Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Only when they LIE, Skippy. No one has been charged with insurrection. BTW, Sparky isn't part of this thread--are you unjustly disparaging another member of the board? Go ahead, tell me NO and be guilty of another fucking lie. Better yet just STFU.Oh, my, my, my... somebody disagrees with your take on this and so they're a Liar? You tell 'em, Sparky...
Please show your evidence, leftist liar.threatening the life of that cop,
Babbit is dead because she was stupid enough to believe Donald Trump's Big Lie and act on it.Babbit is dead because she was summarily executed by a racist democrat gestapo. Floyd is dead because he ODd on fentanyl and failed to follow lawful orders of multiple law enforcement officers you racist fucking pig.
That is not a criteria for accurately labeling an event as an Insurrection.No one has been charged with insurrection.
You're drunk. Wake me up when you sober up.BTW, Sparky isn't part of this thread--are you unjustly disparaging another member of the board? Go ahead, tell me NO and be guilty of another fucking lie. Better yet just STFU.
Thank you, hypocrisy and idiocy are a poor combination. You won't be missed.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Hypocrite" ????????
Good poster Concerned.
You seem strangely upset. Strangely angry over this matter.
Look, I did not know Ms Babbitt, or Mr. Floyd, nor officer Chauvin.
I read about them in the newspaper, newsfeeds, or on the telly.
I ain't angry or upset about any of them. Their lives. Or their deaths.
I do have an opinion about each......but, I ain't as emotionally invested in any of them as you seemingly are.
So, let's do this as I do not wish to stress you or upset you any further.
Let us simply agree to disagree.
I think Ashli is dead because of Ashli; and Mr. Floyd dead becaue of 9-minutes of knee.
You, apparently, demur on each.
I'm OK with that.
Good luck.
Ashli Babbit is dead because she was summarily executed for trespassing. It was a political assassination of the worst kind.Babbit is dead because she was stupid enough to believe Donald Trump's Big Lie and act on it.
If I was drunk, I could at some point sober up. You on the other hand are stupid for life.That is not a criteria for accurately labeling an event as an Insurrection.
You're drunk. Wake me up when you sober up.
A flagpole is NOT considered a "deadly weapon".
That would be something like a knife or gun.
And the police had helmets.
They were never at risk.
If you favor violence then how can you object to Babbitt’s shooting?First of all, any cop shooting an unarmed person is always criminal murder, no matter what they are doing.
Second is that the video clearly shows Bryd never said a word.
And you are totally wrong about me.
I am pro violent BLM protests.
I want to get rid of police entirely.
I think they are all corrupt monsters.
Or else we would not have the largest % imprisoned in the world, the illegal war on drugs, sentence mandates, asset forfeiture, etc.
Ashli may have been wrong, to the point of stupidity, but did not deserve to be shot, and shooting at a crowded room was a horrendous crime.
So what they did is ok, jerkoff? Rioiting in the Capital hunting down Congress if fine with you because they were doing for your pal Trump.Your argument is irrelevant. Legal minds in the AGs office have not charged ANYONE with insurrection, so run your little ignorant ass down the road, moron.
Quite a leap there. Pointing out a lack of charges for one crime has nothing to do with another potential crime. Separate issues.So what they did is ok, jerkoff? Rioiting in the Capital hunting down Congress if fine with you because they were doing for your pal Trump.
Got it, prick with ears.
You not good at moral relativism, you should stop.Point of the matter is, George Floyd had been told numerous times to stop resisting until he was put on the ground. Ashli Babbit was not afforded any warning at all. She was summarily executed for trespassing by one of Piglosi's gestapo.
Did you notice the part of Byrd's statement that it was the first time he had ever fired his weapon? I hope that was a mis-speak because if it isn't, the standard of training for the Capital Police is below that of normal armed security guards. From what little I've seen, hos weapon handling skills are certainly sub-par.
How do you know he was not reprimanded?Let's not forget that Byrd previously lost his pistol in the Mens' Room of the Capitol building and he was not reprimanded or lost his job for his carelessness.
I think the fact that he murdered a civilian speaks for itself.How do you know he was not reprimanded?
Yeah, he neutralized an insurrectionist.I
I think the fact that he murdered a civilian speaks for itself.
Jonathan Turley:
“Under Byrd’s interpretation, hundreds of rioters could have been gunned down on Jan. 6.”29 Aug 2021 ~~ By Stacey Matthews
Jonathan Turley: Statements By Capitol Police Officer Who Killed Ashli Babbitt ‘Demolish the Two Official Reviews That Cleared Him’
"Under Byrd's interpretation, hundreds of rioters could have been gunned down on Jan. 6."legalinsurrection.com
Numerous aspects of what unfolded during the Capitol riot have been hotly debated in the months since it happened, but few have been as contentious and emotional as the debate over the officer-involved shooting death of Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt.
The 35-year-old Air Force veteran was shot and killed by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6th after she tried to climb through a glass-paneled door after parts of it had been shattered by another rioter, identified as Zachary Jordan Alam.
Babbitt, who reportedly had been standing next to Alam, was shot.
n April, the Biden Department of Justice announced they had closed the investigation into the fatal shooting and would not be pursuing criminal charges against Byrd, citing “insufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution.”
Just last week, the Capitol Police confirmed a report from NBC News that they had exonerated Byrd, a 28-year veteran of the force. They stated in a press release that Byrd – who they did not name – “will not be facing internal discipline” because in their view Byrd’s conduct “was lawful and within Department policy, which says an officer may use deadly force only when the officer reasonably believes that action is in the defense of human life, including the officer’s own life, or in the defense of any person in immediate danger of serious physical injury.”
On the heels of the USCP exonerating Byrd, he did an interview with NBC News anchor Lester Holt, identifying himself publicly for the first time.
Instead of clearing things up, the interview only intensified the debate over his actions and whether they were justified. Here’s a key moment from their back and forth:
Video shot by a person in the crowd showed two officers posted in front of the door. Heavily outnumbered, they eventually stepped aside.Byrd said he had no knowledge that any officers were there. Because of the furniture stacked on his side of the door, he also couldn’t make out how many people were on the other side or whether they were carrying weapons.“It was impossible for me to see what was on the other side,” he said.But he did see the person now known to be Babbitt start coming through the broken glass.“I could not fully see her hands or what was in the backpack or what the intentions are,” Byrd said. “But they had shown violence leading up to that point.”Byrd, who says he has been in hiding since that day and has faced death threats, told Holt it was the first time he’d ever fired his weapon.
Watch an edited version of the interview below:
The extended interview can be viewed here.
Georgetown University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley, who has long been a critic of official media narratives surrounding the shooting, said that instead of confirming that the respective decisions by the DOJ and the Capitol Police not to pursue action against Byrd were the right ones to make that Byrd “proceeded to demolish the two official reviews that cleared him” after he admitted he could not determine whether Babbitt was armed:
He expanded on his opinion in a piece published at The Hill:
While the Supreme Court, in cases such as Graham v. Connor, has said that courts must consider “the facts and circumstances of each particular case,” it has emphasized that lethal force must be used only against someone who is “an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and … is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.” Particularly with armed assailants, the standard governing “imminent harm” recognizes that these decisions must often be made in the most chaotic and brief encounters. Under these standards, police officers should not shoot unarmed suspects or rioters without a clear threat to themselves or fellow officers.[…]Legal experts and the media have avoided the obvious implications of the two reviews in the Babbitt shooting. Under this standard, hundreds of rioters could have been gunned down on Jan. 6 — and officers in cities such as Seattle or Portland, Ore., could have killed hundreds of violent protesters who tried to burn courthouses, took over city halls or occupied police stations during last summer’s widespread rioting. In all of those protests, a small number of activists from both political extremes showed up prepared for violence and pushed others to riot. According to the DOJ’s Byrd review, officers in those cities would not have been required to see a weapon in order to use lethal force in defending buildings.I’m not a legal analyst, but I think Turley makes some good points here.
Comment:
Not a single officer at the Capitol that day was threatened with deadly force. If they had been, other rioters would have been shot. “Context” shows that the officer’s lives were not in danger, and no other officer present thought that they were. This includes the officers who had their guns drawn right alongside Byrd; even they did not fire.
Someone crawling through a broken window? Haul them through, put them in zip ties, pass them to another officer to take away, or tell them to sit down and don’t move. Byrd was not a homeowner at night in the dark, defending his home while alone. He was a trained LEO, with armed fellow officers by his side, and still had a barrier between himself and other rioters, who were not known to have been armed (and were, in fact, not armed).
Please note the following:
Byrd violated the Rules of Engagement of both the Military and Law Enforcement. Had a soldier shot a unarmed civilian under the same circumstances he would have been court martialed.
In incidents involving police shootings, LEO's have been prosecuted for shooting supposed unarmed perpetrators, yet in this case there is no indictment or real investigation. The justification of the murder of Ashli Babbitt is purely political and Byrd has virtually gotten away with murder.
Succinctly said. If Byrd were White and Babbitt were Black, there would have been riots, arson and looting. Personally, I would like him to receive justice.
False. There was an investigation. They found he acted correctly.Cop Who Killed Ashli Babbitt Was Cleared of Criminal Wrongdoing Without Interview
11 Jan 2022 ~~ By Paul SperryCop Who Killed Ashli Babbitt Was Cleared of Criminal Wrongdoing Without Interview
Above, Lt. Michael Byrd, the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt, told NBC News he gave fair warning, but under penalty of perjury he refused to say anything to investigators. By Paul Sperry, RealClearInvewww.realclearinvestigations.com
When U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd went on “NBC Nightly News” to tell his side of shooting and killing unarmed Jan. 6 rioter Ashli Babbitt, he made a point to note he’d been investigated by several agencies and exonerated for his actions that day.
~snip~
In fact, investigators cleared Byrd of wrongdoing in the shooting without actually interviewing him about the shooting or threatening him with punishment if he did not cooperate with their criminal investigation.
“He didn’t provide any statement to [criminal] investigators and they didn’t push him to make a statement,” Babbitt family attorney Terry Roberts said in an RCI interview. “It’s astonishing how skimpy his investigative file is."
Use-of-Force Experts Skeptical
Some use-of-force experts are skeptical Byrd did the right thing, even after watching his largely sympathetic NBC interview.
“The limited public information that exists raises serious questions about the propriety of Byrd’s decision to shoot, especially with regard to the assessment that Babbitt was an imminent threat,” said police consultants and criminologists Geoffrey Alpert, Jeff Noble and Seth Stoughton in a recent Lawfare article.
~Snip~
Unlike in a criminal investigation, there is no right to remain silent in a civil case. Wrongful-death litigation claiming negligence may hinge on whether Byrd warned Babbitt before opening fire on her.
“We have serious reservations about the propriety of the shooting,” they wrote.
Byrd, whose mouth was covered with a surgical mask, took aim outside her field of vision and fired as her head emerged through the window. Roberts compared her shooting to an “execution.”
“Killing her by shooting her at point-blank range was completely unnecessary,” he said. “This alone renders the shooting legally unjustified.”
Comment:
Can anyone one this board name one other US law enforcement officer who shot an unarmed suspect, and then remained unnamed and cleared in a secret investigation? It's truly remarkable how the very same Progressive Marxist/Socialist Commie leftists who believe police are out-of-control marauders and seek their defunding are completely content with the machinations occurring here. This was an execution; it was criminal homicide.
Michael Byrd has literally got away with the murder of a U.S. citizen on Federal property caught on camera and our government and their agencies weaponized against Americans have condoned the act.
Never happened.Like I've been saying, this was murder. There was no imminent threat, no deadly force, Ashli was pinned in a doorway window and there were other police present. For some reason known only to Officer Byrd, he inexplicably jumped forward gun drawn and shot her point blank in the fac
