danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Well when you have a cavalier attitude over the riots in Seattle, Portland, and Minneapolis I guess we differ on stuff.
The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Well, yeah, they do ... but at the point where they do, then they are rioting.
Same goes for damaging private or public property, looting, and arson.
Yeah, no.
The people who were at the rally were not involved in a riot ... even when they marched over to the Capitol.
At the point any of them breached the barriers surrounding the Capitol though, that's when (arguably) you had a riot, ostensibly due to the manner in which the barriers were breached.
And if not there, then certainly when the Capitol building itself was breached.
No argument with that.
I wouldn't disagree with that ... basically because I think they are inherently "mean" on their own merits.
Cruelty: it is the point of what passes for modern "conservatism" ...
What Trump did do was incite them to take action ... which they ultimately did.
Clean up your own house ... before worrying about the other guy's.
Karen, I've mainly criticized the absurd use of deadly force of someone involved with a group that caused malicious destruction of property of a glass barrier. I don't condone that.Sure Jan.
She was part of a dangerous mob who had violently broken into the Capitol illegally, specifically to influence elected officials actions.
She herself advocated violence.
#peskyfacts
They should have arrested the 5' 3" unarmed woman and charged her accordingly.
She advocated violence to a glass door. Any other examples? I havent heard reported that she assaulted anyone.
Was she waved inside the building by officers or violently contributed to the breach?I think there is a difference.
We dont. People who caused violence and assaulted people and damaged property should be charged accordingly. But you have many reportedly , that were trespassing and didn't cause any violence or were waved in by police to enter, some who are being held in jail indefinitely.
Why are some cavalier about that?
Last edited:
It's mostly clean. Most Trump supporters don't commit crimes.
Now, whatabout your side? What.is.up
with.that?
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
And assaulted law enforcement officials.
And stated they wanted to hang the Vice-President, Mike Pence.
Ad nauseam ...
Sure.
That's why you have expressed so much outrage about it since January 6th ... and spent absolutely no time or effort to minimize what actually happened.
She shouldn't have become part of an angry mob that violently breached our Nation's Capitol building in an attempt to get at the persons of our duly-elected officials who were carrying out their duties on that day, as laid out by the Constitution.
She shouldn't have ignored the lawful commands of law enforcement officials - one of whom was simply carrying out his duty to protect the persons of our elected officials - both Republican and Democrat - from domestic terrorists, some of whom seemed highly inclined towards murder.
She should have just complied ...
But she didn't ... as explained by one of her fellow rioters, a Mr. Thomas Barani of New York, who was right there with her (in fact, he has her blood on his hand) and who explains the following, along with his own confession of his crimes that day:
1. They were trying to "get to" members of Congress, and
2. a number of police and Secret Service were issuing lawful commands (which he was apparently quite able to hear - even though he was actually behind her) and she ignored them ("She didn't heed the call")
You need to up your game and ask the question:
For what reason ?
Because that door had done her wrong ?
Nope ...
Simply because it was in between her and her goal.
Dunno ... perhaps getting beyond the fact that it was merely a door, to ask what was the greater purpose for that ? is just beyond your ability to comprehend.
So what ?
She was part of mob that assaulted law enforcement and media, caused the destruction of US property, and was advocating violence to elected officials.
No one forced her to be there that day and take part in what was going on.
Her choice.
There is certainly a difference between those two things.
Ultimately, in the end, it really doesn't matter in her case because but for the overwhelming numbers and the violence of the breach, no one would have been "waved inside".
She had a choice when she observed what was taking place that day:
1. Turn around and walk away ... or
2. Continue on with the mob.
She chose poorly ... and it ultimately cost her life.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
If that's the case then the mobs in Minneapolis and Portland, and Seattle should get shot alot by police....And assaulted law enforcement officials.
And stated they wanted to hang the Vice-President, Mike Pence.
Ad nauseam ...
Sure.
That's why you have expressed so much outrage about it since January 6th ... and spent absolutely no time or effort to minimize what actually happened.
She shouldn't have become part of an angry mob that violently breached our Nation's Capitol building in an attempt to get at the persons of our duly-elected officials who were carrying out their duties on that day, as laid out by the Constitution.
She shouldn't have ignored the lawful commands of law enforcement officials - one of whom was simply carrying out his duty to protect the persons of our elected officials - both Republican and Democrat - from domestic terrorists, some of whom seemed highly inclined towards murder.
She should have just complied ...
But she didn't ... as explained by one of her fellow rioters, a Mr. Thomas Barani of New York, who was right there with her (in fact, he has her blood on his hand) and who explains the following, along with his own confession of his crimes that day:
1. They were trying to "get to" members of Congress, and
2. a number of police and Secret Service were issuing lawful commands (which he was apparently quite able to hear - even though he was actually behind her) and she ignored them ("She didn't heed the call")
You need to up your game and ask the question:
For what reason ?
Because that door had done her wrong ?
Nope ...
Simply because it was in between her and her goal.
Dunno ... perhaps getting beyond the fact that it was merely a door, to ask what was the greater purpose for that ? is just beyond your ability to comprehend.
So what ?
She was part of mob that assaulted law enforcement and media, caused the destruction of US property, and was advocating violence to elected officials.
No one forced her to be there that day and take part in what was going on.
Her choice.
There is certainly a difference between those two things.
Ultimately, in the end, it really doesn't matter in her case because but for the overwhelming numbers and the violence of the breach, no one would have been "waved inside".
She had a choice when she observed what was taking place that day:
1. Turn around and walk away ... or
2. Continue on with the mob.
She chose poorly ... and it ultimately cost her life.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
You cross a barrier set up by police and do so after being told not to and then you attack said police with frozen bottles of water or bricks then you deserve to get shot....if your going to use the same logic as the Capitol building cop.
Just because she was in a building at some point of the day as wasAnd assaulted law enforcement officials.
And stated they wanted to hang the Vice-President, Mike Pence.
Ad nauseam ...
Sure.
That's why you have expressed so much outrage about it since January 6th ... and spent absolutely no time or effort to minimize what actually happened.
She shouldn't have become part of an angry mob that violently breached our Nation's Capitol building in an attempt to get at the persons of our duly-elected officials who were carrying out their duties on that day, as laid out by the Constitution.
She shouldn't have ignored the lawful commands of law enforcement officials - one of whom was simply carrying out his duty to protect the persons of our elected officials - both Republican and Democrat - from domestic terrorists, some of whom seemed highly inclined towards murder.
She should have just complied ...
But she didn't ... as explained by one of her fellow rioters, a Mr. Thomas Barani of New York, who was right there with her (in fact, he has her blood on his hand) and who explains the following, along with his own confession of his crimes that day:
1. They were trying to "get to" members of Congress, and
2. a number of police and Secret Service were issuing lawful commands (which he was apparently quite able to hear - even though he was actually behind her) and she ignored them ("She didn't heed the call")
You need to up your game and ask the question:
For what reason ?
Because that door had done her wrong ?
Nope ...
Simply because it was in between her and her goal.
Dunno ... perhaps getting beyond the fact that it was merely a door, to ask what was the greater purpose for that ? is just beyond your ability to comprehend.
So what ?
She was part of mob that assaulted law enforcement and media, caused the destruction of US property, and was advocating violence to elected officials.
No one forced her to be there that day and take part in what was going on.
Her choice.
There is certainly a difference between those two things.
Ultimately, in the end, it really doesn't matter in her case because but for the overwhelming numbers and the violence of the breach, no one would have been "waved inside".
She had a choice when she observed what was taking place that day:
1. Turn around and walk away ... or
2. Continue on with the mob.
She chose poorly ... and it ultimately cost her life.
someone else that was violent toward police doesn't make her guilty of the same crime. You do know this I hope?
I haven't heard that she assaulted a police officer. If so please provide info thanks.
You don't really know what her intent was. She may have wanted to get closer and voice her opinion within hearing distance loudly like protesters often do.
They are not shot over this. They are arrested.
There is actually film footage of someone in a police uniform waving people to come in. So yes, people were waved in.
Many others reportedly didn't know about the violence at the entrance and people reportedly walked in without anyone telling them no.
Again, other people that reportedly advocated violence should be charged accordingly.
What violence against persons specifically did she advocate for and commit?
Last edited:
I understand where you're coming from. But I also understand where other people are coming from on the issue. People are fed up with getting stepped on and terrorized. There were numerous inconsistencies with the past election that weren't even given the time of day. In fact a multi-million dollar Russia collusion witch Hunt was initiated on even less evidence then there were regarding the inconsistencies with this last election. But for some reason the side that was for investigations for numerous years all of a sudden are not for investigations. My thing is if you have nothing to hide then you shouldn't fear and investigation and absolutely should be in supportive one.
Realistically this is something that needed to happen. The government needed to be reminded who controls them and who they work for. For far too long has the government operated on the attitude that they are our masters.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
What does that have to do with the issue at hand?
Thats due to the garbage being spewed by some on the rabid right.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
You mean the stupid left......because all I see is deflecting responsibility onto Republicans.....biden is in office now so hes your problem because you elected him.What does that have to do with the issue at hand?
Thats due to the garbage being spewed by some on the rabid right.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Think on this if Republicans who generally do peaceful armed protests .....ask yourself why we got mad finally....and yet we didn't shoot people that day....because face it if that group had truly gotten pissed they would have taken over the inside of the capital building quite quickly and easily.
Because face it ...it was a riot not a armed insurrection.
It was a riot just like in Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, and Chicago.
The big difference is those riots in those citys were done by Democrats not Republicans.
Because face it ...it was a riot not a armed insurrection.
It was a riot just like in Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, and Chicago.
The big difference is those riots in those citys were done by Democrats not Republicans.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Yes - not necessarily guilty of the same crime - aka violence directed at law enforcement (or property) - that there is little doubt that others that she was with are certainly guilty of.
It is a near certainty however that she was guilty of other crimes that others in the mob - who were guilty of violence towards law enforcement - were also guilty of.
The most relevant probably being that she failed to heed a lawful order from a law enforcement officer - who was discharging his duty to protect our elected representatives from a violent mob - to cease and desist from her unlawful actions.
She wasn't a patriot - she was a deluded QAnon Trumper idiot who was engaged in un-American activities and ended up paying for her error in judgement (and poor choices of associates) with her life.
Whether or not she did, is largely irrelevant at this point.
That's a false standard that you are trying to insert ... likely to absolve her of culpability, or redeem her, for her actions.
No sale here.
I know her intent was to get into an area where our elected officials were which she was prohibited from entering.
And that she ignored lawful commands not to do so.
Wrong time, wrong place.
Read the previous answer above.
After you do that, read it again - however many more times is necessary to get it through your head.
I never claimed there weren't.
Sure.
They will be.
Again: irrelevant ... as to whether the officer was justified in using deadly force.
Two investigations had found that he was.
Trumpers are just majorly butt hurt that the insurrection did not succeed and are now trying to to normalize what occurred and make it acceptable.
It isn't.
But I would not be surprised if some of them attempted it again.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
The only thing you are normalizing is an acceptance of shooting an unarmed protester. Please tell how many code pink protesters that go into restricted ares and interrupt proceedings are shot? None. Because it would be unacceptable. That is also why rioters that chuck bricks and other potentially dangerous items at offiers aren't shot. Because in this country it is highly frowned upon to use deadly force on protesters and rioters.Yes - not necessarily guilty of the same crime - aka violence directed at law enforcement (or property) - that there is little doubt that others that she was with are certainly guilty of.
It is a near certainty however that she was guilty of other crimes that others in the mob - who were guilty of violence towards law enforcement - were also guilty of.
The most relevant probably being that she failed to heed a lawful order from a law enforcement officer - who was discharging his duty to protect our elected representatives from a violent mob - to cease and desist from her unlawful actions.
She wasn't a patriot - she was a deluded QAnon Trumper idiot who was engaged in un-American activities and ended up paying for her error in judgement (and poor choices of associates) with her life.
Whether or not she did, is largely irrelevant at this point.
That's a false standard that you are trying to insert ... likely to absolve her of culpability, or redeem her, for her actions.
No sale here.
I know her intent was to get into an area where our elected officials were which she was prohibited from entering.
And that she ignored lawful commands not to do so.
Wrong time, wrong place.
Read the previous answer above.
After you do that, read it again - however many more times is necessary to get it through your head.
I never claimed there weren't.
Sure.
They will be.
Again: irrelevant ... as to whether the officer was justified in using deadly force.
Two investigations had found that he was.
Trumpers are just majorly butt hurt that the insurrection did not succeed and are now trying to to normalize what occurred and make it acceptable.
It isn't.
But I would not be surprised if some of them attempted it again.
So glad you're able to buy hook line and sinker what ever apparent "investigations" yielded and found zero wrongdoing by the ridiculously absurd use of lethal force by the officer on the unarmed protester.
His name wasn't even officially released, nor drug test, and background. But in your view, hey whatever they come up with is just peachy because she was a Trump supporter.
Just call someone an insurectionist or DT without evidence,. and then they can justify in their mind that she deserved it.