 
     |
| January 6 (Page 12/15) |
|
2.5
|
JAN 21, 03:34 PM
|
|
More perspective from whatever you want to call this hippy guy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bkiEnKLUjI
IMO he seems to be interchanging labels at random, as he notes, but there are still points.
The comments are interesting.
Actually CLEARLY the VAST majority were peacefully protesting.
 [This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 01-21-2022).]
|
|
|
|
randye
|
JAN 21, 04:45 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by theBDub:
The reason nobody has been charged with insurrection is because prosecutors would have to prove intent beyond all reasonable doubt, which you know is difficult to prove even when there is clear intent.
|
|
Sweet Baby Jesus.....You stumbled all the way up to the fountain of truth and logic, took one look and promptly RAN AWAY.
So if, as you claim, those prosecutors can't prove the crime of "insurrection" happened "beyond all reasonable doubt" then WHY do you suppose that is?
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously illustrated the concept of intent when he said “even a dog knows the difference between being stumbled over and being kicked.”
The mens rea requirement is premised upon the idea that one must possess a guilty state of mind and be aware of his or her misconduct;however, a defendant need not know that their conduct is illegal to be guilty of a crime. Rather, the defendant must be conscious of the “facts that make his conduct fit the definition of the offense".
POP! ......That was the sound of your proving "intent" fantasy bubble bursting.
By the way, there is no mens rea where there is no actus reus.
It's so weird watching how you Leftists will cling so stubbornly and desperately to dead narratives, rejecting all critical thinking, simply because you want to believe them.[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-22-2022).]
|
|
|
|
randye
|
JAN 21, 05:08 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
The Ashli Babbit Electoral Count Act of 2022... coming to a Congress near you.
Ashli Babbitt will never be more than a footnote in the larger story of January 6.
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
I admit to some "advertising puffery" in that statement. Very intentional, on my part.
|
|
There's "puffery" and then there is intentionally mocking the killing of Ashli Babbitt.....which is precisely what you did.[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-21-2022).]
|
|
|
|
randye
|
JAN 21, 05:37 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 2.5:
More perspective from whatever you want to call this hippy guy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bkiEnKLUjI
IMO he seems to be interchanging labels at random, as he notes, but there are still points.
The comments are interesting.
|
|
Both he and the article he quotes from are conflating "protest" with violent rioters.
He is also grossly mischaracterizing the Florida law.
https://www.newsmax.com/us/...21/04/19/id/1018170/
"this bill actually prevents against local governments defunding law enforcement. We'll be able to stop it at the state level."
The new law, which went into effect immediately, also allows local governments to be sued if they fail to stop a riot.
"As we saw last summer, some of the local governments are actually telling, not necessarily in Florida but throughout the country, basically telling these folks to stand down, telling police to stand down while cities burnt, while businesses were burnt, while people were being harmed," DeSantis said. "That’s a dereliction of duty.
"What our bill says, and what I’ll sign into law today, is that if you're derelict in your duty as a local government, if you tell law enforcement to stand down, then you're responsible for the damage that ensues. And if someone's been harmed, or their property has been destroyed, then they can sue you for compensation.
The law also created a new second-degree felony called an "aggravated riot," when the riot has more than 25 participants, causes great bodily harm or more than $5,000 in property damage, uses or threatens to use a deadly weapon, or blocks roadways by force or threat of force.
This bill protects all monuments in Florida. You have no right to go in take down monuments. We’re not going to let the mob win the day with that."
Sounds very straightforward and reasonable to most people and it's obviously NOT the "elite, authoritarian usurpation of people's rights" that comedian claims it to be.
Maybe he meant to use his arguing against demagoguery by using his own demagoguery as part of his comedy act.....[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-21-2022).]
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 21, 06:11 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by randye:
There's "puffery" and then there is intentionally mocking the killing of Ashli Babbitt.....which is precisely what you did. |
|
I think of her, first and foremost, as the "window chick." Credit to the other Pennock's forum member who gifted the forum with that perfect epithet.
I believe the outlines of the tragedy that befell Ashli Babbitt began to emerge about two years before January 6, 2021:
| quote | On January 5, Bellingcat published an article detailing how the January 6 rally in Washington D.C. was preceded by weeks of online discussion among the MAGA right, QAnon and adjacent groups about the “Wild Protest” that would take place in the capital that day. As the article outlined, these conversations openly considered whether the Capitol should be stormed and burned.
While Babbitt was described to San Diego news stations as a patriot by her husband and “loyal and extremely passionate” by her brother-in-law, her social media history details engagement with some of the darker sentiments circulating in online right-wing and pro-Trump circles in recent years.
In terms of her views, Ashli Babbitt probably didn’t stand out from the crowd massed at the U.S. Capitol. And that is precisely why the story of her political awakening—well told through her activity on Twitter—is so instructive in understanding what brought that crowd together.
Over the past five years, a potent MAGA online subculture appears to have transformed this former Obama voter, who turned to Trump over a dislike of Hillary Clinton, into a QAnon follower ready to storm the Capitol. In a Twitter exchange on November 15 2018, Babbitt said that she had voted for President Obama, calling him “our president” and saying that he had done “great things” . . .
By that time, Babbitt was describing herself on her Twitter page as a hardcore libertarian, and tweeted messages of support to political figures like Senator Rand Paul, Meghan McCain, Tucker Carlson, and Candace Owens:
By 2019, her Twitter feed struck a more explicit anti-establishment tone. That September, Babbitt wrote about a “political global ring/Hollywood/elite”, the seeds of this rhetoric can be traced back to a Fox News video Babbitt shared back in late 2016.
Two months later, these posts became more conspiratorial, lambasting the media and “elites’” involvement in human trafficking. She had yet to mention QAnon, but did refer to the Pizzagate conspiracy theory.
In February 2020, Babbitt began to tag her posts with QAnon terms, beginning with “WWG1WGA” (Where We Go One We Go All) and simply “Q.”
It was only in March 2020 that Babbitt first used the term QAnon and started retweeting major QAnon Twitter accounts.
Like nearly all QAnon followers, she believed the election results were rigged and that Trump had won, but that wasn’t Babbitt’s only motivation to attend the January 6 rally. She first announced she’d be in attendance by replying to a post that reads, “We will not let the children be forgotten.”
Babbitt sent her last tweet on January 5 2021, which contained two QAnon references: “the storm is here” and “dark to light.” |
|
An excerpt from Bellingcat: "The Journey of Ashli Babbitt." January 8, 2021.
https://www.bellingcat.com/...ey-of-ashli-babbitt/
From an Obama fan, to a Trump supporter, to a self-described "hardcore libertarian", and finally, a radical who used social media to indulge herself in the nonsensical babble of QAnon and joined the violent mob that invaded the Capitol Building on January 6. That is the tragedy of Ashli Babbitt.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-21-2022).]
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
JAN 21, 06:21 PM
|
|
|
So in other words, she had it coming because of what she believed.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 21, 06:27 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
So in other words, she had it coming because of what she believed. |
|
No, she had it coming because of what she did. When her "journey" led her to try to vault herself upwards and through an opening in a door inside the Capitol Building, where shortly before, there had been window glass.
Whatever did she think she was going to do when she got past that doorway?
A rhetorical question.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-21-2022).]
|
|
|
|
Jake_Dragon
|
JAN 21, 06:33 PM
|
|
|
So to be clear, the other side of the door/windows was barricaded with furniture at what looks like about 3 foot tall. The window was broken and anyone coming through it would have to contend with broken glass and the barricade. So this woman with a backpack and no hand/arm protection was going to vault herself through a broken window, take a gun/spray can out of her backpack after she landed and assault someone. This was a cowardly act by a cowardly person that could have used any other means of stopping anyone from coming through that window. Hell I could have stopped her from coming through with a mop and water bucket. [This message has been edited by Jake_Dragon (edited 01-21-2022).]
|
|
|
|
randye
|
JAN 21, 06:53 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
I think of her, first and foremost, as the "window chick."
From an Obama fan, to a Trump supporter, to a self-described "hardcore libertarian", and finally, a radical who used social media to indulge herself in the nonsensical babble of QAnon and joined the violent mob that invaded the Capitol Building on January 6. That is the tragedy of Ashli Babbitt.
|
|
So you justify your mocking of the killing of Ashli Babbitt ....because you don't like her political beliefs.
That's disgusting.
|
|
|
|
randye
|
JAN 21, 07:02 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
Whatever did she think she was going to do when she got past that doorway?
A rhetorical question.
|
|
Since you are so enthralled with "rhetorical questions" why don't you stop all of your vague suggestions and veiled allegations and simply amuse all of us with what you fantasize her intent was. ....."rhetorically" of course...
Maybe you can mock the murdered woman some more while you do that.[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-21-2022).]
|
|
|
|