What logical fallacy is this concerning Jan 6th?
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
P1: That mob on Jan 6th couldn't have been MAGA.
P2: If that mob really wanted to burn the capitol down, they would have destroyed the whole damn thing."
C: Therefore, it couldn't have been MAGA.
Comments on Question
Answers
2There is a premise that isn't stated, but is baked in: that MAGA's intention was specifically to burn the building down. With the evidence that's come out, both from the political side and the gangs that led the attack itself, I can't recall having seen that as part of the plan. I would call that an unsupported claim. It would be about as logical to say that, since they could have coordinated a synchronized performance of the MAGArena, the fact that they didn't means it wasn't them.
This seems to be an ad hoc rescue . Faced with the evidence, the person has invented an arbitrary reason why they'd still be right. Likewise, if the Capitol was burned down, it would be easy to claim that it couldn't have been MAGA since they're patriots, and patriots wouldn't do that.
It is not a coherent argument. P2 does not follow from P1. We are missing something like "If it were MAGA, they would have destroyed the whole damn thing." So non sequitur
MAGA destroys
Captiol wasn't destroyed,
Therefore not MAGA.
The above would be valid but not sound.
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course
What about the claim that it was all staged? Is there a fallacy there?
https://odysee.com/@True_World:f/Capitol-actor-fake-shooting---paid-actors---flase-flag---Jan-6-2021---fake-strelba-v-kapitolu:8