Yes, Democrats Are Blowing It

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  s  •  3 weeks ago  •  80 comments

Yes, Democrats Are Blowing It
It is very difficult to argue that political violence is unacceptable when you have spent so many years accepting it

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



There is some truth in this   David Brooks column   (“The Jan. 6 Committee Has Already Blown It”) on the January 6 hearings, which are going to be — stupidly and wrongly — more focused on the Capitol riot than on the   actual attempted   coup d’état   of which that riot was a minor but dramatic part.


Brooks argues that the Democrats should be using these hearings to ask bigger and more meaningful questions about the state of American democracy, regime instability, creeping authoritarianism, and more. But should  implies  can , and the Democrats really can’t do that.



The reason the Democrats can’t make something useful out of these hearings — besides the fact that they wish to use them only for campaign purposes — is that the Democrats preemptively legitimized January 6. They didn’t know they were doing it at the time, but Democrats spent the summer of 2020 legitimizing “mostly peaceful” riots, arson, and murder during the George Floyd riots.

Denounce whataboutism all you like, but as a political matter, whataboutism matters and always has. It is very difficult to argue that political violence is unacceptable when you have spent so many years accepting it.

And, of course, Democrats have attempted to delegitimize every presidential election they have lost from 2000 onward. The main organizing idea of Democratic politics from 2016 to 2020 was that the 2016 election was somehow stolen from Hillary Rodham Clinton, who insisted that Donald Trump was an “illegitimate” president. They didn’t know it at the time, but Democrats spent those years building the political defense of the 2020 attempt to overturn the election of Joe Biden.

What David Brooks does not seem to understand is that Democrats didn’t blow it this week — they have been blowing it since November 2016. This is an example of Williamson’s Second Law: “When Democrats are in power, they act like they’ll never be out of power, and when Republicans are out of power, they act like they’ll never be in.” One need not make the morally illiterate case that Democratic shenanigans somehow excuse January 6 — they don’t — to appreciate that it matters what kind of example you set. Democrats think that they’re never going to have a Supreme Court nominee who gets the kind of shameful treatment they gave Brett Kavanaugh, and they were surprised when Mitch McConnell used his parliamentary powers to do quietly to Merrick Garland what Democrats did with great fanfare to Robert Bork. Democrats spent 200 years gerrymandering the hell out of every legislative district they could, and started complaining only when Republicans got better at it.

Republicans do not learn quickly or easily, but they do eventually learn.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1  seeder  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

"When Democrats are in power, they act like they’ll never be out of power,"

As Williamson says  "Democrats think that they’re never going to have a Supreme Court nominee who gets the kind of shameful treatment they gave Brett Kavanaugh, and they were surprised when Mitch McConnell used his parliamentary powers to do quietly to Merrick Garland what Democrats did with great fanfare to Robert Bork. Democrats spent 200 years gerrymandering the hell out of every legislative district they could, and started complaining only when Republicans got better at it."  They support claims of election theft when they lose and rioting when they perceived in that their political interests.  They want to get rid of the filuibuster today, but tomorrow they'll call it a pillar of democracy

 
 
 
Lucifer Morningstar
Professor Guide
1.1  Lucifer Morningstar  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    3 weeks ago

The list of ways they have applied their double standards in the political realm is damn near endless.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

Silly article that reached its conclusion before the author started writing it. 

Talk about partisanship. 

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.2  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
2.3  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 weeks ago
Talk about partisanship. 

yeah, I am.  It's why its impossible for anyone with a better memory than a goldfish to take the Democrats seriously.  They don't even try anymore to keep up the pretense they believe what they say.  Biden's chosen spokeswoman is a grade a election conspiracist 

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
2.4  Gulliver  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 weeks ago
Silly article that reached its conclusion before the author started writing it. 

You're onto something there.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.4.1  Ronin2  replied to  Gulliver @2.4    3 weeks ago

[Deleted]

Funny how you never comment on John's article like that. They are as partisan and predictable as the day is long.

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
2.4.2  Gulliver  replied to  Ronin2 @2.4.1    one week ago
Funny how you never comment on John's article like that.

I don't have all day for NT.

Some comments need to go unaddressed by me.

Although I might be inclined to criticize far left public figures like AOC from the center left I have no desire to get deep into the weeds arguing with someone I mostly agree with here in the comments.

There are times I find small areas of agreements with conservatives and I give voice to those, but I am not a conservative. I am a cautious liberal/progressive. And by cautious I mean something like, "let's not do it all at once and blow up the economy and lord knows what else with unintended consequences."

 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.5  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 weeks ago

With the partisan BS you seed. Just go the fuck away. [Deleted]

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.6  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 weeks ago
Silly article that reached its conclusion before the author started writing it. 

That describes every single article you post.

Talk about partisanship. 

Or talk about hypocrisy.  You are the most prolific, most partisan seeder on this forum.  You have zero grounds to complain about anybody else.

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
3  Gulliver    3 weeks ago

Democrats aren't blowing it. They just have little chance of reaching anybody who thinks the Democratic Party is a vast conspiracy to take America away from the hardworking, deserving, white people who made America Great in the first place. (Yawn.)

Show a video of Oath Keepers in stack formation climbing through a freshly broken window and those people's eyes glaze over. To them this is finally people doing something to take America back for them.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Gulliver @3    3 weeks ago
vast conspiracy to take America away from the hardworking, deserving, white people who made America Great in the first place. (Yawn.)

Lol... read a poll.  The only group the republicans have lost ground with are white people.  In the left wing fever swamps, are all the latinos  white Supremacists now?  

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
3.1.1  Gulliver  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1    3 weeks ago
are all the latinos  white Supremacists now?  

Ask Enrique Tarrio.

 
 
 
Lucifer Morningstar
Professor Guide
3.2  Lucifer Morningstar  replied to  Gulliver @3    3 weeks ago

That’s blatantly false, however it does provide a perfect example of what the article is commenting on.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
4  Jack_TX    3 weeks ago
is that the Democrats preemptively legitimized January 6. They didn’t know they were doing it at the time, but Democrats spent the summer of 2020 legitimizing “mostly peaceful” riots, arson, and murder during the George Floyd riots. Denounce whataboutism all you like, but as a political matter, whataboutism matters and always has. It is very difficult to argue that political violence is unacceptable when you have spent so many years accepting it.

He has a point.

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1  Gulliver  replied to  Jack_TX @4    3 weeks ago
He has a point.

Sure. Democrats should have been better in telling their own to make sure that the protests needed to be peaceful. Truth is the party was more worried about its left flank on Twitter than losing the center on election day. They believed polls that told them they had an advantage going in to Nov 2020 that did not exist.

But there is a big difference between people protesting in the streets demanding change and people breaking into the Capitol biuilding during a joint session of Congress.

One is rioting and the other is sedition. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
4.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  Gulliver @4.1    3 weeks ago
One is rioting and the other is sedition.

Neither is peaceful or defensible. But Democrats on the Left have spent years lying about and defending riots. They contributed to a political climate where people think violence is the answer.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
4.1.2  bugsy  replied to  Gulliver @4.1    3 weeks ago
One is rioting and the other is sedition. 

Then you have no problem with Chuck Schumer being brought up on charges of inciting violence against a Supreme Court justice, as he said "I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Here we are only a few months later and sure enough some idiot decides to drive cross country with the intent to kill Kavanaugh because of what Schumer said about overturning Roe. .

Liberals like to say that word have consequences.

After all, Trump saying come "peacefully and patriotically" is inciting violence, then Schumer saying what he did sure as hell is.

This is no difference, if most liberals have any credibility left.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
4.1.3  Jack_TX  replied to  Gulliver @4.1    3 weeks ago
Sure. Democrats should have been better in telling their own to make sure that the protests needed to be peaceful.

Not just that.  They should have been better on the local and state level about stopping the rioting.

Truth is the party was more worried about its left flank on Twitter than losing the center on election day. They believed polls that told them they had an advantage going in to Nov 2020 that did not exist.

It doesn't matter why.  Any description of "why" is just an excuse.  

You can't condone political violence for months or even years and then all of a sudden decide you're upset about it.

But there is a big difference between people protesting in the streets demanding change and people breaking into the Capitol biuilding during a joint session of Congress. One is rioting and the other is sedition.

Sorry, that just doesn't fly.   Everybody knows the real comparison is "one is liberals and the other is Trump supporters".  

Rioters in Seattle declared independence from the United States, took over US territory and held it for a month.  Authorities stood by and did nothing.  Local residents were extorted based on their race.  Women were raped.  At least one person was murdered.  Authorities (Democrats) still did nothing.  There was no congressional commission set up to study that.  No inquiries.  It's not on national television. 

So basically "sedition" is only a problem when certain people do it.  Rioting is only a problem when certain people do it.  Political violence in general is only a problem when certain people do it.  When that happens, the rule of law no longer exists in society.  

I don't have a problem locking up every one of these Jan 6 idiots for a very long time.... provided.... each and every one shares a cell with a BLM/Antifa/CHAZ idiot.  Political rioting is either a problem or it's not.

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1.4  Gulliver  replied to  Tacos! @4.1.1    3 weeks ago

Both are prosecutable for what they are.

 
 
 
Lucifer Morningstar
Professor Guide
4.1.5  Lucifer Morningstar  replied to  Gulliver @4.1    3 weeks ago

Well what you really meant to say one was riotous murder of police officers (aka sedition) in the heartland and the other was rebelling against a corrupt system in DC which resulted in the murder of an unarmed woman who was a US Veteran. 

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1.6  Gulliver  replied to  Lucifer Morningstar @4.1.5    3 weeks ago

No. That wasn't what I mean to say. Not what I really meant to say.

I said rioting and sedition are both prosecutable for what they are.

They are unrelated activities and one has nothing to do with the other. This is not a hostage negotiation with Putin.

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1.7  Gulliver  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.3    3 weeks ago
Rioters in Seattle declared independence from the United States, took over US territory and held it for a month.  Authorities stood by and did nothing.

If the authorities did nothing then then the rioters would still control that piece of Seattle.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
4.1.8  Jack_TX  replied to  Gulliver @4.1.7    3 weeks ago
If the authorities did nothing then then the rioters would still control that piece of Seattle.

It took a month.  More than enough time to firmly establish the double standard.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
4.1.9  Ronin2  replied to  Gulliver @4.1.4    3 weeks ago

Not if you have a highly toxic and partisan AG and DOJ at the federal level. Then AG's and DA's at the local and state level that are nothing more than criminal loving George Soros hacks. What you end up with is a two tier justice system where leftists walk; and those on the right face the full punishment of the law. We have a third world legal system.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Guide
4.1.10  1stwarrior  replied to  Gulliver @4.1    3 weeks ago

256

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1.11  Gulliver  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.8    2 weeks ago

So they should have waited a month to evict the rioters from the Capitol?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
4.1.12  Jack_TX  replied to  Gulliver @4.1.11    2 weeks ago
So they should have waited a month to evict the rioters from the Capitol?

Or... if we're not complete morons... we can agree they should have evicted and arrested the CHAZ nutjobs immediately.

I'm not sure the DC rioters were forcibly evicted anyway.  Didn't most of them just leave after a while?

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1.13  Gulliver  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.12    2 weeks ago
Didn't most of them just leave after a while?

After killing a few people and making congress flee their attempt to certify the election?

Do you REALLY see parallels here or is the world just a word game to you?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
4.1.14  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Gulliver @4.1.13    2 weeks ago
After killing a few people

Ashli Babbitt was the only person killed during the protest and she was shot by Capital Police LT Michael Byrd.  

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
4.1.15  JBB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.14    2 weeks ago

Yet one hundred seventeen law enforcement officers were wounded by Trump's rioters on January 6th, 2020. A total of seven people ultimately died in connection to January 6th.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
4.1.16  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JBB @4.1.15    2 weeks ago

So what you are saying is that, YES there was only ONE person killed during the protest.  The rest were not.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
4.1.17  JBB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.16    2 weeks ago

What I am stressing is that police defending the Capital used amazing restraint when violently attacked by a mob they could have rightfully mowed down if they were not ordered not to...

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
4.1.18  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JBB @4.1.17    2 weeks ago
What I am stressing is that police defending the Capital used amazing restraint when violently attacked by a mob they could have rightfully mowed down if they were not ordered not to...

Did you stress that restraint of Law Enforcement in the Kenosha, Minneapolis and Baltimore riots when they were attacked by a mob they could have rightfully mowed down (without being ordered to)?

I don't recall it.

 
 
 
Wishful_thinkin
Freshman Silent
4.1.19  Wishful_thinkin  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.18    2 weeks ago

What about.....(attempted deflection).

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
4.1.20  Jack_TX  replied to  Gulliver @4.1.13    2 weeks ago
After killing a few people and making congress flee their attempt to certify the election?

I think you mean "after getting a few of themselves killed".  Deservedly so, BTW.  Still, they left of their own accord.  

Do you REALLY see parallels here or is the world just a word game to you?

How do you not see the parallels?  

Either violent lawlessness is OK or it's not.  It doesn't suddenly become OK because it's committed by people who agree with you politically.  

Democrats everywhere want to talk about "the violent insurrection"... as long as it's not any of the ones liberals perpetrated and Democrats enabled.  Well, you can't do that and hope to have any credibility. 

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1.21  Gulliver  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.14    2 weeks ago

She may as well shot herself in the throat attempting to crawl through a broken window protected by an armed officer charged with protecting congress on the inside of that room. She had no first amendment right to crawl through a window the crowd she was in had just broken. She was engaged in a violent criminal act and she reaped what she had sewn.

Only Ashli Babbit, her fellow idiot traitors, and Trump are to blame for her death.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
4.1.22  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Gulliver @4.1.21    2 weeks ago
Only Ashli Babbit, her fellow idiot traitors, and Trump are to blame for her death.

I'd agree with you but then we'd both be wrong.  Thousands of people there, she was the only death.  If it were as bad as you claim it to be, would be more people shot.  

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1.23  Gulliver  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.22    2 weeks ago
If it were as bad as you claim it to be, would be more people shot. 

Maybe more people SHOULD have been shot.

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
4.1.24  Gulliver  replied to  Gulliver @4.1.23    2 weeks ago

I would like to clarify that it is sad that anyone at all was hurt on Jan 6. These Capitol police not only showed an awful lot of restraint but it is not the kind of engagement with the public they are normally called upon to do. On most days this sort of police job involves a lot of looking at IDs, routine security checks, and pointing people in the right direction. On January 6 they were slipping in their own colleagues' blood.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.25  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @4.1.1    5 days ago

That is a lie.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.26  Tessylo  replied to  Jack_TX @4.1.12    5 days ago
"Didn't most of them just leave after a while?"

jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.27  Tessylo  replied to  Wishful_thinkin @4.1.19    5 days ago

That's all he has plus projection and denial.  And completely fact free comments.  

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
4.1.28  Tacos!  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.25    4 days ago

Oh thank goodness. I thought I would go all day without seeing another vacuous, trolly comment.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
5  Greg Jones    3 weeks ago

 Denounce whataboutism all you like, but as a political matter, whataboutism matters and always has. It is very difficult to argue that political violence is unacceptable when you have spent so many years accepting it.

Never has a political party been so out of touch with the American people, as the current Democrats are. I'd categorize most of them as a "basket of despicables".

Any by the way, the Dems are losing large numbers in about every demographic, especially Blacks and Hispanics

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
6  Tacos!    3 weeks ago
Denounce whataboutism all you like

It’s the only argument you’ll ever hear against this. “Stop talking! That’s whataboutism.” It’s only whataboutism when you refuse to acknowledge what is happening right now and instead point to something else as a deflection. But when you can acknowledge that 1/6 was wrong; when you can acknowledge that Trump was full of shit about the election being stolen, and you can still point out the hypocrisy of Democrats on the issue, that’s not whataboutism. It’s just being fair and honest. 

On the issues of disputed elections, filibustered judges, election conspiracy theories, and not-so-peaceful protests, Democrats owe this country an apology at least as much as Republicans do, if not more.

 
 
 
MonsterMash
Sophomore Participates
7  MonsterMash    3 weeks ago

Democrats conveniently overlooked the video of Ashli Babbitt being murdered by an unidentified black cop.   

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
7.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  MonsterMash @7    3 weeks ago

I think that the Capital Police showed unbelievable restraint.  I amazed that more attackers weren't shot or bludgeoned,  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2  TᵢG  replied to  MonsterMash @7    3 weeks ago

The focus of the committee is on the insurrection;  they are not trying to determine if the defenders all acted properly per protocol.    Babbitt could be shown trying to force her way into a secured area and that would be relevant, but the committee has already demonstrated quite well that the Capitol was indeed violently breached.

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
7.2.1  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @7.2    3 weeks ago

And the fact that the insurrection went to the level that it did had nothing to do with Capital Police letting them in?..

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.2  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @7.2.1    3 weeks ago

The Capitol security was severely overwhelmed by the number of people breaking their way into the Capitol building.  So if you trying to argue that the security sucked then that point is sound.

But you seem to be ... oddly ... trying to argue that the Capitol security was complicit in the insurrection.   That by their inability to stop the intruders they were in some way at fault.

Is that really what you are trying to argue?

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
7.2.3  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.2    3 weeks ago

Oddly? I don’t think so. Do you think if you were the leader of a group charged with the security of something of relevant importance, in that kind of situation your decision would have been to acquiesce?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.4  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @7.2.3    3 weeks ago

Man you are really grasping at straws.  So you clearly must not approve of Trump’s refusal to for three hours in spite of the urging of advisors.    Right?

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
7.2.5  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.4    3 weeks ago

How so?

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
7.2.6  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.4    3 weeks ago

I'm just asking a simple question. One that the committee isn't interested in... odd for one that calls itself the January 6 committee. Perhaps they should just call it the Trump part 4 or 5 committee?  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.7  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @7.2.6    3 weeks ago

Do you not understand the stated purpose of this committee?   They are not investigating how to shore up security at the Capitol, they are investigating who is culpable for the insurrection.

 
 
 
GregTx
Junior Participates
7.2.8  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.7    3 weeks ago

So negligence or incompetence would have no bearing in culpability?

Is that really what you are trying to argue?
 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.9  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @7.2.8    3 weeks ago
So negligence or incompetence would have no bearing in culpability?

One could distort the narrative to make negligence / incompetence of Capitol security an issue but rational minds, I am certain, will see that there are those who violently breached the Capitol with the intent to disrupt the proceedings of the transfer of power and those who tried to stop them.

The forces on the ground certainly are not culpable since they did their jobs while horribly over powered.   So if you want to deflect culpability away from Trump and the insurrectionists you could legally go after the individual responsible for Capitol security based on incompetence / negligence.

It should be obvious to everyone that the intentional wrongful acts were committed by Trump, his co-liars and the insurrectionists.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
7.3  Jack_TX  replied to  MonsterMash @7    3 weeks ago
Democrats conveniently overlooked the video of Ashli Babbitt being murdered by an unidentified black cop.

We're going to disagree on this one.

There are certain times in life when you look at people and go..."I'm not sure WTF you were thinking, but you surely should have expected to get shot."  

This was one of those.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
7.3.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Jack_TX @7.3    3 weeks ago

She had no weapon and was not a threat to the trigger happy cop.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
7.3.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Greg Jones @7.3.1    3 weeks ago
She had no weapon and was not a threat to the trigger happy cop

She was participating in a riot, storming a government facility, and she knew she was breaking the law.

  

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
7.4  Gulliver  replied to  MonsterMash @7    3 weeks ago
Democrats conveniently overlooked the video of Ashli Babbitt being murdered by an unidentified black cop. 

NT should give out prizes for comments this silly.

The cop was named:

Babbitt, hoisted by two men, [20] attempted to climb through the shattered window. She was then shot in the neck/shoulder by Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd

-and-

Republican Representative Markwayne Mullin , a witness to Babbitt's attempted breach, said that the Capitol Police "didn't have a choice" but to shoot, and that this action "saved people's lives".

How can I put this into terms you would understand?

He was a good guy with a gun standing his ground.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.4.1  Ronin2  replied to  Gulliver @7.4    3 weeks ago

[ deleted ] Please prove where she posed any threat to the officers or Congressman departing the area?

She was executed instantaneously by Barney Fife with a gun. 

Also, please notice the 3 officers that departed the area as soon as the Congressman were escorted from the Chamber? Not one of them deemed her a threat- and they had far better vantage point than Fife did.

Unless Mullin is a ghost he didn't witness the execution first hand; but on video like most others.

The fact this asshole isn't up on charges is due to it being a white Trump supporter he shot; and not an African American BLM or criminal.

In the second video it shows the heavily armed DC police coming up from behind only seconds after the shot. Guess what they were doing? Dispersing the rioters. Notice how quickly they they duck down; and the lead officer points his weapon directly in Fife's direction? Seems they didn't want to be shot by the moron either. Yet no charges pressed. Just excuses for why an unarmed protester was shot by Democrats and leftists.

Here is another article that doesn't cast the shooter in such a good light. Not exactly an exemplary officer.

Michael Byrd, the U.S. Capitol Police lieutenant who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, is the same officer who left his gun unattended in a Capitol bathroom in 2019.  Capitol Police found Byrd’s Glock 22 in a Capitol Visitor Center complex bathroom in February 2019 “during a routine security sweep.” At the time, Byrd was the Capitol Police commander of the House Chambers and was scheduled for work the next two days after the incident. The police department launched an investigation into Byrd’s negligence, but he was eventually allowed to stay on the force.

If only they would have fired him as they should have!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
7.4.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @7.4.1    3 weeks ago
Here is the video you sick fuck. Please prove where she posed any threat to the officers or Congressman departing the area?

She was executed instantaneously by Barney Fife with a gun. 

Also, please notice the 3 officers that departed the area as soon as the Congressman were escorted from the Chamber? Not one of them deemed her a threat- and they had far better vantage point than Fife did.

Unless Mullin is a ghost he didn't witness the execution first hand; but on video like most others.

The fact this asshole isn't up on charges is due to it being a white Trump supporter he shot; and not an African American BLM or criminal.

I have seen the video at least a half dozen times. Let's get back to reality. 

The doorway the mob was bashing in led directly to the floor of the House of Representatives. Once they breached that door they would be inside the House chamber in a few seconds. The cop was protecting the people in that chamber, even if they all had left it a few seconds earlier. How was he supposed to know that, or know that every one was gone? 

Secondly, the door to the Speakers Lobby was locked and barricaded. If that isnt proof that the "protesters" were not allowed inside that door I dont know what would be. 

Third, seven seconds before Babbitt climbs through the broken door window, one of her compatriots, a few mere feet away from her,  shouts "he's got a gun" referring to the cop , who showed the mob his gun before he used it. Babbitt had seven seconds to come to her senses, and she didnt. 

The cop did nothing wrong, if he let Babbitt get inside others would have followed, he would have been overrun and anyone inside the House chamber would be in danger.  

Babbitt died for her illegitimate cause, which is a shame, but it was her own fault. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
7.4.3  Jack_TX  replied to  Ronin2 @7.4.1    3 weeks ago
Please prove where she posed any threat to the officers or Congressman departing the area?

She was at least as big a threat as the guy who threw a plastic bag at Kyle Rittenhouse.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.4.4  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @7.4.2    2 weeks ago
I have seen the video at least a half dozen times. Let's get back to reality. 

Please your version of reality has nothing to do with reality.

The doorway the mob was bashing in led directly to the floor of the House of Representatives. Once they breached that door they would be inside the House chamber in a few seconds. The cop was protecting the people in that chamber, even if they all had left it a few seconds earlier. How was he supposed to know that, or know that every one was gone? 

So what about the 3 DC police that were blocking the door from the rioters John? You know, the ones that departed once the Congressmen had departed the area. They were radioed to leave- so they did. If there was any danger they wouldn't have departed. Byrd could have looked behind him at any time. He didn't. Byrd could have had his radio on; why wasn't he monitoring communications?  The three officers that were blocking the doors received communication that the Congressmen had departed. Why didn't Byrd. Or did he leave that in some bathroom like he did his firearm previously? To bad he couldn't have made that mistake on Jan 6th.

Secondly, the door to the Speakers Lobby was locked and barricaded. If that isnt proof that the "protesters" were not allowed inside that door I dont know what would be. 

Didn't seem to matter to BLM and Antifa rioters when police stations and federal buildings were locked and barricaded. They still burned them; vandalized; and entered them at will. Please show where any of them were shot and killed?

Third, seven seconds before Babbitt climbs through the broken door window, one of her compatriots, a few mere feet away from her,  shouts "he's got a gun" referring to the cop , who showed the mob his gun before he used it. Babbitt had seven seconds to come to her senses, and she didnt. 

Byrd, the fucking moron who never should have been given a badge, had his gun out the entire time. He didn't care who came through he was going to shoot them. As for the person that yelled- they were all yelling. It was a fucking riot! You think she, or those that were lifting her through the window heard? You really need to watch the second video where the heavily armed DC police that were dispersing the rioters had to duck down when the shot was taken. Byrd being the mighty mental midget he is never lowered his weapon. A heavily armed DC officer had to point his very scary assault rifle in Byrd's direction and motion with his arm to get Byrd to lower his weapon. Seems the idiot couldn't identify his own people. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.4.5  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @7.4.4    2 weeks ago

All you have is projection, deflection, and denial.  It's fucking tiresome.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.4.6  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @7.4.4    2 weeks ago

Nope, it's your version of reality that has nothing to do with reality.  

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
7.4.7  Gulliver  replied to  Ronin2 @7.4.1    one week ago
Please prove where she posed any threat to the officers or Congressman departing the area?

Are you for real? She was breaching a window broken by the crowd she was in to enter a room where congress was in session.

If it was your bedroom, would you have offered her a blanket and a cup of tea or the front of your bedroom shotgun?

Is it rude to laugh at you? 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Freshman Guide
7.4.8  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @7.4.5    one week ago
It's fucking tiresome. 

As is someone that says all you have is projection, deflection, and denial without adding anything to the discussion in the majority of their posts.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
8  Greg Jones    3 weeks ago

She was using both hands to climb through a broken window.....the door remained locked.

She posed no threat to the cowardly racist  cop

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
8.1  devangelical  replied to  Greg Jones @8    3 weeks ago

it should've been a head shot...

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
8.1.1  bugsy  replied to  devangelical @8.1    3 weeks ago
it should've been a head shot.

I'll remember that the next time a white cop shoots an "unarmed" black.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @8.1    2 weeks ago

"it should've been a head shot..."

She's still dead.  The traitor got just what she deserved.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.2  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @8    3 weeks ago

If you are trying to climb through a broken window to enter a chamber of the Capitol in the middle of a violent insurrection you put yourself at risk of being shot.

Other than blind partisanship, how do you conclude that the officer was cowardly or racist?    You think this black officer shot Babbitt because she was white?

Byrd said he had no idea whether the person he shot was carrying a weapon. It was only later that night that he found out that the rioter was a woman who was unarmed.

Asked why he pulled the trigger, Byrd said it was a “last resort.”

“I tried to wait as long as I could,” he told Holt. “I hoped and prayed no one tried to enter through those doors. But their failure to comply required me to take the appropriate action to save the lives of members of Congress and myself and my fellow officers.”

Byrd has been cleared of wrongdoing by the Justice Department and the Capitol Police . In announcing its decision not to charge him, the Justice Department said in April that investigators had examined video, physical evidence from the scene, autopsy results and statements from the officer involved, as well as other officers and witnesses.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
8.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @8.2    2 weeks ago

If she were carrying a weapon the three officers that were blocking the door and had ample view of the rioters would have done something about it. They all ignored her. Once the Congressmen were safely out of the area they left.

Byrd had his weapon drawn and can be seen clearly pointing it the entire time at the direction of the window. He didn't give a damn who came through he was going to shoot them. He didn't check with the three officers guarding the door. He didn't even bother to look behind him to see that the Congressmen departed- so they were not in direct danger.

If you take a look at the second video on post 7.4.1 you can clearly see that the heavily armed DC police squad was coming up from behind and dispersing the rioters when the shot was taken. They all ducked down and hold position. When the plain clothes security rushes forward to try and check on Babbit- the lead DC officer points his weapon at Byrd. He then makes a motion with his arm for Byrd to lower his weapon. The idiot was ready to fire on some his own!

As for the Justice Department. Only Democrats, who the DOJ seems beholden to, have done more to wreck this country. Our two tier justice system is the envy of third world dictators everywhere. If this had been a member BLM, or African American criminal, Byrd would already have been charged, tried, and sentenced by new. But being a white Trump supporter- the law doesn't apply.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.2.2  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @8.2.1    2 weeks ago
He didn't give a damn who came through he was going to shoot them.

That is probably the case; he very likely did not target an individual so clearly his actions had nothing to do with race.   He was defending his ground against a violent mob.   If you break into the Capitol, especially if you are part of an angry mob that has well overpowered the defending police, you should expect to be shot.

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
8.2.3  Gulliver  replied to  Ronin2 @8.2.1    one week ago
Byrd had his weapon drawn and can be seen clearly pointing it the entire time at the direction of the window.

And somehow Ashli Babbitt didn't take the hint.

I had a cop point a gun at me once in my own home. He entered my rented home through an open door because a neighbor called about a breaking and entry in progress. When he arrived he wanted to know who the hell I was.

I took that gun very seriously. A wave of morbid fear passed through my body. I had only one desire within me - to do whatever it took not to get shot.

So I have a question to ask here about Ashli Babbit: What was wrong with her? Why did she think she was the unarmed American who looks at the business end of a  police officer's gun and tells them to get the hell out of her way and does not get shot?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
8.2.4  Greg Jones  replied to  Gulliver @8.2.3    one week ago

What makes you think she even saw him?

If the cop had  been white and the victim black, the left's response would  be very different.

 
 
 
Gulliver
Freshman Guide
8.2.5  Gulliver  replied to  Greg Jones @8.2.4    one week ago
What makes you think she even saw him?

Is there no end to you people?

Why was she even in the goddamned building?

She was part of a crowd that broke a window on a door to a room where congress was in session and she was climbing through the window.

Seriously - what is wrong with you?

 
 

Who is online



26 visitors