Storming the Capitol

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
“the murderer”

LOL
Are you familiar with Shaun King?
ErWUEFaUcAAUqcf.jpeg
 

floridays

Well-Known Member
“the murderer”

LOL
LOL
My ass
Tell me exactly what transpired, exactly what precipitated the use of deadly force.
It was a homicide, manslaughter, what degree?
Justifiable homicide? The elements are accessible
The elements of manslaughter are readily accessible.
We can move to murder after that.
 

Box Ox

Well-Known Member
Please offer your definition.
Use the legal terms.

It was a homicide, any other cop on the road, exactly what charges would he answer to?
You might like to confer with Derek Chauvin.

Police-involved shootings that result in a death are usually described as "homicides". Further describing one of them as a "murder"suggests intent.

And also, if it had been BLM and/or hard leftists that had stormed the Capitol, half of the Trumpees in here would be wishing aloud that they'd received machine gun fire for trying to get through the same door Ashli Babbitt did.

Are you familiar with Shaun King?
View attachment 340101

Anti-police civil rights activist and BLM supporter questions police action. News at 11.

King.jpg
 

floridays

Well-Known Member
Police-involved shootings that result in a death are usually described as "homicides". Further describing one of them as a "murder"suggests intent.
Beyond a statutory "crime" intent is always an element, was it formed and why is the first question.
Every death that is not from natural causes is viewed as a homicide until it is ruled out. Ashli Babbit expired not from natural causes, she expired from gunshot to the neck area.

Why was a round from a policeman necessary to halt her?
She was armed, threatening innocents? No

She was invading a personal residence putting those inside at fear of life? No

She was trespassing, with a lethal weapon putting those inside in grave danger of loss of life? No

Was she trespassing? yes

Was the officer in fear of his life? You'd have to ask the officer for his "feeling."

Does evidence (camera, visual) show the officer was in eminent danger of his or a bystanders life or bodily harm. No

Under those conditions, why would you discharge a weapon?

Directly to the officer,

Why exactly was it necessary that you discharge your weapon?
 

Tyrone Slothrop

Well-Known Member


What about Trump? Well, he made it clear to Miller on January 5 that he wanted boots on the ground:


I also want to address questions that have been raised in regard to the President’s involvement in the response. He had none with respect to the Department of Defense efforts on January 6. . . . On the afternoon of January 5, I received a call from the President in connection with a rally by his supporters that day at Freedom Plaza. The President asked if I was watching the event on television. I replied that I had seen coverage of the event. He then commented that “they” were going to need 10,000 troops the following day. The call lasted fewer than thirty seconds and I did not respond substantively, and there was no elaboration. I took his comment to mean that a large force would be required to maintain order the following day.

Who was “they”? And why did Trump believe there would be such a need for troops—because he expected the troops would have to fend off Antifa, or because he anticipated that his own supporters would cause trouble? Miller said he didn’t follow up on the request because, “At the time, I had been advised by our domestic law enforcement partners that based on their experience with protests and crowd control, as well as their intelligence information, that they were confident that they had sufficient personnel assigned to maintain order.”
 

fishtm2001

Well-Known Member
"....I think what Donald Trump did is the most dangerous thing, the most egregious violation of an oath of office of any president in our history," Liz Cheney after donald's speech yesterday
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Are you familiar with Shaun King?
View attachment 340101
Nope. Don’t know who you are Shawn but you’re not very bright.

Regardless what the police officers behind her were doing and even if they “should’ve stopped her”, she wa coming through the window to the next line of defense.

It’s like saying nobody should have faced consequences because they shouldn’t have gotten that far in the first place.
 

Ou812fu

Polishing toilet bowls since 1966.
"....I think what Donald Trump did is the most dangerous thing, the most egregious violation of an oath of office of any president in our history," Liz Cheney after donald's speech yesterday
Not that you will ever view facts. Yet I'll give you another video to watch. Since reading comprehension is so hard to understand..

 

fishtm2001

Well-Known Member
Not that you will ever view facts. Yet I'll give you another video to watch. Since reading comprehension is so hard to understand..

450 wingnut donald supporting rioters fave been arrested.
 

fishtm2001

Well-Known Member
"A new report from the New York Times over the weekend, based on revelations from an investigation by the Senate Judiciary Committee, detailed new ways in which Meadows had a front-row seat to some scattershot rat:censored2:ing. Meadows pushed the Department of Justice across five emails to investigate loony conspiracy theories—always put your delusional election-theft scams in writing!—including a plea for then-Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen to look into whether people in Italy somehow used satellites to steal votes from Mr. Trump. This was, and we're not kidding here, referred to as "Italygate." Truly the dumbest time to be alive. And that was just one of the theories of how Trump really won. Another involved New Mexico, a state Joe Biden won by nearly 11 percent. As usual with the tail end of the Trump Era, the rat:censored2:ers were not sending their best. Most of the hacks with genuine talent realized the story always ends with someone not named Donald Trump under the wheels of the bus."

Esquire
 
Top