|
Politics Forum
|
List All Forums | About |
message board home
Next
8/26/2021 11:47:41 AM
 
Reply
or ReplyNewSubject
Section 4: President & Congress Subject: Jan 6 Truths emerging Msg# 1135943
|
||||||
|
Oh for God’s sake.
Me saying that more people will be shot in defense of the Capitol if another Jan. 6th type riot happens there again is not me ADVOCATING for people to get shot. Clearly. It’s me saying that if similar circumstances were to arise, and more idiots attempt to storm a government building while loudly and verbally calling for the public execution of those inside, people will likely get shot, because obviously. I’m genuinely surprised more people didn’t get shot on Jan 6th, if I’m being honest. So thank you for pointing out that you object to “multiple shootings in the future. “ It’s a brave position to take. I will make a note of where you stand on the issue. Additionally, I appreciate you making me go out of the way to clarify something which was already embarrassingly obvious. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: Robert You may recall I was objecting to the idea that more geniuses (sorry, “patriots”…) are going to end up getting shot in the face. So I'd again point out my objections to multiple shootings in the future. That's wrong. Its not OK. It deserves being renounced. Now today you've shifted into arguing the Ashli Babbit case. And that's the subject of a lawsuit brought by Babbit's family. Click Here Report titled: Family of slain Jan 6 protester Ashli Babbitt suing Capitol Police for $10mn over 'failure to warn' before shooting Quotes from the family's attorney: “It’s not debatable. There was no warning . . . I would call what he did an ambush." The attorney, Terry Roberts also said -- no one appears to be ducking for cover in the moments before Babbitt was shot, which also suggests that the cop gave no verbal warning. In addition, the issue of govt failure to allow access to 14,000 hours of video has come up in the Babbit case. That refusal to allow access to the govt's own video system recordings smells like a coverup. And a stalling tactic. See the bunch of other messages mentioning that problem. Raises the big question -- What are they hiding ?? Of course, in court cases there's always arguments on both sides. So it will be decided in court, not here on the OP Forum.
|
