ADVERTISEMENT

Speaker Johnson releases the Jan 6th tapes

@Uniformed_ReRe this thread is for you.

This is what happens when you blindly 'trust the experts'. The 'experts' on Jan 6th told you that your country was under attack from the people in these videos.

You believed them. You had a near panic attack in real time on this board.

You got hoodwinked. Now you can either admit that to yourself and stop 'trusting the experts', or you can ignore it, get mad at us, and go on trusting the 'experts' again, and get hoodwinked again.

Your call.
 
All the frenzy over the 'insurrection' is BS.

BUT, the protesters shouldn't have acted up like they did.

I don't mind anyone who caused a problem on 1/6 being punished but I'd like to see the same thing happen with all the other protests/riots/looting.

 
  • Like
Reactions: BCSpell
All the frenzy over the 'insurrection' is BS.

BUT, the protesters shouldn't have acted up like they did.

I don't mind anyone who caused a problem on 1/6 being punished but I'd like to see the same thing happen with all the other protests/riots/looting.
I think every person putting the law before their politics would agree with this.
 
All the frenzy over the 'insurrection' is BS.

BUT, the protesters shouldn't have acted up like they did.

I don't mind anyone who caused a problem on 1/6 being punished but I'd like to see the same thing happen with all the other protests/riots/looting.
Yes, burning state and federal buildings to the ground was much worse than this demonstration. Plus, looting billions of dollars from retailers was despicable and basically unpunished to a large degree.
 
not a peep from the sheep


Nope. Same posters that literally had a panic attack in real time on Jan 6th here, now saying nothing once we learn THEIR SIDE is mostly responsible.

When they thought it was Trump supporters trying to overthrow the US government, no punishment was too great.

Now that they know that it was mostly scripted by their side....well.....let's just move on.
 
Nope. Same posters that literally had a panic attack in real time on Jan 6th here, now saying nothing once we learn THEIR SIDE is mostly responsible.

When they thought it was Trump supporters trying to overthrow the US government, no punishment was too great.

Now that they know that it was mostly scripted by their side....well.....let's just move on.
You and I watched this whole thing on PBS live that day. Remember that? I was laughing my ass off. Guards and "terrorists" were high fiving each other. I'll never forget that. 😂
 
You and I watched this whole thing on PBS live that day. Remember that? I was laughing my ass off. Guards and "terrorists" were high fiving each other. I'll never forget that. 😂
Yep. We were laughing our asses off, @Uniformed_ReRe watching the same reporting and having a heart attack.

Poor Lisa Desjardins reporting for PBS from INSIDE the capitol. She had to turn her cameras off after she filmed Trump supporters walking past her in single file SMILING AND WAVING at her.

Next time they go to her, they explain she can only provide audio cause cameras are TOO DANGEROUS. She goes up to a Trump supporter, "Can you tell us why you are doing this???? Why are you so ANGRY????"

"Ma'am I'm just trying to find the bathroom'.
 
When you make the decision to enter an area that is secured by people carrying loaded weapons, you're rolling the dice. Sometimes, you're going to lose.

It's sad but she put herself into a bad position.
That's besides the point.

I'd like to have a look at the use of force guidelines for the capitol police, because generally you can't shoot unarmed suspects without some justification. I rather doubt they have a standing order to repel boarders with extreme prejudice, as it were.

The secret service might be able to get away with this, but I suspect this was not lawful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RussellCasse
That's besides the point.

I'd like to have a look at the use of force guidelines for the capitol police, because generally you can't shoot unarmed suspects without some justification. I rather doubt they have a standing order to repel boarders with extreme prejudice, as it were.

The secret service might be able to get away with this, but I suspect this was not lawful.
It's no more beside the point than considering what some stupid criminal was doing when the cops 'unfairly' shot them.

FAAFO goes both ways.
 
It's no more beside the point than considering what some stupid criminal was doing when the cops 'unfairly' shot them.

FAAFO goes both ways.
I am not absolving Ms Babbit of responsibiliy for her actions, I'm demanding the officer be held responsible for his.

I believe that an investigation is warranted in light of new evidence. If he followed procedure then yes, she wrote the check and he cashed it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RussellCasse
I am not absolving Ms Babbit of responsibiliy for her actions, I'm demanding the officer be held responsible for his.

I believe that an investigation is warranted in light of new evidence. If he followed procedure then yes, she wrote the check and he cashed it.
I'm not against the guard being treated according to the established rules.

I just think the story brings out the hypocrisy in a lot of people on both sides.
 
I am not absolving Ms Babbit of responsibiliy for her actions, I'm demanding the officer be held responsible for his.

I believe that an investigation is warranted in light of new evidence. If he followed procedure then yes, she wrote the check and he cashed it.

I'm hypothesizing here but I don't know how an investigation would not have taken place. When a homicide takes place, justified or otherwise, the case is presented to a grand jury. I cannot imagine a loophole.

IMHO, he had protectees that he was responsible for. If that crowd comes through, he cannot protect them. Whether or not Babbitt was armed, or whether any in the fairly large crowd with her were armed, if he reasonably believes that his protectees are in peril, the shoot is justified. That's my take.
 
I'm hypothesizing here but I don't know how an investigation would not have taken place. When a homicide takes place, justified or otherwise, the case is presented to a grand jury. I cannot imagine a loophole.

IMHO, he had protectees that he was responsible for. If that crowd comes through, he cannot protect them. Whether or not Babbitt was armed, or whether any in the fairly large crowd with her were armed, if he reasonably believes that his protectees are in peril, the shoot is justified. That's my take.
And that's a sound justification.

I read that she broke a window and was the point man for the incursion into the secure area.

Given that there was an unknown amount of people in the building and an unknown amount of people were behind her attempting to breach the secure area with her, creating a bottleneck would seem to me the best way to keep the area secure as well as protect the VIPs.

I'll be honest, that is not a situation I would want to be in.

As I said I'm a reservist, not a "road dog" like you so this is speculation on my part. I just don't recall any mention of that officer being placed on administrative leave pending investigation.

I once had to shoot a dog. In addition to feeling very bad about it, it took me an hour to write the supplemental my shift supervisor wanted to justify shooting a citizen's dog in a suburban neighborhood. Even though said animal was off leash in a public street.

I would like to see the is dotted and ts crossed. If I have to justify shooting a dog, and LEOs have to justify using force on people who insist on resisting with violence for misdemeanors, shooting an unarmed veteran, albeit one was being stupid and engaging in criminal trespass, should follow standard form, no?

I'm not calling for his head, just a review of video evidence that corroborates his incident report and statements made to investigators.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BamaFan1137
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT