treason or old school regicide, and tend to assume a certain degree of organisation and pre-meditation. Those latter qualities tend to be lacking in riots, which tend to simply, you know, happen.

Wow, that sure sounds like it could just as well describe Jan 6th, considering the massive crowd of Trump supporters there that day. If that was actually the planned insurrection so many try to paint it as, would it have been over as quickly as it was? Hell no. Trump asked people to peacefully and patriotically show their support for democracy, which is what the vast majority of people there did. Then Pence made the decision to not even discuss allegations of election fraud, and instead just ratify votes that many people weren't confident in, so a portion of that crowd lost their shit and invaded the Capitol, which lasted what, a few hours? Some had intentions of inflicting violence on government officials, but even the most inflated death toll for that day is only 5 deaths, most of which were Trump supporters. The police officer who died was hospitalized by pepper spray, but that was falsely reported as him being bludgeoned, for weeks. Totally sounds like completely fair and balanced reporting on an incident that was definitely an organized terrorist attack.

But when cities like Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, etc were/are having nightly riots, that just sort of happens, right? Crowds chanting mottos about murdering police officers, or "no justice, no peace" in conjunction with these riots associated with their cause, isn't an attempt to scare people into supporting a particular political ideology? When crowds of people are shooting fireworks into the faces of police officers, there was no organization or premeditation, right? When those 'autonomous zones' pop-up, claiming a few city blocks to be under the control of a particular group that does not recognize the existing authorities, that just, sort of happens? And continues to happen for weeks sometimes, with the tacit support of local leadership?

Yes, it was a riot. Well? What were you expecting me to say?
As for the latter paragraph, "organisation" tends to imply a certain amount of formality. Al Qaeda can be designated a terrorist group, because it is very much a formal group with a formal structure and all that jazz, and it's a lot easier to charge folks when there's a brand to have brand loyalty to.
Come now, this is a conversation you'll want to have, insofar as US efforts to add domestic terrorism to the criminal code could end up vaguer than others.