DOJ Admits Federal Government Ran Informants Inside the Oath Keepers on Jan. 6 & they could be called to testify under 6th Amendment

I believe Andrew Clide actually made that claim. There is video of him doing it, dumb ass.
Of the hundreds of people charged so far, I'm not aware of a single Antifa in the group.
Sure you are. John Sullivan
 
The DOJ and the FBI can deny all they want that they had informants and agitators undercover among the protesters to goad them into turning violent.

They can, but for some reason, they do not. They refuse to answer any questions about that, and don't even leak a denial.

For some reason . . .
 
No, that's not what can I see.

That's what your media told you to see.

Holy shit. :eusa_doh:

You're literally denying what the video shows. Then compounding that idiocy by needlessly dragging "my" media into this, though the media's not needed since there are multiple videos.

Including the video YOU posted which shows those 3 cops leaving.
 
Holy shit. :eusa_doh:

You're literally denying what the video shows. Then compounding that idiocy by needlessly dragging "my" media into this, though the media's not needed since there are multiple videos.

Including the video YOU posted which shows those 3 cops leaving.
Makes no sense that they would leave. Your lieutenant is under attack by deadly force (which is the justification for a police shooting) and you run away? Did these guys work for Uvalde Police before they got federal jobs?

What would make sense would be if they saw their lieutenant murder a woman, and decided not to get involved for fear of prosecution themselves. Too bad for them the video shows they were standing there.

Question: If those officers fled, as you claim, why did the Lieutanant not flee? If he was that afraid of the mob, did he not know that killing a woman in front of them would be more likely to enflame them, than to frighten them into leaving? Or is the Capital Police filled with nothing but Affirmative Action hires who can't be expected to think thirty seconds ahead?

This is why non-liberals are so disgusted with liberals. You were so happy when rioters were attacking police, courthouses, department stores, and small neighborhood businesses, calling the riots "mostly peaceful protests" while standing in front of burning buildings. But now you cheer a police officer shooting an unarmed woman because she is a Trump supporter. There is no justification for that shooting, but he will get away with it in the same spirit that white men in the south used to get away with lynchings.
 
Holy shit. :eusa_doh:

You're literally denying what the video shows. Then compounding that idiocy by needlessly dragging "my" media into this, though the media's not needed since there are multiple videos.

Including the video YOU posted which shows those 3 cops leaving.
Honest check, Faun:

Based on FBI statements, how many FBI agents and informers were agitating the J6 protesters into rioting?

Just based on FBI statements about that.
 
Makes no sense that they would leave. Your lieutenant is under attack by deadly force (which is the justification for a police shooting) and you run away? Did these guys work for Uvalde Police before they got federal jobs?

What would make sense would be if they saw their lieutenant murder a woman, and decided not to get involved for fear of prosecution themselves. Too bad for them the video shows they were standing there.

Question: If those officers fled, as you claim, why did the Lieutanant not flee? If he was that afraid of the mob, did he not know that killing a woman in front of them would be more likely to enflame them, than to frighten them into leaving? Or is the Capital Police filled with nothing but Affirmative Action hires who can't be expected to think thirty seconds ahead?

This is why non-liberals are so disgusted with liberals. You were so happy when rioters were attacking police, courthouses, department stores, and small neighborhood businesses, calling the riots "mostly peaceful protests" while standing in front of burning buildings. But now you cheer a police officer shooting an unarmed woman because she is a Trump supporter. There is no justification for that shooting, but he will get away with it in the same spirit that white men in the south used to get away with lynchings.

He was on the other side of the doors and barricade. Those 3 cops were standing in between the violent mob and the barricade. They were not well armed and were being replaced by heavily armed cops.

But even worse for your dementia, rather than try to figure out why they left, all a normal person has to do is watch the video. You can see them leaving. They're literally walking down the stairs, away from that violent mob.

In this video, they're seen standing against the wall on the right. This video starts after they already moved away from the doors. At the 0:32 mark, you can see them walking away as they head for the stairs leading down...




And no, I was not happy with BLM violence. I condemned it repeatedly.
 
He was on the other side of the doors and barricade. Those 3 cops were standing in between the violent mob and the barricade. They were not well armed and were being replaced by heavily armed cops.

But even worse for your dementia, rather than try to figure out why they left, all a normal person has to do is watch the video. You can see them leaving. They're literally walking down the stairs, away from that violent mob.

In this video, they're seen standing against the wall on the right. This video starts after they already moved away from the doors. At the 0:32 mark, you can see them walking away as they head for the stairs leading down...




And no, I was not happy with BLM violence. I condemned it repeatedly.

Obviously you're not going to let that idea that they were leaving go so I'm not going to convince you of what I see with my own eyes. It's like talking to a kid denying taking a cookie with crumbs popping out of his mouth as he speaks.

Whether the others were leaving changes nothing.

So explain why - if they were leaving - it was necessary to shoot just one of hundreds of FBI-agitated protesters as they left? How was the Lieutenant in danger from an unarmed woman struggling to get through a window when he could have walked away?
 
Obviously you're not going to let that idea that they were leaving go so I'm not going to convince you of what I see with my own eyes. It's like talking to a kid denying taking a cookie with crumbs popping out of his mouth as he speaks.

Whether the others were leaving changes nothing.

So explain why - if they were leaving - it was necessary to shoot just one of hundreds of FBI-agitated protesters as they left? How was the Lieutenant in danger from an unarmed woman struggling to get through a window when he could have walked away?

Holy shit. Even posting a video where they're visibly seen walking away and you still deny it.

Here's more video proving you're out of your fucking mind...


38:07 - the 3 cops in question are seen standing in front of the doors leading into the Speaker's Lobby

38:26 - 4 heavily armed cops are seen walking up the stairs, approaching the violent mob

38:50 - the first 3 cops, no longer standing in front of the doors, are standing against the wall to the right

38:56 - those 3 cops are seen walking towards the stairs

38:58 - a voice is heard saying, "they're being evacuated for their own safety."

39:06 - those 3 cops are seen walking down the stairs

39:10 - Benedict Babbitt is shot.

Denying what the video shows is denying reality.
 
Last edited:
Holy shit. Even posting a video where they're visibly seen walking away and you still deny it.

Here's more video proving you're out of your fucking mind...


38:07 - the 3 cops in question are seen standing in front of the doors leading into the Speaker's Lobby

38:26 - 4 heavily armed cops are seen walking up the stairs, approaching the violent mob

38:50 - the first 3 cops, no longer standing in front of the doors, are standing against the wall to the right

38:56 - those 3 cops are seen walking towards the stairs

38:58 - a voice is heard saying, "they're being evacuated for their own safety."

39:06 - those 3 cops are seen walking down the stairs

39:10 - Benedict Babbitt is shot.

Denying what the video shows is denying reality.
So - again - if they were leaving, why was it necessary to shoot just one of the protesters as she struggled to get through a window?

If they were moving to a safer area, why stop to kill a woman first, which a cheeseburger would know is the opposite of deescalation?
 
So - again - if they were leaving, why was it necessary to shoot just one of the protesters as she struggled to get through a window?

If they were moving to a safer area, why stop to kill a woman first, which a cheeseburger would know is the opposite of deescalation?

She was shot because as part of a violent mob breaking in, she happened to be the first one to breach the police barricade.
 
She was shot because as part of a violent mob breaking in, she happened to be the first one to breach the police barricade.
So that's the standard? If a person is part of a violent mob breaking in, it's fine to shoot them? Why didn't he shoot more, I wonder?

That rule would have been a big help during the BLM/ANTIFA riots. It seems a big change from the days when Democrats cried about police brutality because a router was arrested by officers in an unmarked vehicle.

Maybe the Capital Police should conduct trainings for local departments in riot control. The really struggled in 2020 not knowing that violent mobs should be dealt with through immediate deadly force.
 
So that's the standard? If a person is part of a violent mob breaking in, it's fine to shoot them? Why didn't he shoot more, I wonder?

That rule would have been a big help during the BLM/ANTIFA riots. It seems a big change from the days when Democrats cried about police brutality because a router was arrested by officers in an unmarked vehicle.

Maybe the Capital Police should conduct trainings for local departments in riot control. The really struggled in 2020 not knowing that violent mobs should be dealt with through immediate deadly force.

Why wonder? He didn't have to shoot anyone else because everyone else obey the lawful order to get back.
 
Why wonder? He didn't have to shoot anyone else because everyone else obey the lawful order to get back.
So summary execution was an effective means of crowd control?

Long as you're fine with it if Trump is re elected and BLM/ANTIFA starts the mostly peaceful protests AKA murderous slash and burn rampages.
 
So summary execution was an effective means of crowd control?

Long as you're fine with it if Trump is re elected and BLM/ANTIFA starts the mostly peaceful protests AKA murderous slash and burn rampages.

No, but lethal force was necessary to keep that mob out of the House chamber until all lawmakers and staff could be safely evacuated.
 
No, but lethal force was necessary to keep that mob out of the House chamber until all lawmakers and staff could be safely evacuated.
Oh so the necessity of lethal force depends on who wants to get away from the mob. Kill to protect politicians, but when the mob is attacking family businesses, trying to light a courthouse on fire while locking federal officers in, or throwing Molotov cocktails at police cars, not so much.

That's what I like about this board. Democrats can be more honest about what they want.

I'll return the favor and be honest. Democrats cry over the claim that Trump wanted armed people allowed near the Capital. But Capital police didn't kill any armed Americans that day, just an unarmed American veteran. We are not stupid so we can learn from that.
 
Last edited:
Oh so the necessity of lethal force depends on who wants to get away from the mob. Kill to protect politicians, but when the mob is attacking family businesses, trying to light a courthouse on fire while locking federal officers in, or throwing Molotov cocktails at police cars, not so much.

That's what I like about this board. Democrats can be more honest about what they want.

I'll return the favor and be honest. Democrats cry over the claim that Trump wanted armed people allowed near the Capital. But Capital police didn't kill any armed Americans that day, just an unarmed American veteran. We are not stupid so we can learn from that.

Who knows why the right is so stuck on her not being armed with a gun? That violent mob was threatening law makers. They didn't need guns to harm them as that mob demonstrated in the lower west terrace tunnel. Law enforcement was not about to let that violent mob do to lawmakers what they were doing to police.
 
Who knows why the right is so stuck on her not being armed with a gun? That violent mob was threatening law makers. They didn't need guns to harm them as that mob demonstrated in the lower west terrace tunnel. Law enforcement was not about to let that violent mob do to lawmakers what they were doing to police.
My point went completely over your head. According to Democrat hysteria there were armed Trumpsters at the Capital. None of them were shot.

If the FBI is going to plant agitators in among peaceful protesters to turn the peaceful protest into a riot and then Capital Police are going to shoot them to death as long as they are unarmed, then non Democrats have two options.

We can be bullied out of our right to protest for fear that Government agitators will foment a riot to justify our killing by law enforcement or we can the right to protest as our Constitution safeguards while bearing arms to make sure it stays peaceful.
 

Forum List

Back
Top