• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

[W: 1411] Video: Woman Killed in Capitol was Executed. Cop Should Face Charges.

chuckiechan

chuckiechan

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Messages
16,568
Reaction score
7,253
Location
California Caliphate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If investigations prove this theory out, then there should be charges.
 
SCrider said:
If that's the take you got form that video there is no hope for you.

Love the article no bias at all.
Click to expand...

Yes...the article is written terribly and basically had me dismissing it. I don't understand why people can't write a point without such stylizations that do nothing but distract.
 
When you are climbing into a federal building through a broken out window what is going through your mind?

I understand those waving flags and shouting from the streets but this is crossing a big line.

If I break into your home in the middle of the night I am quite aware I could get my ass shot.

She is a mother too which is really perplexing as why she would put herself into possible danger.
 
chuckiechan said:
The ROE’s are not that simple for Capitol Police. I suggest this was an “agency of one kind or another”, and possibly even accidental.
Click to expand...
Very possible those were Secret Service agnates they will shot to kill if you cross a line they have drawn.
 
chuckiechan said:
Forget the article. It is the video. (Insert rolling eye smiley).
Click to expand...

I tried to find it but it wouldn't load for me, and I'm half scared of getting digital herpies from clicking on a link now, so all I have is the article.
 
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

  • Overall, we rate Big League Politics Questionable based on extreme right-wing bias, promotion of propaganda and conspiracies as well as numerous failed fact checks.
Detailed Report
Reasoning: Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Fake News
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180

History

Big League Politics is an Alt-Right news and opinion blog founded by Patrick Howley, a former writer for the far-right Daily Caller and Questionable Breitbart. According to their about page “Big League Politics is a fast-paced news site led by a team of top-level investigative reporters, filmmakers, and citizen journalists all over the country. We challenge powerful politicians in both the Republican and Democratic Parties. We are not conservative. We are not liberal. We are road warriors fighting the good fight for journalism.” They further state that “All stories on Big League Politics are factually accurate.”

Big League Politics - Media Bias Fact Check


Why do you keep believing the stuff these fantasy news sources keep putting out?



.
 
You are my first ignore of the year for such a huge thread crap.
 
The sign above the door next to the window she was climbing through said "Speaker's Lobby." If Pelosi was still in there, I have no doubt her Secret Service detail shot her. The Secret Service doesn't play.
 
armycowboy said:
The sign above the door next to the window she was climbing through said "Speaker's Lobby." If Pelosi was still in there, I have no doubt her Secret Service detail shot her. The Secret Service doesn't play.
Click to expand...
Then why only him shooting and why did he stop at one kill?
I think we haven’t heard the end of this story.
 
armycowboy said:
The sign above the door next to the window she was climbing through said "Speaker's Lobby." If Pelosi was still in there, I have no doubt her Secret Service detail shot her. The Secret Service doesn't play.
Click to expand...

Not Secret Service. Capitol Police.

The Secret Service does not provide security to members of Congress.
 
chuckiechan said:
Graph view. Use discretion. I don’t believe he had probable cause to fire his weapon, let alone go for a head shot.
Click to expand...
Good lord, all that was thru the window was her head, neck, and a shoulder. And he didnt 'get' a head shot so why do you assume it?

Previously posted, based on video and the interview with the people taking the video:

... facts like: they had bludgeons, like flag poles. That's what they used to break the windows. They had a mob...a much larger number, enough to overwhelm the LE inside, firearms or not. (Firearms wrested from downed officers would then be in the hands of insurrectionists. LE KNOWS it must keep from having its weapons taken.)​
​
So that mob breaching that door was indeed a legitimate immediate lethal threat to the LE and Congress members beyond (whom Capitol LE is sworn to protect).​

But make no mistake...her blood is on The Donald's hands.

In that video I saw them using multiple blunt objects to break the windows. And I saw baseball bats and other weapons in other images from that day. She was the first one to attempt getting thru the broken window. You could see the semi-auto pistols aimed. She should never have attempted it.
 
Last edited:
chuckiechan said:
Then why only him shooting and why did he stop at one kill?
I think we haven’t heard the end of this story.
Click to expand...
More cut and paste from other thread:

No one else attempted it after she was shot (in the video.) There was furniture in view, blocking the doors. IMO they made it pretty obvious that the sitting ducks struggling thru the broken window werent going to have much success. But I dont what happened after what's shown on the video.​

And

How about the fact that it seems like no one else was willing to try and squeeze thru that window into the face of a semi-auto muzzle after she was shot?​
 
I disagree, but now that the video is out the shooter has to justify his actions. He is not 007 with a license to kill.
 
chuckiechan said:
I disagree, but now that the video is out the shooter has to justify his actions. He is not 007 with a license to kill.
Click to expand...
What I posted is about law that protects LE and citizens in many situations, like someone breaking thru a window into your house.

I doubt there was anything unlawful about this shoot...for the reasons I wrote...and you have not challenged.
 
I saw that over and over yesterday.

She went over a through a broken door and tried to climb a barrier where a cop was defending the doorway.

She got shot.

Even if some other cop shot her in the back she was breaching a secured position and that's how it goes.

Do not even try to claim I would see it differently otherwise. Ice been here too long. Talked about this too much here for you to support that position
 
You must log in or register to reply here.