Trump v Biden 2020,The insurrection (pt 6) Read OP

markodaly · 10-01-2021 01:03AM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

We've also had posters declared she was unarmed when there is no conclusive proof that she wasn't

Well that is kinda silly reverse logic. Sure you may as well say she had a WMD on her, no evidence yet she didn't :pac:

Overheal · 10-01-2021 01:03AM

JupiterKid wrote: »

I found out a half an hour ago that I guy whose family were good famoly friends and former neighbours was one of those who stormed the Capirol building on Wednesday.

Nutjob - I've a good feeling his late mother and father - Irish who emigrated to the USA in the 1950s and came back to Ireland in the 1970s - would be deeply ashamed of what he did.

He was born in the USA in 1970, grew up in Dublin and moved back to the States in the late 1990s. At his father's funeral after in 2016, he told me he was an ardent Trump supporter and had fallen out with his brother and one of his sisters over this.

Would I be correct in presuming he's going to jail?

If he was inside, more than likely, if not fined for trespassing (it's a higher charge at a federal building like this). If he participated in any violence, vandalism, or theft, it's a guarantee; the fact that people committed to violence while already in the engagement of a criminal act (like trespassing), escalates the charges to aggravated assault etc.

There are not many early paroles for federal sentences, either.

Sand · 10-01-2021 01:06AM

Christy42 wrote: »

Kyle went down to kill people, ... Why the emotive language?

Where is the proof he went down to kill people? By my read he was a simple minded boy who thought he might render medical assistance and protect people. Dumb as a box of rocks, but not a murderer.

Overheal · 10-01-2021 01:06AM

markodaly wrote: »

Well that is kinda silly reverse logic. Sure you may as well say she had a WMD on her, no evidence yet she didn't :pac:

Yes, that's the logic they have to take. She could have been strapped up. These were lawmakers, and these people chanted they wanted them dead. IEDs were also found in the siege, along with molotov cocktails. Several of those arrested were carrying concealed weapons and firearms - a serious federal crime in DC.

10-01-2021 01:07AM

alchemist33 wrote: »

Why mention her military history all the time? Why not mention the three restraining orders she's had in the last five years if you're going to go into background, like so many did with the guys Rittenhouse killed?

Because it's one of the angles of argument that the usual scrote sites are pushing as her being some type of martyr.

Foxtrol · 10-01-2021 01:07AM

Sand wrote: »

I know you still think Kyle Rittenhouse is a murderer for shooting the 3 guys trying to chase him down and beat him to death. Yet you simultaneously believe the shooting of Babbet is justified because she was a domestic terrorist because she was in a place she shouldn't have been. I'm okay with us having different views. I'd second guess myself if we ever agreed on something.

I know this has been widely called out already but it might be the most ridiculous false equivalence in this thread.

You're really trying to equate the actions of a vigilante who crossed state lines and broke a police curfew so he could act like a little rambo to the actions of the secret service who had retreated to a confined area with high profile politicians protecting them from a violent mob that had smashed in the door of their room?

Pathetic.

Sweetemotion · 10-01-2021 01:07AM

Overheal wrote: »

If he was inside, more than likely, if not fined for trespassing (it's a higher charge at a federal building like this). If he participated in any violence, vandalism, or theft, it's a guarantee; the fact that people committed to violence while already in the engagement of a criminal act (like trespassing), escalates the charges to aggravated assault etc.

There are not many early paroles for federal sentences, either.

You've changed your tune.

Timberrrrrrrr · 10-01-2021 01:08AM

markodaly wrote: »

Well that is kinda silly reverse logic. Sure you may as well say she had a WMD on her, no evidence yet she didn't :pac:

You're on protective detail to some of the most high profile people in the world.

An unknown person smashes a window and attempts to climb through wearing a back pack.

Do you

A: Ask the person nicely to not do that?

B: Shout several warnings while pointing a gun at them and when they don't comply open fire?

There's only one correct answer and it isn't A

suicide_circus · 10-01-2021 01:09AM

Would be nice of the Reps don't spend the next 3/4 years looking for ghosts and phantoms making this election invalid like the Dems did with the Russian collusion story re the 2016 election but i dont hold out much hope.

Christy42 · 10-01-2021 01:09AM

Sand wrote: »

Where is the proof he went down to kill people? By my read he was a simple minded boy who thought he might render medical assistance and protect people. Dumb as a box of rocks, but not a murderer.

Basic logic? Don't go down to a potential riot with an illegal weapon??? Then you might get the benefit of the doubt. May as well say that those who set buildings on fire thought it looked cold.

10-01-2021 01:11AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Would be nice of the Reps don't spend the next 3/4 years looking for ghosts and phantoms making this election invalid like the Dems did with the Russian collusion story re the 2016 election but i dont hold out much hope.

You mean the Mueller investigation that lead to the arrest and imprisonment of a number of people, that story?

jill_valentine · 10-01-2021 01:12AM

Tea drinker wrote: »

You conspiracy theory is that news outlets, left wing and right wing are spreading lies claiming she was unarmed, when in fact she was armed (you are suggessting pistol I assume?) even though this news would be manna from heaven for anti trump group.

Her belly holster is visible in footage of her body being extracted. I appreciate you'd like confirmation, but on the other hand I can't pretend I didn't see it.

She is listed as an employee for security at a nuclear facility, there is no mention of a record as DC security.

I'd hate to think you are making stuff up to tarnish a formerly troubled dead woman

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/07/us/who-was-ashli-babbitt.html

From this exact link:

She then served in the Air Force Reserves and the Air National Guard. In the Guard, she was assigned to a unit based near Washington that is known as the “Capital Guardians,” because one of their primary missions is defending the city. Security forces in the squadron regularly train with riot shields and clubs for what the Air Force calls “civil disturbance missions.”

She was in the 113th Wing. The article has a picture of her with her comrades.

Despite the name, they're a specialist unit of security soldiers who are tasked with protecting DC. Their aviators protect the airspace, but Babbitt was in the Security Forces, who are the crowd control people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbcNbQAsz30

She was once in the exact unit that's supposed to be in place for exactly this kind of attack. Some or most of these soldiers are from the 113th -

suicide_circus · 10-01-2021 01:12AM

DubInMeath wrote: »

You mean the Mueller investigation that lead to the arrest and imprisonment of a number of people, that story?

Well quite but it didn't invalidate the election, did it?

Sand · 10-01-2021 01:13AM

Foxtrol wrote: »

I know this has been widely called out already but it might be the most ridiculous false equivalence in this thread.

You're really trying to equate the actions of a vigilante who crossed state lines and broke a police curfew so he could act like a little rambo to the actions of the secret service who had retreated to a confined area with high profile politicians protecting them from a violent mob that had smashed in the door of their room?

Pathetic.

No, I'm not trying to equate them at all. One was self defense. The other was shooting a military veteran for crossing a doorway. That you think there is any equivalence at all is interesting, but its not my position.

MeMen2_MoRi_ · 10-01-2021 01:14AM

And this is what the terrorists were being told before they went to the capitol building.

https://twitter.com/JulianCastro/status/1347778310495985664?s=19

Sacrifice your blood, sweat, tears and your fortune's for what exactly.. there was a free and fair election, one of the biggest turnouts in the history of the US.. the sitting president having one of the biggest votes for the GOP party ever, just so happens the other guy got even more.. over 80 something million votes..

If for just one second, we buy into the argument we are being told by CNN what to think what to do... So is the other side by sitting Senators/representatives and last but not least their demigod POTUS.. he and everyone one who bought into that nonsense of stolen election have blood on their hands.

Here's a timeline of her spiral down to death's door.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2021/01/08/the-journey-of-ashli-babbitt/

Muahahaha · 10-01-2021 01:15AM

JupiterKid wrote: »

I found out a half an hour ago that I guy whose family were good famoly friends and former neighbours was one of those who stormed the Capirol building on Wednesday.

Nutjob - I've a good feeling his late mother and father - Irish who emigrated to the USA in the 1950s and came back to Ireland in the 1970s - would be deeply ashamed of what he did.

He was born in the USA in 1970, grew up in Dublin and moved back to the States in the late 1990s. At his father's funeral after in 2016, he told me he was an ardent Trump supporter and had fallen out with his brother and one of his sisters over this.

Would I be correct in presuming he's going to jail?

Give these guys a tip off and we'll find out
https://tips.fbi.gov/

Sand · 10-01-2021 01:15AM

Christy42 wrote: »

Basic logic? Don't go down to a potential riot with an illegal weapon??? Then you might get the benefit of the doubt. May as well say that those who set buildings on fire thought it looked cold.

Well, I wouldn't have advised her to do what she did but equally I wouldn't have advised Michael Brown to attack an armed police officer. But the media narrative - and of some posters - is completely opposed on both shootings. I'm at least consistent.

Kaybaykwah · 10-01-2021 01:16AM

She axed for it.

namloc1980 · 10-01-2021 01:16AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Well quite but it didn't invalidate the election, did it?

It was never about invalidating the election. Where'd you get that idea from? Russian interference in the 2016 election actually happened as per Meuller and the US intelligence community.

Overheal · 10-01-2021 01:17AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Well quite but it didn't invalidate the election, did it?

Indeed, it didn't, but the point of the probe was not to nullify the result of the election. The point of the probe was accountability. You can't 'undo' an election. But if we had seen the 'stained dress' that proved Trump malignantly fixed the election with Russia (a high crime)? How wouldn't you have impeached. What would the power of impeachment even be for, then? To be clear, if there was evidence Biden committed a high crime in this election, it shouldn't matter if it's his last week in office either, impeach him.

There will be a commission for election integrity, and it will be bipartisan. It will more than certainly continue to do a postmortem on the election to make recommendations for new legislation.

Christy42 · 10-01-2021 01:17AM

Sand wrote: »

No, I'm not trying to equate them at all. One was self defense. The other was shooting a military veteran for crossing a doorway. That you think there is any equivalence at all is interesting, but its not my position.

You are making this sound like she went through her bedroom door. Ridiculous stuff. You are also incredibly insistent on saying military vet like it is relevant. It is true. I will give you that but it is not relevant.

10-01-2021 01:19AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Well quite but it didn't invalidate the election, did it?

Eh where was it claimed that the point of the investigation was to invalidate the election?

suicide_circus · 10-01-2021 01:19AM

namloc1980 wrote: »

It was never about invalidating the election. Where'd you get that idea from? Russian interference in the 2016 election actually happened as per Meuller and the US intelligence community.

The whole thing was an effort to get Trump out of office - not to get a few people jailed - i hope that the Reps accept the election and focus on offering coherent opposition

Tea drinker · 10-01-2021 01:20AM

DubInMeath wrote: »

You mean the Mueller investigation that lead to the arrest and imprisonment of a number of people, that story?

e.g. Arrested for obstruction ... if the cops come down heavy enough they will always find something.

@ Jill_Valentine thanks for the info

Overheal · 10-01-2021 01:21AM

DubInMeath wrote: »

Eh where was it claimed that the point of the investigation was to invalidate the election?

Only as alleged by Republicans to gaslight deliberation.

Sand · 10-01-2021 01:21AM

Christy42 wrote: »

You are making this sound like she went through her bedroom door. Ridiculous stuff. You are also incredibly insistent on saying military vet like it is relevant. It is true. I will give you that but it is not relevant.

As a military veteran she had sworn an oath to defend the republic against all enemies, foreign and domestic. She went through a doorway paid for with her taxes to speak to her democratic representatives. Why they were so afraid of an unarmed American that they would prefer to shoot her than speak to her says a lot for where American politics is right now.

namloc1980 · 10-01-2021 01:23AM

DubInMeath wrote: »

Eh where was it claimed that the point of the investigation was to invalidate the election?

It's the Trumpist view of reality. They've been utterly brainwashed and are no longer in tune with reality. I mean we have a poster here who's insisting that the woman who was killed at the Capitol who was part of a violent insurrectionist mob was murdered for simply coming through a door. Bonkers.

Overheal · 10-01-2021 01:24AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

The whole thing was an effort to get Trump out of office - not to get a few people jailed - i hope that the Reps accept the election and focus on offering coherent opposition

Well, that's kind of the end result of carrying out an investigation into a crime. However to be clear Trump wasn't actually a subject of the probe until he began interfering with the probe with such temerity it required a whole second volume of report to memorialize. So, it's not accurate to say that the whole point of Mueller's probe was to go after Trump.

Kaybaykwah · 10-01-2021 01:24AM

Sand wrote: »

No, I'm not trying to equate them at all. One was self defense. The other was shooting a military veteran for crossing a doorway. That you think there is any equivalence at all is interesting, but its not my position.

<snip>

Who knew or cared she was a veteran skier or military person?

She vaulted through that window, in spite of the Secret Service officer's summons, she entered that protected space.

Why had officers put furniture in front of the doorway?

Once you know she was a trained defender of DC's federal buildings, you can only conclude she had a death wish. She gave her life for her ideals, very nobly. She is a hero to her cause, a martyr.

Overheal · 10-01-2021 01:27AM

Sand wrote: »

As a military veteran she had sworn an oath to defend the republic against all enemies, foreign and domestic. She went through a doorway paid for with her taxes to speak to her democratic representatives. Why they were so afraid of an unarmed American that they would prefer to shoot her than speak to her says a lot for where American politics is right now.

So, which is it: Was she an aggressor against domestic enemies, or was she a soft spoken librarian who just happen to be oblivious to the context around her, who just wanted to tell Pelosi that she thought she was mean, having paid the sales tax on her bottle of water? Impossible to simultaneously believe she just wanted an audience with "her democratic representatives" by citing 'defend the republic against all domestic enemies.'

Trump v Biden 2020,The insurrection (pt 6) Read OP

Comments