DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Who should be held accountable for the attempted coup in DC?

On the woman who was shot, are we sure that the shooter is a cop? He's wearing a suit, so I'm wondering if he's Secret Service. If so, that adds in another element regarding chain of command and protocols varying from one agency in place to another, potentially.

I would be willing to bet that there was a VIP, if not multiple, down that hallway.

It is unclear what his chain of command was - and they have not identified who the officer was.

From the extra furniture etc. pushed in front of that door - it is clear that door was a position they decided they needed to defend.

Who ever the officer is. He saved lives. Hero.

Yeah, if this dude is Secret Service, he is the absolute last line of defense, and I think it's logical to believe that his actions are not discretionary. It's if X happens, you shoot. I'd like to see that question regarding his role answered.

If that is the case, and the cops out front disregarded the red lines, and pretty much let these people in to a situation where they'd be approaching a last line of defense, shoot-to-kill situation from a separate branch of law enforcement, it makes things even crazier and more complicated.

Here's the odd part in what you're saying here as I see it. Trump had over 74 million people vote for him. There were thousands of people who came to the protest in Washington. Of those thousands, not even the majority of those protestors stormed the Capital building.

So let's break that down shall we? The thousands that came to Washington were far less than even .25 of one percent of Trump supporters. Of that well under .25 percent of trump supports, far less than half of them stormed the Capital building.

So from that minuscule portion of Trump supporters, of which I'm giving great liberties in those numbers skewed in your favor to increase the amount from what would be the actual numbers, here's what your claim was.....



Now maybe you meant something different than the way you presented it. But by looking at what you posted, I'll stand by my previous comments.

FYI, there’s a video on Twitter that I can’t post here. I think it’s also on the Washington Post. It muddies the water even further. It shows the events leading up to Ashli’s death, not just the moment she was shot.

Basically, there were three cops standing in front of the door. One of the rioters was actually punching the door around the cop’s head and he wasn’t reacting. You can see one of the Democratic reps down the hallway who was visible to the rioters as well. They were attempting to get to him. For whatever reason unknown to me, the three cops left and began walking down the stairs. Prior to that, they were the only ones between the rioters and the doors.

After the cops left, the rioters started trying to break down the door and windows, including Ashli. This is when the first video we all saw released yesterday began. The officer wearing the suit behind the door aimed his weapon. Most people who started smashing the door were aware and backed off. Ashli was still hanging onto the door frame and trying to get in. You can then see him take aim and fire, leading to everything we already know.

Let me know if I missed something or if anyone has anything to add.

How many mili-seconds until the establishment left gets the

Circus of, conflict back in the middle east started again.

Half a week? yea probably about half a week.

Way to stay on topic

While that is quite potent imagery, the issue is that, just like the overwhelming number of people who supported BLM and the protests but objected to looting and violence .... The overwhelming number of people who voted for Trump objected to the Capitol occupation and would most certainly object to the picture of the confederate flag in the building.

Just saw the Washington Post video -- I think it makes it clearer that this was a line -- and they should have known it.

There are house members on the other side (identified by the washington post) in the hallway 30 feet away. Cops are holding the line.

Protestors are telling the Cops that they have them outmanned (they do, by a lot) and "we don't want you to get hurt, there are a lot of people getting hurt out there -- but there are a lot of people coming up here and we are going to get through the door."

The cops seem to leave presumably, (since the hall is empty in the next shot) they left once the VIPs got evacuated into the office rooms -- there are three of them attached to the Speaker's lobby.

As soon as the cops leave, people start breaking down the doors, with fits, metal and wooden poles, etc...

Then the protestors notice the cop on the other side take a tactical position and poll a gun - there are shouts of "he has a gun"

The victim decides at that point to jump through the broken glass window.

The officer fires.

I just watched that video as well. That was definitely the line not to cross.

I was curious if those other officers knew to walk away from the situation because all the other tactical officers were coming up the stairs basically simultaneously.

Crazy video to watch unfold.

I should have read the whole article first.

At this point, one officer guarding the door said to the others, “They’re ready to roll,” and gestured to them to come with him, the video shows. The officers stepped away from the door together and moved to an adjacent wall.

Trump now permanently suspended/banned from Twitter!

Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter — we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence.

In the context of horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would potentially result in this very course of action. Our public interest framework exists to enable the public to hear from elected officials and world leaders directly. It is built on a principle that the people have a right to hold power to account in the open.

However, we made it clear going back years that these accounts are not above our rules entirely and cannot use Twitter to incite violence, among other things. We will continue to be transparent around our policies and their enforcement.

The below is a comprehensive analysis of our policy enforcement approach in this case.

Overview

On January 8, 2021, President Donald J. Trump tweeted:

“The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”

Shortly thereafter, the President tweeted:

“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”

Due to the ongoing tensions in the United States, and an uptick in the global conversation in regards to the people who violently stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks. After assessing the language in these Tweets against our Glorification of Violence policy, we have determined that these Tweets are in violation of the Glorification of Violence Policy and the user @realDonaldTrump should be immediately permanently suspended from the service.

Assessment

We assessed the two Tweets referenced above under our Glorification of Violence policy, which aims to prevent the glorification of violence that could inspire others to replicate violent acts and determined that they were highly likely to encourage and inspire people to replicate the criminal acts that took place at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

This determination is based on a number of factors, including:

President Trump’s statement that he will not be attending the Inauguration is being received by a number of his supporters as further confirmation that the election was not legitimate and is seen as him disavowing his previous claim made via two Tweets (1, 2) by his Deputy Chief of Staff, Dan Scavino, that there would be an “orderly transition” on January 20th.
The second Tweet may also serve as encouragement to those potentially considering violent acts that the Inauguration would be a “safe” target, as he will not be attending.
The use of the words “American Patriots” to describe some of his supporters is also being interpreted as support for those committing violent acts at the US Capitol.
The mention of his supporters having a “GIANT VOICE long into the future” and that “They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!” is being interpreted as further indication that President Trump does not plan to facilitate an “orderly transition” and instead that he plans to continue to support, empower, and shield those who believe he won the election.
Plans for future armed protests have already begun proliferating on and off-Twitter, including a proposed secondary attack on the US Capitol and state capitol buildings on January 17, 2021.
As such, our determination is that the two Tweets above are likely to inspire others to replicate the violent acts that took place on January 6, 2021, and that there are multiple indicators that they are being received and understood as encouragement to do so.

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html

I believe that the tactical officers came up to rescue the other officers -- who were seriously outmanned -- and even with new reinforcements they were still outmanned.

They seem to be leading those three officers down the stairwell, and only come up after shots were fired.

I missed that part, too. Yeah, it seems like they were waiting for the tactical officers to come up and left when they were arriving.

That's definitely what happened. I just had not read the remainder of the article yet.

Maybe that’s the case as well. My initial thought when I saw it was “why the hell are these guys leaving???”

I was thinking that from a vantage point that, yeah, they were outnumbered, but it just appeared to be the one officer behind the door which was already close to being broken, with VIPs down the hallway.

J/C

I sure love Friday evening deplatforming!

Here's my 2 cents (since you were obviously asking for it...) :-p

Twitter is just trying to save face. Sorry, I don't buy it. They've handed this lunatic a bullhorn for the last 4+ years that he's used it to amplify way waaaaaay worse tweets than the ones above. He folded his hands like a toddler and said he's not going to the inauguration, and the other tweet don't even rate in terms of the vile crap he's spewed on their platform. They've had ample opportunity to take the tool that they created and manage out of his hands, and they decide now is the time.

I suppose it's better than continuing to not do anything at all, but honestly it just feels like a slimy corporate move to save a little face.

FBI: No evidence antifa involved in Capitol riot

No evidence has been found that members of the left-wing antifa movement were involved in this week’s storming of the Capitol building, the FBI said Friday, contradicting a narrative pushed by some Trump allies.

“We have no indication of that at this time,” Washington Field Office assistant director Steven D'Antuono said during a briefing when asked about any potential involvement of antifa.

The term is used to refer to the loosely connected network of far-left activists who say they are fighting against what they perceive as fascism.

Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin separately said Thursday that investigators had not seen evidence of antifa presence.

Several figures on the right have attempted to pin fault for the mob that broke into the Capitol on Wednesday on antifa.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on Wednesday claimed that left-wing agitators had disguised themselves as Trump supporters, citing a Washington Times story with false claims that was later retracted.

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) also suggested on Twitter that the riot had “all the hallmarks of antifa provocation,” while Fox News host Laura Ingraham gave air to the baseless conspiracy on television.

Blaming antifa for apparent instances of right-wing violence, and claiming such members are creating “false flags,” has become a popular deflection for some conservative allies of the president.

Among those who have been identified from the Capitol riots are white nationalist and “QAnon Shaman” Jason Tankersley and Nick Ochs, founder of the Hawaii chapter for the far-right group Proud Boys, among others.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/533432-fbi-no-evidence-antifa-involved-in-capitol-riot

I saw something a couple nights ago that Pence, Pelosi and Grassley were in rooms down that hallway. They are 2,3 and 4 in line to the president.

You just hate to see fascists get deplatformed.

Can you explain your use of fascists, and 'deplatformed'

Fascism

Link

Wednesday was his most obvious example of fascism he's used. I broke this down a bit a few weeks ago and with DC. I never got a reply.

Here's the link to the post.

And no, you're not a fascist or a fascist sympathizer.
----------------------

Deplatforming

A bit more here

As for why we need to deplatform fascists, I'll leave you some links.

Link 1

Link 2

Link 3

Too bad there is no LOVE button for this post.

More reason to support local journalism...

I haven’t independently researched the money aspect of it yet, but I used to work on the other side from his daughter in the courtroom in Greene County. She was not pleasant, to say the least.

Sadly, I liked working with her much more than the guy she lost to.

I like how you posted a meme and avoided everything I posted. Nice deflection.

Quoted for truth. While it may be entirely debatable if they're willing to admit it's the rhetoric that Trump has been continually spouting that has fanned the flames which are at the root of what happened is an entirely different subject, the point you made and I have been attempting to make is no less accurate.

That woman was killed while committing a crime.. End of discussion

Not commenting on this particular incident -- I think the officer was justified.

I would certainly not argue that it is ok to kill anybody who is committing a crime.

Why is it now the end of discussion yet when other people get shot it gets discussed for months and results in massive protests?

And on point, I don't really disagree, though I don't think she was armed.

I took out some other comments I didn't really mean, so no sense getting off topic.
My feeling are this...I don't think she needed to be shot. I am also not all that bother by the fact.