RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Is there some evidence that he is ? (lying)
The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
Is there some evidence that he is ? (lying)
You are the one that said it was a PR statement what else would he say? I provided his quote saying that there were no issues with manpower. If its just a PR statement and isn’t true, then he is lying. Regardless he shouldn’t be lying to the public if that is the case.
And the FBI shouldn’t be lying to the public.
Departments investigating themselves, rubber stamping and then giving out a medal to him. Looks legit.
Anyone who was adequately trained in the use of deadly force would agree the first case not justified.
The second case was clearly an accident and wasn’t intentional.
Sentencing her to jail, possibly lengthy. What does that solve?
Both officers should lose their jobs.
Most everyone on the Left uses that same phrase. It’s their favorite talking point. Helps them rationalize to themselves an unjustified shoot.
Wait, what? Wasn’t this angry mob “posing a threat”?
“Posing a threat”? Yeah or Nay?
If you say so.What's good for the goose ought to be good for the gander ... right ?
lansing was violent, but the events in Washington on Jan 6 was just a peaceful protest.... Gotcha.
So how many people were arrested and jailed for the May 2020 insurrection?
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Law enforcement agencies perform internal investigations of themselves all the time.
I should note however, that multiple departments within the Department of Justice conducted their own review of the matter and cleared the officer in question.
Clearly that's not the case at all.
It would appear so.
She got ten years IIRC.
The lack of justice for clear negligence.
You have the right to have that opinion.
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
LOL ... "most everyone" ...
And you know that how ... by polling "most everyone" on "the Left" ?
... "talking point" ...
Apparently it's origin was in some Tom Clancey novels back in 80's/90's ... who himself was quite far from being "on the Left" ...
You would know this already ... if you would follow my previous advice and read more.
No need to rationalize something that was justified, and was found to be so by the relevant authorities.
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
From just watching the video's - while ignoring the editorial propaganda in the captioning included by Ngo and the voice-over commentary probably provided by Leland Vittert (both of which is designed to spin up your sense of outrage) - I would say no, it wasn't ... based on what I can actually see.
I will give you this though: it certainly looks to me like it has the potential to become violent ... because anytime you have a group of pissed-off people gathered together opposing other individuals or a group it can quickly descend from a peaceful gathering to a violent mob.
The first video largely shows an officer who has apparently been hurt possibly by someone in the crowd - or at least that is what the correspondent is reporting. There is no footage showing the actual event where the officer was hurt so one can only speculate as to how that happened. The crowd does not appear to be acting aggressively towards the law enforcement officers on the scene ... to the point that multiple law enforcement officers appear to have their backs to the crowd. That's not something normally does when a crowd poses a threat.
Second video is a little more difficult to discern ... you know: because it's night and it's dark out.
It appears there is something burning which one could assume was set by someone who was there for the protest. But I can't make out what actually started it, because the footage of it is only when it is already in progress. Hard to see any violence actually being directed at law enforcement officers and the motion of the crowd appears to be away from law enforcement.
BTW - how many successful positive ID's have you made on any of the participants ?
I mean that should be pretty easy ... right ?
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Again, based on what I actually see and hear (or don't - see below) in the videos I would have to say: it isn't clear that it is.
And I'll provide the same caveat as before: potentially could be posing a threat at some other point but not clear in the video that it does at that time.
In the first video, it's very dark and one can see a crowd milling around and number of folks holding up cellphones to video whatever is going on. There are some noises, some of which sounds like breaking glass possibly. I can discern no threatening actions towards law enforcement and the crowd does not appear aggressive.
In the second video the lighting is much better and you can see the action as far as what's going on. A number of people in the crowd are wrestling law enforcement for barricade which they eventually are successful in wrestling away from law enforcement. After that many in the crowd advance to stand face-to-face with law enforcement ... but they do not appear to be aggressive or violent towards them. The barricade is not used as a weapon against law enforcement. People from the crowd appear to merely be talking to them.
Interestingly, that second video has no sound.
The reason why that is interesting is Ngo makes a claim about what people in the crowd are calling for, and because Twitter indicates that the clip did not come, or was not linked, from another Twitter user. I have no idea where it came from, whether Ngo personally recorded it off his own tv, or what.
But it is very interesting indeed that Ngo makes a claim about what is being called for "by many in the crowd" ... but fails to provide the audio for that particular clip. That should have been pretty easy to do.
Of course, doing so might pose a wee bit of a problem given the propagandistic captioning that he elected to use for that clip ... if it didn't show what he claimed was being called for "by many in the crowd".
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
I wasn't familiar that particular event, but from what I can gather thus far there was an order of magnitude of difference.
