No, I did my own research to verify their claims.
BTW, I would like to thank YOU for the challenge to do that. I had saved some links, but they are now behind firewalls and I don't expect you to sign up just to view them, so I looked for more.
Do you accept all the sources that say, and it is the standard narrative, that January 6 was an insurrection?
No, because there are other sources that don't call it an insurrection. It was labelled an insurrection by some DC courts, but a bi-partisan report from the Senate declined to use that description. Of course the leftists are pushing that narrative, but nothing requires me to take their word for it, regardless of whether I believe the CIA's report on 1953.
Before I respond to your post line by line, perhaps we can take a step back and see if we have any areas of agreement. Do you dispute any point listed below.
The lawful government of Iran in 1953 operated under the constitution of 1906, with revisions adopted in 1907 and 1948.
That government was divided into three branches, executive, legislative, and judicial.
The head of the legislative branch was the king, known as the shah.
The head of the legislative branch was the prime minister.
The shah held the power under Article 46 of the constitution to appoint and dismiss the prime minister.
Are any of these untrue?