The insurrection committee is killing Trump and his Cult

[woodwork201]

Done

Completely false. It is not a crime to go where invited. The Capital wasn't posted and wasn't locked. Only when they passed locked barriers or barricades did they commit trespass.

 

[MadChemist]

Here's what the officers testifying said they want the Jan. 6 committee to investigate

The House select committee investigating the deadly Capitol riot is holding its first high-profile hearing today. Follow here for the latest news.

www.cnn.com

The committee is obviously going after Trump, as well they should. McCarthy and McConnell and companies will try their best to defend him, but, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!!! It's gonna take a whole bunch of defending for the big orange criminal! Bigly!!!

You've got nothing.

 

[MadChemist]

You don't put friends of an arsonist in the arson investigation

But it is O.K that the petrifiedPelosi, the hater of Trump can call for an investigation ?

Actually No.

If a hater launches it, he can have friends be a part of it.

 

[toobfreak]

The insurrection committee is killing Trump and his Cult​

You honestly must be dumber than hammered shit if you really think Trump's popularity can be hurt by one lowlife no-name RINO goon the DNC has bought and paid for!

But so much for any pretense that this "committee" exists for anything other than the 19th attempt by Nancy to try to skunk her arch-nemesis.

 

[MadChemist]

You honestly must be dumber than hammered shit if you really think Trump's popularity can be hurt by one lowlife no-name RINO goon the DNC has bought and paid for!

What these turds don't understand is that this kind of thing only solidifies people behind him.

It's going to make it very difficult to move on if they've given him that much leverage by making a near-martyr out of him.

But they never were to bright.

And in the end, if he is nominated again, they only have themselves to blame.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Does anyone have still doubt that Babbitt needed shooting? In fact, anyone who put their hands on a cop should have been shot. There should have been hundreds of shot rioters in the Capital. Any of them who touched a cop or encouraged another to touch a cop - perhaps by yelling "kill him with his own gun" needs to be sent to Federal prison for 10 years or more. That includes yanking on face masks, hitting, shoving, kicking, taking their shield, or any touching more violent than a handshake.

I have consistently argued, in cases where the police shoot anyone - armed or unarmed, that if you violently put your hands on a cop, you get shot. Cops are armed and the assumption must be that if you harm a cop you intend to disarm them and that you could use their gun for further violence.

Most faux-conservatives have agreed with me and many have added thanks or love to those posts. I say faux-conservatives because those same users aren't applying the same conservative logic to the Capital riots. A trait of real conservatives is that they are consistent because conservatism should be values based and not situation based. Just as we will fight to defend the right of people to say things with which we disagree - that's consistency; we always support the right to free speech - we always defend the police when they shoot someone who attacks them.

usually most Democrat Cultists are violent crackpots

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Pelosi refused Jordan and Banks. Did you know this?

.

You mean two Trump flunkies that would have done nothing but tried to cause chaos and stop the truth from coming out.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Of course they are killing Trump and his 'cult'.

Pelosi cherry picked them to ignite Trump Impeachment #3

The Republicans could havehas a bipartisan comission but killed that deal. They deserve whatever they get

 

[GWV5903]

The listed anti-American traitors are up to the task and their racist supporters here on USMB, and other precincts, are patiently standing back and standing by to regurgitate and distribute the mandated talking points issued from Central Kommand.

More from RacistMarcATL, don’t you get tired of calling your opponents RACIST every 5th word? After all this time you just dig in further, your whole message is driven by your hatred, I could careless what color your skin is, it’s your behavior that counts for me…

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Trump isn't dying and he has no cult. What imbecile titled this thread?

You look up the definition of "cult" before you drink anymore Koolaid

 

[Orangecat]

You look up the definition of "cult" before you drink anymore Koolaid

Don't need to, you imbecile liberals exhibit textbook examples here daily.

 

[sear]

Only when they passed locked barriers or barricades did they commit trespass.

If you are certain of that, please post the text of the statute. I'd like to read it.

What's the behavioral difference between "trespass", and "criminal trespass"? Part of this issue is jurisdictional. Is it DC law, or direct federal law? Is "trespassing" inside the capitol bare-handed a lesser offense than carrying a demonstration placard displayed on a pole that could be used as a weapon, or insurrectionist tool?

w2,
Would you have the insurrectionist that never entered the capitol that day be spared criminal charge, if their presence was non-violent?

 

[Quasar44]

Astrostar
Yes another fake committee that has zero validity to trick the masses of Peons like yourself

 

[woodwork201]

If you are certain of that, please post the text of the statute. I'd like to read it.

What's the behavioral difference between "trespass", and "criminal trespass"? Part of this issue is jurisdictional. Is it DC law, or direct federal law? Is "trespassing" inside the capitol bare-handed a lesser offense than carrying a demonstration placard displayed on a pole that could be used as a weapon, or insurrectionist tool?

w2,
Would you have the insurrectionist that never entered the capitol that day be spared criminal charge, if their presence was non-violent?

What text of statute? There's no law that says that going into a public place by invitation is not trespass. Prove they are guilty by showing the law that says they did. We prove guilt, not innocence, in this country - remember?

They went into a public building, open to the public every day before then, not posted, not locked, and, in fact, doors opened and held so by Capital Police. Show the trespassing law that is violated by that behavior.

 

[Oldestyle]

Republican lawmaker blames his party for lack of answers in emotional statement

The House select committee investigating the deadly Capitol riot is holding its first high-profile hearing today. Follow here for the latest news.

www.cnn.com

It's going to take a mountain of work by Fox News, Newsmax, Breitbart, McCarthy, Hannity, Tucker, Ingram, etc. to rescue Trump from this shellacking. Of course they will try. REmains to be seen if they will be successful. Still hoping Trump runs in 2024, giving President Biden another landslide win. Bigly!!!

Is anyone going to pay attention to this committee? I don't know why. It's a show trial.

 

[Oldestyle]

Does anyone have still doubt that Babbitt needed shooting? In fact, anyone who put their hands on a cop should have been shot. There should have been hundreds of shot rioters in the Capital. Any of them who touched a cop or encouraged another to touch a cop - perhaps by yelling "kill him with his own gun" needs to be sent to Federal prison for 10 years or more. That includes yanking on face masks, hitting, shoving, kicking, taking their shield, or any touching more violent than a handshake.

I have consistently argued, in cases where the police shoot anyone - armed or unarmed, that if you violently put your hands on a cop, you get shot. Cops are armed and the assumption must be that if you harm a cop you intend to disarm them and that you could use their gun for further violence.

Most faux-conservatives have agreed with me and many have added thanks or love to those posts. I say faux-conservatives because those same users aren't applying the same conservative logic to the Capital riots. A trait of real conservatives is that they are consistent because conservatism should be values based and not situation based. Just as we will fight to defend the right of people to say things with which we disagree - that's consistency; we always support the right to free speech - we always defend the police when they shoot someone who attacks them.

When did Babbitt "put her hands on a cop"?

With all due respect, Woodwork...Police Officers have been assaulted by far left protesters repeatedly over the past several years and few of those protesters were even arrested let alone sentenced to long jail time. Why the double standard?

 

[woodwork201]

When did Babbitt "put her hands on a cop"?

With all due respect, Woodwork...Police Officers have been assaulted by far left protesters repeatedly over the past several years and few of those protesters were even arrested let alone sentenced to long jail time. Why the double standard?

Read it again. I never said Babbit put her hands on a cop; the hands-on-a-cop part was an add-on - additional people who should have been shot.

Unlike the leftists and the faux-conservatives here, I'm very consistent and, apparently, on of very few that do not have a double standard. If you put your hands on a cop in any kind of attack, the assumption should be that you're trying to harm the cop, disable the cop, and very possibly take their firearm and hurt the cop or others with it. That means in the riots in Portland and Minneapolis. It means in the riots at the White House, and for those few who did so, at the Capitol as well. If you put your hands on a cop, you should be shot.

As for Babbitt, and any behind her who might have come through that broken window, they were, as I've said over and over again, invading the protected space, where they were clearly locked out and forbidden to go, and were considered to be a threat to the protectorate of the Capitol Police.

Were you to find someone climbing in the window of your child's (your protectorate) bedroom, would you wait until the got their feet on the floor so you could assess the threat, measure their height and weight, and either search or ask if they had guns? No. They came into your protection zone with you right there in front of them, forcefully having broken a window to climb into the otherwise locked space. They must be considered a threat with violent intentions. Shoot to stop the threat. That's the top of the head presenting itself and no other visible, sure, way to stop them. No chest or COM shot. No leg shot. The available stopping shot is top of the head and that's exactly where I would have shot her.

It's too bad. She had been, up to that time, an American hero, an honorably discharged veteran, a real patriot. Then she got caught up in the fervor of an FBI plot to undermine the President one last time before he left office, an attempt to get one last shot at impeachment and the conviction they hoped to get to deny him the ability to run again for office. But caught up she was.

Babbitt's passion for justice and truth led her to follow calls by FBI instigators to penetrate into areas of the Capitol not opened to the public and secured, even defended, by armed Capitol Police. These are police unlike the Seattle or Portland police who stood down in the face of rioters. These are police, many with their own political views aligned or not aligned with Babbitt's own views, who took their job of protecting Congress very serious. These are police who had previously seen a Sanders supporting communist open fire on Republican members of Congress and had fought to save them. Politics aside, as the Secret Service would have been for the President had the White House been penetrated, these police were the real thing and they did their job.

When the window in the locked door was broken directly in front of the police inside the door, and the rioters started through that door, the Capitol police had no choice. What if they'd let Babbitt in? Then the second or the third person? How many before some got in with guns that they may have carried or, listening the cries of the FBI instigators, taken from the Capitol police outside of that door? How many come in before those three officers wouldn't have the power or capacity to stop them? No, they could not let even the first one in the door. They didn't know it was Ashli Babbitt. They had never seen Ashli Babbitt or knew anything about her.

Our own admiration and respect for her patriotic service is an testament to her potential to be a threat. It's not reasonable to talk about her brave service to her nation and now paint her as a tiny, frail, "girl". Even had she actually been weak and harmless as the faux-conservatives try to paint her, the Capitol police had no way to know that about her but, be honest, had she really intended harm she certainly had the knowledge and capacity to have brought the tools of harm with her and to use them and to have caused harm. There was no time or opportunity for the Capitol Police to know or assess anything different about her or the dozens waiting to follow her through the window.

The Ashli Babbitt story is a very sad chapter in our history. It is no doubt an attempt by the left to undermine our republic and it was led by the FBI. When you blame the Capitol Police for doing their job, you give a pass to the FBI, Nancy Pelosi, and others who very intentionally created the circumstance that led to Ashli's death. It's akin to blaming the gun - the Capitol Police were simply the tool used by the FBI and Pelosi to go after Trump. Just as Ashli Babbitt was not murdered by the gun, she was not murdered by the police. She was murdered by the FBI.

 

[Oldestyle]

Read it again. I never said Babbit put her hands on a cop; the hands-on-a-cop part was an add-on - additional people who should have been shot.

Unlike the leftists and the faux-conservatives here, I'm very consistent and, apparently, on of very few that do not have a double standard. If you put your hands on a cop in any kind of attack, the assumption should be that you're trying to harm the cop, disable the cop, and very possibly take their firearm and hurt the cop or others with it. That means in the riots in Portland and Minneapolis. It means in the riots at the White House, and for those few who did so, at the Capitol as well. If you put your hands on a cop, you should be shot.

As for Babbitt, and any behind her who might have come through that broken window, they were, as I've said over and over again, invading the protected space, where they were clearly locked out and forbidden to go, and were considered to be a threat to the protectorate of the Capitol Police.

Were you to find someone climbing in the window of your child's (your protectorate) bedroom, would you wait until the got their feet on the floor so you could assess the threat, measure their height and weight, and either search or ask if they had guns? No. They came into your protection zone with you right there in front of them, forcefully having broken a window to climb into the otherwise locked space. They must be considered a threat with violent intentions. Shoot to stop the threat. That's the top of the head presenting itself and no other visible, sure, way to stop them. No chest or COM shot. No leg shot. The available stopping shot is top of the head and that's exactly where I would have shot her.

It's too bad. She had been, up to that time, an American hero, an honorably discharged veteran, a real patriot. Then she got caught up in the fervor of an FBI plot to undermine the President one last time before he left office, an attempt to get one last shot at impeachment and the conviction they hoped to get to deny him the ability to run again for office. But caught up she was.

Babbitt's passion for justice and truth led her to follow calls by FBI instigators to penetrate into areas of the Capitol not opened to the public and secured, even defended, by armed Capitol Police. These are police unlike the Seattle or Portland police who stood down in the face of rioters. These are police, many with their own political views aligned or not aligned with Babbitt's own views, who took their job of protecting Congress very serious. These are police who had previously seen a Sanders supporting communist open fire on Republican members of Congress and had fought to save them. Politics aside, as the Secret Service would have been for the President had the White House been penetrated, these police were the real thing and they did their job.

When the window in the locked door was broken directly in front of the police inside the door, and the rioters started through that door, the Capitol police had no choice. What if they'd let Babbitt in? Then the second or the third person? How many before some got in with guns that they may have carried or, listening the cries of the FBI instigators, taken from the Capitol police outside of that door? How many come in before those three officers wouldn't have the power or capacity to stop them? No, they could not let even the first one in the door. They didn't know it was Ashli Babbitt. They had never seen Ashli Babbitt or knew anything about her.

Our own admiration and respect for her patriotic service is an testament to her potential to be a threat. It's not reasonable to talk about her brave service to her nation and now paint her as a tiny, frail, "girl". Even had she actually been weak and harmless as the faux-conservatives try to paint her, the Capitol police had no way to know that about her but, be honest, had she really intended harm she certainly had the knowledge and capacity to have brought the tools of harm with her and to use them and to have caused harm. There was no time or opportunity for the Capitol Police to know or assess anything different about her or the dozens waiting to follow her through the window.

The Ashli Babbitt story is a very sad chapter in our history. It is no doubt an attempt by the left to undermine our republic and it was led by the FBI. When you blame the Capitol Police for doing their job, you give a pass to the FBI, Nancy Pelosi, and others who very intentionally created the circumstance that led to Ashli's death. It's akin to blaming the gun - the Capitol Police were simply the tool used by the FBI and Pelosi to go after Trump. Just as Ashli Babbitt was not murdered by the gun, she was not murdered by the police. She was murdered by the FBI.

Here's my issue with what happened at the Capital in regards to Ashli Babbitt, Woodwork. I've watched the videos of the prelude to the shot being taken and I'm troubled by what I saw from the Capital Police. It appears to me that they were inviting someone to break that door down and that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The Police standing in front of the door all leave without a struggle. There is an entire stairwell to the right of the door filled with Police in tactical gear and they don't intervene at all. Yet the hallway beyond the door is essentially emptied of everyone...giving the impression that the doorway was the last barrier before the protesters would reach the chamber. Why is that? Why does the officer hide out of sight until the window is broken and only then come out pointing his gun and firing without warning? Who was running that shit show? Who was giving the orders that day?

Your example of someone being shot breaking into your home would become a different story if you were trying to lure some of the neighborhood thieves into breaking in by giving the impression that nobody was home while you hid in waiting...waiting to shoot them as they did break in. That's the impression I got from the videos that I saw. It looked to me like the Capital Police gave the impression that they were abandoning their posts and the way was clear for the protesters to enter the legislative chamber but then they emerged from hiding to shoot to kill. Like I said...it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[sear]

What text of statute? There's no law that says that going into a public place by invitation is not trespass.

From a previous post:
Sunday at 8:29 PM

woodwork201 said:

Only when they passed locked barriers or barricades did they commit trespass.

"If you are certain of that, please post the text of the statute. I'd like to read it." sear

-------------------------
In your above quoted assertion, you defined the parameter that constitutes "committing trespass".

What text of statute?

That's what I was asking you.

So if not by standard of statute, then by what other here-to-fore unspecified standard do you assert so definitively:
woodwork201 said: "Only when they passed locked barriers or barricades did they commit trespass."

 

[Colin norris]

Republican lawmaker blames his party for lack of answers in emotional statement

The House select committee investigating the deadly Capitol riot is holding its first high-profile hearing today. Follow here for the latest news.

www.cnn.com

It's going to take a mountain of work by Fox News, Newsmax, Breitbart, McCarthy, Hannity, Tucker, Ingram, etc. to rescue Trump from this shellacking. Of course they will try. REmains to be seen if they will be successful. Still hoping Trump runs in 2024, giving President Biden another landslide win. Bigly!!!

Teump will never be returned to the presidency because he requires the votes of the republicans who voted him out. That's a fact.
The hearing will expose just what a complete nut case and dictator he wanted to be. Yet here You are hoping he will run again. You haven't learnt a thing.