Trump made me do it?
- Thread starter cosmickid
- Start date
- Status
I'm sorry - remind me what Derek Chauvin is up to these days.
Also, being a part of a seditious mob TRESPASSING INSIDE THE US CAPITOL, INTENT ON KILLING THE VICE PRESIDENT TO OVERTURN A LEGITIMATE ELECTION is infinitely worse than anything George Floyd was accused of.
It's beyond silly to even compare the two.
On another message board back in the day, we would refer to this strategy as E3 - Everything Equals Everything.
It was utilized by posters who were too stupid to know when they were being beaten.
I'm not the one making inane statements about playing stupid games, win stupid prizes.
That was you and now you add conditions to it. Maybe you shouldn't base your opinion on memes.
"Adding conditions to it." That's rich.
I guess it was asking too much to assume that when talking about Ashli Bobbett, it would be implied that we were talking about the crimes she was committing when she was killed.
My bad. I didn't realize that you have no sense of context or nuance.
So in DANC's world, if you do anything against the law, death at the hands of the police is an outcome you should be prepared to accept.
You all were laying a pretty flimsy reason up above.
Babbitt was a deplorable acting poorly with a gun pointed at her. She ended up dead and it is "play stupid games..." She is subhuman because she was a Trump supporter, so **** her. You may not have that as your intended message but that is how a wide swath of people take the message.
President Uniter thinks there are not many "real Republicans" anymore and the right are a bunch of "MAGAs" (whatever the hell that means). There are people sitting in jail right now and have been for over a year for doing far, far less than what I showed in that Chicago video and I could pull more. That "deplorable" dehumanizing is spreading to encompass more and more people. We don't appreciate it.
Next time there is a riot, the standard you put forth up above is that police should draw their weapons, demand compliance, and then blast anyone who takes a step forward (because any step at that point is a threat per the Babbitt standard articulated above). And anyone protesting like that Chicago video (which is super similar to the orst of Jan 6) should expect to spend 18 months+ locked away, no quick trial, when trial comes anyone throwing or hitting at police can expect multiple years of a jail sentence, if you happened to be taped in the area, you also can expect treatment similar to a combatant in case we need time to sort it all out and make a point that we are not putting up with leftist linked bullshit ever again. Just making sure we have the rules established.
The glaring difference you're missing is that most of us believe there should be heavier penalties for being a part of a seditious riot, trying to break into restricted areas of the US Capitol to kill the Vice President and harm members of Congress than any other example listed in this thread.
No one is excusing any illegal action, but we're also making some pretty clear delineations between one and the other. that you and some others are either failing to see or willfully ignoring.
Anyone that riots should go to jail, period. I don't think we've seen anyone on the boards defend the riots outside those on the extreme far sides of both aisles, I think we can agree on that.
What I think people are now starting to turn against is that you have those on the right that were all for the blue turning on them. Hell, Lindsey Graham is on national television saying there will be riots if Trump is charged.
Where are the people from the right proclaiming that's wrong? I haven't seen it. Graham is actively threatening violence if charges are brought against Trump.
If that was someone from the left, this board would be on fire right now.
Yes, that's a new low for Graham. (On second thought, and because it's Graham we're talking about, I should have said it's a new bottom).
Those people in Chicago were rioting against the authority of the government. The police are literally the main enforcement arm of that authority. Do we have any evidence that Ashley Babbitt was attempting to kill anyone? So strike your Pence and members of Congress from her prosecution.
She was a rioter at a federal building who was upset about the election. She was unarmed and was shot for being threatening. The President had to be whisked away the prior summer because of a threat of protestors at the White House. There were riots attempting to interfere with his inauguration in 2017. The people in Chicago were hitting the police with sharpened PVC pipes and lobbing projectiles at them. They broke an officers orbital bone.
You want to put in distinctions where YOU get to do these things to THEM based on the rules YOU want to make. I am saying that WE view what happened at Trump's inauguration and during the summer of 2020 as exactly tye same type of behavior. If those are the rules you want to impose on the right, we accept and will impose them on the left. I expect a few multicolored hair individuals to catch some rounds the next time we see a bunch of black clad idiots rioting like in the video up above. Those are now the rules.
As I have often said, I refuse to live by one set of rules for Democrats and another for Republicans. You all get to riot? We do to. We get shot for rioting. You do too. Equality.
What happened at Trump's inauguration? I recall seeing the loser in attendance. She looked pissed. A former Republican president commented "That was some weird shit" after the Inaugural address. What else occurred?
When was Trump "whisked away" from the White House? I remember reading he went to the bunker for a time, but he insisted it was for an inspection.
You're putting lipstick on a pig here. And ignoring key facts.
She was a rioter in the US Capitol with a goal of overturning a legitimate presidential election. She was a part of a large mob who were chanting "Hang Mike Pence!" She was trying to gain access to arguably one of the most secure locations in America. If she were protesting the election at some federal building in middle America and got shot, I'd totally agree with your point.
She wasn't. I don't.
No one is saying the Capital or DC police should have opened fire on the crowd that was beating on them all afternoon. But they had their guns out for a reason until the members of Congress were evacuated.
What crime? Trespassing? She had no weapon and she was no physical threat to anyone. Ooooh, she was banging on a door..... the mob was led by a barely 5 foot female and she was going to break down the doors. Laughable.
You're insane if you think she was some threat to democracy.
I didn't realize you were such a drama queen.
Trump voters are now untermenschen to the Dims and media now.
Soon we'll be forced to wear an identifier on our clothing.
You mean like Schumer threatening Gorsuch and Kavanaugh?
Oh, that's right - it's not the same thing......
So you're a victim now? Not surprising. That strategy has worked well for your hero.
No that was me. She had plenty of opportunities to turn around and not get shot. This wasn't some quick trigger situation. She should have never been inside to begin with and had plenty of chances to turn around.
The officer was justified but instead people like you want to paint her a victim. It's ridiculous.
Justified in shooting a small woman who was hanging on a door while his Capitol Police brethren were on HER side of the door.
Yeah, Ok.....
It's not. Schumer acknowledged he was out of line and apologized.
I do remember quite a bit of outrage, following Schumer's comments, from Trump, McConnell and others. McConnell described Schumer's words as "astonishingly reckless and irresponsible . . . and clearly dangerous." Where's the GOP blowback against Graham's violent rhetoric, not only in this instance but with respect to the Special Grand Jury proceedings in Georgia?
Hold on. Police didn't just start blasting anyone who advanced. If they did, there would be hundreds dead. No, they fell back to a defensible position and declared a line in the sand. One woman crossed it. She died.
You want to draw an analogy, at least make it a fair one.
The line in the sand was drawn where members of congress were. That's what the right doesn't care about.
That has absolutely no meaning to the right, because to them, the Jan. 6 rioters were mostly peaceful tourists, or so I've been told, more then once.
This was the scene on the other side of the House chamber approximately the time Babbit was shot. Once the House evacuated, the police put their guns away. Despite enduring continuing direct physical attacks from the rioters.
The police in Chicago looked like Custer's last stand. The only difference is they did not draw a weapon. I am saying that in that next situation, they should draw (per the Babbitt precedent up above) and shoot the next "threatening" person. And then any others that are not detoured by the first one being shot. That was the precedent laid out above when facing a violent and threatening mob that was acting seditiously (attacking the government...which the police are part of...which the federal courthouse they tried to set on fire in Portland was part of...etc.)
And if this is all sounding crazy, that is entirely my point. A whole bunch of people in this thread are awfully flippant about shooting someone who "played a stupid game" and I assert that is because she is viewed as a "deplorable MAGA" who had it coming. I saw a bunch of people who would be more aligned with your politics who had it coming in 2020, I expect that same standard to be enforced in the future.
It's fun when we all get to make our own partisan rules.
That is not the precedent. You are purposefully misrepresenting what happened.
You're still missing the point that the police were not defending themselves. They suffered attacks for several hours after Babbit was shot. She was shot to defend members of Congress.
This response makes me think you're just messing with us.
She was part of a larger group that was intent on doing harm to members of Congress and killing the VP. As mentioned in previous posts, she crossed a line of defense the Capitol police established. She was a part of a mob - do you think if they let her through that broken glass window in the door she was trying to climb through others wouldn't have also tried to get through?
But all that is beside the point. Even on a normal day you'll likely be shot if you try to enter highly restricted areas of the Capitol after ignoring repeated warnings. This wasn't a normal day by any stretch. She was part of a seditious and violent mob. I think that is part of what you and others aren't getting or ignoring.
She was shot by an overeager "cop" who had problems with weapon security in the past.
He could have fired a warning shot. But no, he went right for the kill.
He was itching to shoot someone.
Are there any law enforcement agencies anywhere in the country that teach the use of “warning shots”?
Really? On a normal day? Like when the Colbert group was trespassing, told to leave, and still stuck around?
You make this too easy.
And run over any and all protestors who block traffic. Get a Rover with grill bumpers like the rich Haitians have when they mow through beggars
No idea. Doesn't it make sense to try to disperse a crowd with some show of real force before shooting to kill?
Yeah, just like I was around the bend when I didn't believe the Russian Collusion Hoax or that the Hunter laptop was Russian disinformation.
I am not misrepresenting anything. A "line in the sand" was drawn. That can arbitrarily be drawn at any point. "We are surrounded and being pelted with projectiles and pointy spears and we have nowhere else to go." If they keep pushing in we could really get hurt. That was the cop situation there. Line drawn, open fire.
"The protestors are over running our precinct station and they are attempting to light the courthouse on fire. If we don't stop them, someone could get hurt." Line drawn, open fire.
"The protestors are getting so rowdy outside that we have to move the President to a safe location." Crossed a line, open fire.
"This isn't similar." Of course not, that is ALWAYS the answer on these from you guys. I reject that paradigm. Rules for thee as well as me.
I don't know what to tell you.
If you don't or won't acknowledge the vastly different set of rules that come into play when you're talking about being inside the US Capitol vs being on the street in Chicago or Portland then there's no point in engaging you on this.
I should also note that I'm not defending anyone breaking the law.
- Status
Similar threads
