Lets suppose trump was directly responsible and literally said, "Go attack the capitol building."
Its not insurrection to follow the orders of your (the fairly elected) leader.
I'd argue you were just protecting the constitution from those who were subverting it under direction from your leader. I'd also probably be in prison.
When the leader is fairly elected in the US if they are saying to storm a building it becomes legal to storm that building.
I believe what you're looking for is moral. In fairness they have gotten the concept of morality and legality so twisted and intertwined its hard to tell.
Edit; to clarify, the same applies to congress or the supreme court. If any of the three arms that are intended to be checks and balances say its time to storm a building; its time to storm a building.
Lets suppose trump was directly responsible and literally said, "Go attack the capitol building." Its not insurrection to follow the orders of your (the fairly elected) leader.
Yes. In that case, they would have to forgive all the people who breached the Capitol of any and all crimes/charges.
Ex-military here and you are allowed to not obey orders that would be illegal. Also far as I know they all had free will.
I'd argue you were just protecting the constitution from those who were subverting it under direction from your leader. I'd also probably be in prison.
Legal and illegal are now defined by what can harm good people.
Well, then, since there weren't any good people in the chamber that day....
When the leader is fairly elected in the US if they are saying to storm a building it becomes legal to storm that building.
I believe what you're looking for is moral. In fairness they have gotten the concept of morality and legality so twisted and intertwined its hard to tell.
Edit; to clarify, the same applies to congress or the supreme court. If any of the three arms that are intended to be checks and balances say its time to storm a building; its time to storm a building.