What is your definition of insurrection, and does it agree with the statute, 18 USC §2383?

With regard to the US Statute  18 USC §2383, are there any Democrat members of this site with sufficient lack of bias to explain, while there were charges of insurrection against a few of the hundreds of people charged with a variety of crimes for Jan 6 involvement, why there is not one single conviction for insurrection, yet your political-finger-pointing talkers continue to call the incident an "insurrection?" Some of you do, too. Since there are no convictions, it didn't happen, did it?  Something did, but that is not what it was, was it? Can you call it what it was please? Don't ask me; I not the one giving answers.  Don't wait for your talking pointers; they're sold down the river. Keep a decent head on your shoulders, huh?

"a violent uprising against an authority or government"

I wouldnt call Jan 6 an insurrection.

Few thousand people walking around and yelling aint ever going to overthrow US government.

Was there even a charge of insurrection?

That is exactly what it was.  An opportunity for Democrat, and even a few Republican talking points. I do not believe our government ought to be operated by talking points. It has a constitutional framework to follow, and, sorry for the misguided pols, but political parties area not therein mentioned, while even God is.

Yes. As I said; several. There was once a list of all the charges made against every person arrested.

This citation from Newsweek in 2023 is not the list I had. That list was complete, listing names, charges, and results of trial with dates. Attempting to retrieve it was fruitless, it's been coincidentally pulled. This list does not include charges in all cases, but does list convictions. Not one, as I d=said, for insurrection.

Being loyal to an ex-president cannot be an act of insurrection. Going against the establishment like Jesus did is an insurrection.

It was violent

Jan 6 was domestic terrorism. Noif. No but.

Not an uprising. Most people were just walking around. Few that got violent dont count. Otherwise, BLM riots would be uprising too then.

Nope. Not when Christ's response to Pilate after the latter's question to him, "Whence art thou?"  was replied to by the answer, "My  kingdom is not of this world." What threat, therefore, to Pilate, and Rome? Pilate's response was to wash his hands, symbolic representation of his own dismissal of responsibility for Christ's  life. And the. only reason why he had to remain involved is because the Sahedrin and Pharisees claimed they had no authority [due to Rome] to exact death by punishment for anybody. No, they did not get it, either. None of them believed Christ would resurrect, and scattered like Democrats today, wondering why they lost the 24 election. None of them get that, either, regardless of Trump. The Dems lost their own election by their own doing, or not doing, as the case may actually be. They had no message, apparently, that voting Democrats wanted. or they would not have lost. Bad-mouthing Trump is an obvious vote killer because everyone is tired of the complaining without a better message of what Democrats would do instead. As for Christ, he offered a lot of answers that a lot of people wanted, absent of Sanhedrin/Pharisees, and Roman's, the latter of which ultimately embraced the message themselves, didn't they, corrupted though it become.