Trump Mob Invades Capitol with Alarming Ease – Law Enforcement Did Little Compared to Treatment of Police Brutality Protesters

Image: Win McNamee / Getty Image

By Koda Slingluff and Mia Machado 

CAPITOL HILL— Calling themselves the “Save America Rally,” a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol, halting Congress from the formal electoral vote count to certify the winner of the presidential election.

Several thousand protestors broke off from an estimated crowd of 10,000-20,000 pro-Trump demonstrators and charged the building, breaking windows, pointing guns, and waving flags—including the Confederate flag—in the name of President Donald Trump and an election they perceived to be fraudulent.

Yet. as the Senate and members of the House moved from lockdown in their chambers to a full evacuation, many were left to wonder how the same law enforcement that had shown aggressive action against Black Lives Matter protesters could do so little now.

Supporters of Black Lives Matter, many of whom protested in the past year, noted a drastic difference in the police’s response.

George Floyd was an unarmed black man who suffocated to death at the hands of Minneapolis police after a shopkeeper suspected he had paid for cigarettes with a counterfeit 20 dollar bill. The footage of his death shows a brutal excessive use of force, with him pinned under an officer as other police watch him dying on the ground.

Floyd’s brutal death sparked outrage across the nation. The organization Black Lives Matter (or BLM) along with many other civil rights activism groups led a growing movement against police brutality.

These protests yielded radically different reactions from law enforcement than the Save America Rally that stormed the Capitol.

Protests of George Floyd’s death in 2020 allegedly resulted in more than 14,000 arrests—substantially higher than today’s reported 13 total. On May 28, a woman was trampled by a police horse in Houston. The very same day in Minneapolis, an officer in a squad car was recorded spraying a chemical onto bicyclists and pedestrians in the area.

May 30 saw eight BLM protesters suffer severe eye injuries from rubber bullets, highly embraced by law enforcement when addressing BLM. Closer to home, an unarmed, kneeling man with his hands up was shot five consecutive times by police in Vallejo, CA, murdering him. And a National Lawyers Guild legal observer suffered major injuries in Sacramento when shot by a rubber bullet while observing the police.

Some may argue that these instances are not comparable, since the protests were nationwide rather than just in Washington, D.C. Unfortunately, Washington was no exception to the bloody force implemented against BLM protesters.

Video shows an Australian news team attacked by D.C. police in riot gear last June. A cameraman from BBC also recorded being charged at by police outside the White House. A colleague of the cameraman said, “The assault took place even before the curfew had been imposed and happened without warning or provocation.”

Perhaps most famously, the police and national guard used tear gas, flash grenades, and rubber bullets to clear a path in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church to allow the president to pose for photographs back in May 2020.

Treated like an all-out riot, the crowd was allegedly completely peaceful, and even contained leaders of the Christian community. More than 20 priests were tear gassed by law enforcement that day, having done nothing illegal or out of order.

These examples show the willingness—excessive willingness—to subdue nonviolent demonstrations. Time and time again, BLM supporters have risked mass arrest, assault, teargas, blindness from rubber bullets, and even trampling, in order to protest.

Twitter user @johnpavlovitz summarized this dissonance in a viral tweet, saying, “One person was shot and killed today when thousands of white terrorists violently forced their way into the seat of our Government intending to do harm. That’s as many people who were shot and killed when George Floyd tried to use a counterfeit 20 dollar bill.”

It took hours for the national guard to show up as the Capitol building was actively mobbed. And after the mayor of D.C., Muriel Bowder, had already declared a 6 p.m. curfew. After Virginia Governor Ralph Northam had sent his own state troopers. Only then did the President send in the national guard.

In the time before he took this action, the president tweeted in support of those inflicting chaos at the capitol, saying he “loved” them.

“These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long… Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!” The president tweeted.

President-elect Joe Biden spoke publicly as the sitting president remained silent (aside from his tweet). Biden emphasized that what was happening in D.C. was not indicative of the American people.

“Let me be very clear: the scenes of chaos at the Capitol do not represent who we are,” he said. “What we are seeing is a small number of extremists dedicated to lawlessness. This is not dissent, it’s disorder. It borders on sedition, and it must end. Now.”

Sedition is a felony offense in which someone incites rebellion against lawful authority. With the United States Senate and House of Representatives fleeing a mob at the Capitol, the term “sedition” may be thrown around in the upcoming weeks, as America strives to understand who is responsible for what has happened.

Following the chaos that ensued on Capitol Hill, many prominent news outlets, including MSNBC News, CNN and USA Today, were quick to point out the seemingly “double standard” treatment Trump supporters received from law enforcement in comparison to what Black Live Matter protesters experienced last summer.

USA Today notes that as “thousands of people of color and allies took to the streets this summer to peacefully protest police brutality, law enforcement often clashed with demonstrators, deploying tear gas and rubber bullets, bruising faces and bodies.”

In stark contrast, as USA Today points out, when thousands of President Trump supporters—“mostly white”—broke to the Capitol building as lawmakers convened to count presidential electoral votes, forcing them to shelter in place, “crowds of law enforcement were notably absent.”

Despite D.C. Police Chief Robert J. Contee, III, recognizing that Trump supporters had come to Capitol Hill with “the intent on causing harm to our officers” in order to forcibly enter the building, “only a small group of riot police stood outside the back of the Capitol building … as demonstrators called for breaching the building.”

As seen in a video posted on social media, “several people in D.C. Capitol Police jackets [were seen] removing barriers outside the Capitol building, allowing demonstrators to pass through the building.”

In another video posted to Twitter, at least one person “appeared to be an officer taking selfies with people who had breached the Capitol.”

The National Lawyers Guild, with 200 chapters nationwide, noted the “sharp contrast” of treatment at the Capitol “to the police response to white supremacist violence in Charlottesville, VA in 2017, where right-wing operatives and loyalists rioted in attempt to reverse a city council decision to remove racist monuments.

“Today, police stood down yet again—as is expected of such an inherently white supremacist institution. These right-wing operatives are their friends, family, and political brethren. The difference between the police response to protesters of color just a few months ago and all throughout American history, and the current response to white Trump supporters instigating a coup, lays bare the priorities of U.S. law enforcement.

“As we witnessed today, right-wing revanchists were able to storm the Capitol with little to no resistance by law enforcement. Some police officers were even documented opening barricades to let right wing operatives through, taking selfies with them, and carefully escorting them away from the scene.

Other news outlets, such as Forbes Magazine, took the opportunity to criticize the considerably light-hearted response elicited by President Trump to the violence on Capitol Hill, after spending the summer condemning the actions of Black Lives Matter protesters.

Forbes ridiculed President Trump’s sympathetic rhetoric on Twitter to the “mob of his supporters who charged past barricades and law enforcement to infiltrate the U.S. Capitol.”

After repeating his “baseless claims” that the election had been stolen, President Trump assured his supporters that “I know your pain” and  “I know you’re hurt,” before adding, “We love you.”

Though asking supporters to “go home in peace,” Trump added that they are “very special,” and are “great patriots.”

President Trump’s rhetoric around Black Lives Matter protests, as Forbes Magazine points out, is quite oppositional to his recent statements.

When addressing Black Lives Matter movement, Trump has repeatedly referred to protestors as  “thugs,” “terrorists” and “anarchists.”

In response to video footage captured in September of clashes between protestors and the public in Pittsburgh, President Trump tweeted a claim that protestors were “anarchists” who “harass elderly Pittsburgh diners, scaring them with loud taunts while taking their food right off their plate.”

Earlier in the summer following the death of George Floyd, Trump appeared to “threaten violence against protesters,” tweeting that “when the looting starts, the shooting starts.” In denouncing the destruction of property by protectors, Trump referred to the behavior as “domestic acts of terror.”

Forbes Magazine also called attention to Trump’s rhetoric when Black Lives Matters protestors demonstrated outside the White House in May.

After claiming that BLM protestors were “just there to cause trouble,” the President added that if protestors got too close, “they would have been greeted with the most vicious dogs, and most ominous weapons, I have ever seen. That’s when people would have been really badly hurt, at least.”

Mia Machado is a junior at UC Davis, currently majoring in Political Science-Public Service and minoring in Luso-Brazilian studies. She is originally from Berkeley, California

Koda is a junior at UC Berkeley, majoring in Philosophy and minoring in Rhetoric. He is from Ventura, CA.


To sign up for our new newsletter – Everyday Injustice – https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9

Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:

About The Author

The Vanguard Court Watch operates in Yolo, Sacramento and Sacramento Counties with a mission to monitor and report on court cases. Anyone interested in interning at the Courthouse or volunteering to monitor cases should contact the Vanguard at info(at)davisvanguard(dot)org - please email info(at)davisvanguard(dot)org if you find inaccuracies in this report.

Related posts

195 Comments

  1. Keith Olsen

    As we’ve heard from the Democrats and the mainstream media in regards to the chaos, looting, burning and destruction of the BLM and Antifa riots all year, the “Save America Rally” was a mostly peaceful demonstration.

      1. Keith Olsen

        Though asking supporters to “go home in peace,” Trump added that they are “very special,” and are “great patriots.”
        President Trump’s rhetoric around Black Lives Matter protests, as Forbes Magazine points out, is quite oppositional to his recent statements.
        When addressing Black Lives Matter movement, Trump has repeatedly referred to protestors as  “thugs,” “terrorists” and “anarchists.”

        Is this predictable tu quoque also?

         

        1. Keith Olsen

          Most of this article is speaking to the hypocrisy of Trump’s words and how BLM protesters were treated in comparison to the DC rally yesterday.

          Curious, I don’t see any mention of the protester Ashli Babbitt who is an Air Force veteran who was shot and killed.

        2. Keith Olsen

          David, do you know who filmed that video of the unarmed Ashli Babbit getting shot and killed?  It was a left winged activist and Trump hater John Sullivan.  Which brings up the question of why was he there as part of the demonstration?  Why was he in the building?  There are reports surfacing that several of the people that entered the capital were Antifa members.  I’ve read accounts that two have already been identified.

          1. David Greenwald

            But the person who died was clearly a Trump supporter and QAnon. Clearly the bulk of the people there were indeed Trump supporters. I think the entire argument otherwise is a deflection.

            Likewise the dude who photographed himself in Pelosi’s office was clearly a Trump guy. I just don’t see a credible argument here.

        3. Keith Olsen

          “Sullivan who shot the video, describing the moments leading up to the shooting, said protesters were trying to get into the main entrance of the chamber when they came upon two guards who refused to move. Sullivan is the founder of the left-wing activist group Insurgence USA. He said he was not at the Capitol as part of the protest but did not specify what exactly brought him there.”
           
          Disturbing Video Shows Moment Trump Supporter Ashli Babbit Was Shot Dead by Cops at Capitol

        4. Keith Olsen

          Yes, exactly my point.  Left wing activist Sullivan was inside the Capitol during the protest.  What was he doing there?  It just proves that left wingers were also part of the surge.

        5. Richard_McCann

          John Sullivan was almost certainly there to be a direct witness. I expect that his group does not trust the mainstream media because its all owned by corporations and he wanted to document what the MAGA crowd was going to do.

          NPR and other media organizations were reporting from inside the Capitol. Does that mean that they were also part of the insurgency?

          So far everyone who has been arrested has been associated with a right wing organization.

        6. Keith Olsen

          Well it appears that left wing activist John Sullivan was at the riot and did more than just take video:

          “There are so many people. Let’s go. This sh*t is ours! F*** yeah,” he is heard saying in the video, according to an FBI affidavit from FBI Special Agent Matthew Foulger.
          “We accomplished this sh*t. We did this together. F*** yeah! We are all a part of this history,” he also said, adding: “Let’s burn this sh*t down.”

          https://dailycaller.com/2021/01/14/john-sullivan-capitol-ashli-babbit/

          1. David Greenwald

            I’m not sure the Sullivan case really proves your point.

            Interesting article in the Intercept: https://theintercept.com/2021/01/14/capitol-riot-john-sullivan-ashli-babbitt/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=theintercept

            “According to an affidavit submitted to a federal court in Washington, D.C., the FBI determined that Sullivan was not just an observer but a participant in the riot, based on a review of nearly 90 minutes of raw footage of the raid that he recorded on his phone and posted on YouTube. He is being held by the Tooele County Sheriff’s Office near his home in Sandy, Utah.”

            “For the past week, Sullivan’s presence in the Capitol and his previous record of anti-Donald Trump activism has been the focus of frenzied attention in the right-wing media, where the baseless conspiracy theory that pro-Trump rioters were led into violence by left-wing anti-fascist agitators lives on.”

            “At the same time, left-wing organizers have been keen to stress that they ejected Sullivan from their ranks months ago, accusing him of being either a right-wing infiltrator or a dangerously naive amateur.”

            And then this:

            “Although Sullivan began describing himself as a journalist in the aftermath of the raid, when his footage of the shooting was licensed by major news organizations, including the Washington Post and MSNBC, his raw footage captured him repeatedly expressing what sounded like genuine enthusiasm for the success of the riot. At one point highlighted in the federal complaint, Sullivan could even be heard trying to convince police officers to abandon their posts and let the rioters seize the House chamber.”

            Hard to know exactly what Sullivan is – but if that’s all you, it seems rather thin evidence of a left-wing plot.

      2. Alan Miller

        Keith with his predictable tu quoque defense

        I don’t see that as a “defense” of what happened.  I see that as pointing out the lameness of the previous defense of leftie demonstrations.  That isn’t the same thing and stop trying to equate that two.

    1. Richard_McCann

      In case you missed it, I previously posted that 93% of the demonstrations about the civil rights violations of Blacks by police have been peaceful. And I similarly posted a set of links showing that much of the violence at those events was instigated either by law enforcement infiltrators or alt-right individuals posing as BLM protestors. The Antifa demonstrators are almost always responding to violence or threats by reactionary demonstrators.

      1. Keith Olsen

        The Antifa demonstrators are almost always responding to violence or threats by reactionary demonstrators.

        I fell out of my office chair laughing at this remark.

  2. Matt Williams

    Yet. as the Senate and members of the House moved from lockdown in their chambers to a full evacuation, many were left to wonder how the same law enforcement that had shown aggressive action against Black Lives Matter protesters could do so little now.

    .
    After a lot of reflection (yesterday was an incredibly long day with a lot of time for reflection), I believe yesterday’s response from the DC Mayor and the various elements of law enforcement was at the right level … and that (hopefully) that level of response reflected lessons learned from the ways that protests throughout 2020 were handled.  I found myself wishing (over and over again) that the 2020 examples of response would have shown similar restraint.  If that were the case, George Floyd would be alive.

    As I listened from 10:30am, from the time when I turned on the radio in the car as I headed toward Right and Relevant to the time when I turned off the C-Span streaming after the Electoral College tally was officially received by Congress at a bit after 1:00am, there was plenty of time to consider what the appropriate level of response might be.  After all that reflection I came to believe the response … and the planning (in the days leading up to yesterday) for the possibility for the need for response … was an example of one step backward in order to take two steps forward.

    I believe that if the response was as aggressive and forceful as mob violence insurrection customarily warrants, there would be one more violent example to add to all the violent examples from 2020.

    If the belief was (with camera evidence providing authorities what they need to arrest and charge the participants in the insurrection) that instead of diverting scarce resources to processing arrests, those resources should instead focus on keeping confrontational violence from breaking out, then I think that belief was wise.  On the other hand if there are not arrests and charges of 1,000 or more people in the next 24 hours, then the “two steps forward” will have been wishful thinking on my part.

    With all the above said, yesterday should never have happened. As was said yesterday, “There’s no question the president formed the mob, the president incited the mob, the president addressed the mob. He lit the flame.”

  3. John Hobbs

    The apologists for Trump and his [minions] are as guilty of treason as their evil master.

    “He said he was not at the Capitol as part of the protest but did not specify what exactly brought him there.”

    He was peacefully exercising his first amendment right to observe and report. He has been in D.C. this week for several planned protests including Wednesday’s rally at the Capitol. He entered the building through the window already broken by the rioters.

    Sullivan said he’s hearing the White House and the BLM Monument could be next targets, so he’s staying in D.C. to see what happens before coming back home to Utah.

  4. Alan Miller

    Law Enforcement Did Little Compared to Treatment of Police Brutality Protesters

    Um . . . they shot and killed a woman.  That ain’t little.

    Trump Mob Invades Capitol with Alarming Ease –

    Damn straight.  That they were able to get anywhere near, much less inside, is simply unbelievable.  There are vids apparently showing Capitol guards (who I assume must be loyal to Trump) letting protestors in through gates, and as you mentioned, taking selfies.  I don’t know how one can deny those same guards wouldn’t be taking selfies with leftie protestors.  Those guards must be identified and arrested on charges of treason.  I don’t know how else that fail could be viewed.  But higher up, heads are gonna roll – they sure better.  That was a spectacular failure.

      1. Alan Miller

        I can’t imagine those guarding the capital are gonna get away with that.  Especially since the dems control the place – they are going to want to know they are safe, and their guards aren’t letting mobs in.

    1. Chris Griffith

      Ron that is very true and it still could happen if people don’t tone it down .

      this has been going on for quite a few years each years I can’t wait till next election cycle people be whipping out the machine guns and killing each other.

       

       

       

  5. Ron Glick

    “Did you say that during the BLM and Antifa riots?”

    Did they invade the Congress of the United States? I hadn’t seen that.

    If you think that storming the Capitol during the certification of the next President of the United States in a clear act of sedition is the same as anything else you want to complain about you are seriously mistaken in your attempts to explain away what happened with some diversion to moral equivalence.

    1. Ron Oertel

      They did take over a section of Seattle (including a police station), resulting in death and assaults. And were apparently “allowed” to do so, by officials.

      They’ve repeatedly taken-over freeways (again, resulting in deaths and assaults).

      Just some of the examples.

      1. Tia Will

        Ron

        People vote for all kinds of different reasons. The question I would put before you is: Do you believe Trump did not use boasts, lies, and threats during his campaigning?

        1. Boasts – I alone can fix it. No one knows more about “X” than I do.

        2. Lies – Mexico will pay for the wall. We will propose a better plan than the ACA.

        3. Threats – “lock her up”. With no specified charges.

        All every bit as realistic as this terrorists  declaration “We are in charge now.”

      2. Richard_McCann

        Ron O

        So you believe that Bull Connor was fully justified in turn his hoses and dogs on the marchers in Selma because they were blocking the bridge?

        If you can’t see the difference in magnitude between holding a police station and attempting to overthrow the democratic election process of the nation, then I’m left having to dismiss your judgement on being able to balance the relative importance of most issues.

        1. Ron Oertel

          That’s odd.

          I don’t remember Selma being discussed in this article (or comment section – until you brought it up).

          Maybe someone (probably me) can remind me (ahead of time) why it’s not a good idea to even make any comments on here, in the first place. How many times do I have to remind myself of that? 😉

          What do they say – shame on you (the first time), but shame on me thereafter. (Something like that.)

          Either that, or just laugh about it.

        2. Richard_McCann

          Ron O

          You brought up “repeatedly taken-over freeways” which are roadways as a disruptive event in your attempt to create moral equivalence. Protestors were blocking the bridge in Selma. Again, do you believe that Bull Connor was justified in his actions since you against any demonstrations that block roadways?

          Your comments rarely move the conversation forward because of your complete unwillingness to concede on any point. Your behavior fits that of an Internet troll who is just interested in arguing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll  If instead, you want to have constructive conversations, you will accept that you should change your point of view when presented with facts contrary to your initial presumptions.

        3. Keith Olsen

          Your comments rarely move the conversation forward because of your complete unwillingness to concede on any point. 

          Richard, show me examples on the Vanguard where you have ever conceded points.  I’m all ears.

        4. Richard_McCann

          I do often enough to people such as Alan or Tia or Matt.

          But much more importantly when I’m challenged I either post a link to documentation that supports my point or provide an extended explanation that lays out my rationale for my point and invite others to critique by reasoning. I don’t make unsupported pronouncements because I’m careful to ensure that my statements are true and backed up. I can not say the same for much of what you post. That’s why I haven’t conceded to you (or Ron O)–you’ve never posted evidence that is sufficient to support your claims.

    2. John Hobbs

      Yeah, I thought tearing down the US flag and trying to replace it with a “Trump” flag made the sedition, insurrection thing pretty clear, but as some commenters here prove, Trumpkin’s would have to pull their heads out of their rectums to see the truth.

      1. Ron Glick

        I think if you examine the record of my posts throughout the summer you will not find a single one where I condone looting or violence. Yet here you are responding to my charge of Sedition against the United States of America by repeating a failed argument for moral equivalence. If that is all you have you don’t have much defense against bringing the full weight of law against those who committed crimes yesterday.

  6. Tia Will

    We’re in charge now!”

    Most of the points I consider relevant have been covered by previous posters. One aspect I have not seen covered here is the theatrical aspects of this insurgency. The self-delusion of the comment that briefly occupying a space by force means that you are indeed “in charge”.

    Trump arguably gained & maintained his position of power not through rational thought processes, well thought through or executed plans but rather through lies, showmanship, cruelty and threats. The exact same tactics used by this mob. For four years, Trump has told us he was in charge ( truthfully) but that he had everything under control ( untruthfully) as the pandemic illustrates.

    How predictable that the administrative & communication model set by Trump, one of boasts, lies, and threats, would be mirrored by his followers in their futile and in some ways ludicrous attempt to achieve control.

      1. Tia Will

        Ron

        I knew someone would jump at that. You win.

        Just because something is “arguable” does not mean it is not true. Some people are still arguing that the earth is flat or that vaccines change human DNA.

         

        1. Ron Oertel

          I’m not trying to “win”.

          But your subsequent comment is also irrelevant.

          I see comments such as yours as contributing to the divide in this country.  (Of course, you’re not alone, nor are your comments particularly inflammatory.)

           

        2. John Hobbs

          “Some people are still arguing that the earth is flat or that vaccines change human DNA.”

          Or that Trump is not a malignant narcissist and the republic is just fine.

          We must presume the delusions are organic in nature.

        1. Bill Marshall

          My experience has been “not”…

          Many ‘Trump voters” were ‘bullet voters’, or had concerns about Biden, and how the ‘uber-“progressives” might influence him and congress (on that basis, there were many folk, “moderates” who had concerns on that score)… many Biden voters were fed up with the whole “Trump product” over the last four years… speculation as to how many “bullet voters” there were on either side I leave to others…

          I personally only know a very few “Trump” voters who questioned the results… and most of the rest are probably part of the “Trump cult”, fueled by Trump, aided/abetted/incited by Trumps distortions, outright lies, that conservative media presented, with no refutation… ‘enablers’…

          The scary part, on an individual level, are those who are so into the “cult”, have college/advanced college degrees, and still buy into the Trump/QAnon theories that there is a “deep state”, the election was ‘rigged’ (asserted before both elections, by Trump, as the only reason he would not win… and he lost two popular votes, one Electoral College vote)… yeah, prima facie proof it was rigged or stolen), or manipulated by Republican Governors/Secretaries of State in “red” states…

          He cannot accept he was an “apprentice”, and he “was fired!”

          I predict that history, 20-50 years from now, will view him as the most toxic, and worst president… I hope to be around 20 years from now, but at the upper limit, I have no reason to expect to be… to date, historians have considered James Buchanan as the worst president… he completely ignored the tension between north and south, did not address slavery (had to ‘play to his “base”‘… and has thus far, been the only then-living president who did not attend the inauguration of his successor.  Google it…

  7. Tia Will

    Ron

    People vote for all kinds of different reasons. The question I would put before you is: Do you believe Trump did not use boasts, lies, and threats during his campaigning?

    1. Boasts – I alone can fix it. No one knows more about “X” than I do.

    2. Lies – Mexico will pay for the wall. We will propose a better plan than the ACA.

    3. Threats – “lock her up”. With no specified charges.

    All every bit as realistic as this terrorists  declaration “We are in charge now.”

    1. Ron Oertel

      The question you’re asking now is different than your initial comment.

      In response to you and David, you’re referring to a portion of Trump supporters.

      I believe that Trump (largely) won based upon his claimed concern for American jobs, controlling illegal immigration, and challenging China’s upcoming dominance.

      I’m not a supporter, though those issues have some broad appeal.

      But really, it’s pretty tough to find Trump supporters on this blog, in Davis, the Bay Area, etc. And if you do find one, they’re not likely to be supportive of what occurred yesterday.

      1. David Greenwald

        You said “a portion” – but actually you mean, the majority if you look at the polling over 80 percent of Trump supporters believe that Trump won, more than two-thirds polled yesterday supported the action at the Capitol. That’s not a small segment. And it belies your last paragraph. Google the polling from yesterday, it’s pretty stark and in direct contradiction to your point.

        1. Ron Oertel

          Well, that is surprising – if true.  Would you mind posting a link to exactly what you’re referring to?

          I guess they view it as something akin to the original “tea party” in Boston. (Is that viewed “heroically”, at this point?)

          Now that I think about it, isn’t America itself the result of an “insurrection” against England? 😉

          Maybe I’d better not think about it.

          Reminds me of “freedom fighters” vs. “terrorists”. (Not just limited to America.)

          The part that I don’t understand is the belief that Trump actually won.

        2. Ron Oertel

          Thanks.

          This seems to be a key figure:

          In fact, many Republicans (45%) actively support the actions of those at the Capitol, although as many expressed their opposition (43%).

          Why do you suppose that so many Republicans support this?

          1. David Greenwald

            I agree it’s a key figure. I suspect it is a large number of people who have been riled up by the angry rhetoric and false narratives of the last few months (and years).

        3. Ron Oertel

          I guess my key question is, why do you suppose that so many believe that Trump actually won?

          Are they getting their news from somewhere else, or do they just not believe what the mainstream media tells them?

          Do they believe that the media is so biased that they wouldn’t report the truth?

          Or do they just believe what Trump says, at face value?

          If it’s the latter two, I’m not sure what to say. 😉

          In any case, I haven’t really seen this analyzed, in depth.

          1. David Greenwald

            I believe that there is a percentage of the population that would do almost anything that Trump told them to do. That said, it’s not just Trump, it’s the right wing media that are playing up the conspiracy theories and playing down the evidence that largely debunks them. So it’s not simply Trump’s rhetoric, but Trump is driving the media boat too.

        4. Keith Olsen

          A few outlets of right leaning media may have been onboard with Trump saying he won the election, but it wasn’t the rule.  Fox for the most part wasn’t on board.  The NY Times is hardly a fair publication to be doing the judging on this.

        5. Keith Olsen

          I agree it’s a key figure. I suspect it is a large number of people who have been riled up by the angry rhetoric and false narratives of the last few months (and years).

          Like the fake Russian Collusion narrative and the impeachment based on basically nothing but partisan bias and hatred for Trump?

          1. David Greenwald

            You keep making this comment as though it were somehow accurate. The report by special counsel Robert Muller issued in March 2019 did not conclude that Trump or anyone from his campaign colluded with the Russians’ interference with the 2016 election. BUT his two-year investigation generated 37 indictments, seven guilty pleas or convictions and evidence that the president obstructed justice. It also found that Trump associates repeatedly lied to investigators about their contacts with Russians.

        6. Richard_McCann

          Keith O

          The Mueller Report includes “Individual-1” who clearly is Trump as an unindicted coconspirator. DOJ has a policy that a sitting president can’t be indicted.

          https://time.com/5610317/mueller-report-myths-breakdown/

          As for threatening a national leader for partisan gain, what the Ukrainian president believed Trump was trying to do is well documented. He was just about to publicly announce the investigation into Hunter Biden in mid-September in exchange for defense funding when the news about Trump’s call broke.

          https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timeline-trump-giuliani-bidens-and-ukrainegate/

        7. Richard_McCann

          The part that I don’t understand is the belief that Trump actually won.

          Have you been living under a rock for the last 2 months. This has been the other lead news story along with the pandemic. It’s been impossible to miss.

  8. Tia Will

    I see comments such as yours as contributing to the divide in this country.”

    I agree my comments are contributing to the divide in this country. I am a pacifist, a progressive, and a humanist. Almost any comment I make is guaranteed to be “divisive” in our violent, conservative, and largely self-serving culture. What is interesting to me is whether or not you consider your comments to be equally divisive. Because I guarantee you I see them as such, but strongly doubt that you do.

      1. Richard_McCann

        Ron O

        Your comments on policing and that certain ethnic groups are rightfully targeted for excessive law enforcement efforts have sewn divisiveness because you have been saying essentially, “what problem?”

      1. Hiram Jackson

        Keith Olsen: “I don’t get the point?”

        Colin Kaepernik didn’t destroy property, injure or kill anyone, didn’t resist law enforcement, and didn’t disrupt the federal government in fulfilling its constitutional obligation.  At the time Trump thought it was important to scold his behavior

        Do you think the mob’s behavior yesterday merits at least equivalent condemnation, especially from someone who publicly swore to defend and uphold the Constitution?

        1. Alan Miller

          I personally never had a problem with anything CK did, nor any nonviolent protest.

          Trump not only didn’t scold the rioters, he incited the riot and then kept saying stupid S after it started.  There are sore losers, and then those whose megalomania turns to delusion when they lose for the first time the highest throne (which they seemed to only crave as the ultimate game).

        2. Hiram Jackson

          Keith Olsen: “Your comparison is what could be easily labeled a false equivalency.”

          I don’t get the point.

          For something as serious as interfering with constitutional duties of government, putting lives in danger, resisting law enforcement, and destroying property, and generally even damaging the Trump brand, I would hope that a ‘Law and Order’ guy and a brand-sensitive guy like Trump would issue at least as sternly worded rebuke as he gave Kaepernik.  Instead it was “We love you” and “you’re very special.”

        3. Richard_McCann

          Your comparison is what could be easily labeled a false equivalency.

          Yes, it’s a false equivalency because scolding CK is so ridiculous, especially in the context of failing to strongly condemn an invasion of the US Capitol. They are most certainly NOT equivalent events, yet they somehow merited responses completely inverse to their magnitude of the violation of our nation’s principles.

  9. Don Shor

    Reported at Talking Points Memo:

    Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH), who oversees the Capitol Police as chair of the House Appropriations Committee’s legislative branch subcommittee, said that as many as 60 Capitol Police were injured during the siege of the Capitol Wednesday, NBC News reports. Many were hit with lead pipes, he added.

    Fifteen were hospitalized, with one in critical condition, Ryan said.

     

  10. Bill Marshall

    Two brief comments:

    There are 1-4 yet unsung ‘heroes’ yesterday… the parlimentarians, under fear of possible death or injury, had the presence of mind to collect all the electoral college certifcates, and secure those before being escrorted to safety.  Had they not, and if the chambers had been breached, those could have stolen, or substitued, and then the process would have been up the creek (or down the drain).

    I’m glad someone removed the post about the 29th amendment, and its “provisions”…

    1. Alan Miller

      OK, I had to look that up, since it was ‘banned’ according to the above.  All I’ll say is that would certainly render any additional Measure J,R,D votes unnecessary.

  11. Ron Oertel

    Did anyone else notice that no one “reportedly” died of Covid, yesterday?  (Comment regarding the media, itself.)

    I suspect that they’ll resume dying today, or tomorrow (at the latest) – in reference to the media’s focus.

      1. Richard_McCann

        Given that Ron O had not heard that a large majority of Trump voters believed that Trump had actually won the election (which was why Trump was able to carry on his fantasy), I’m not surprised that he missed that news as well.

        1. Keith Olsen

          Not to speak for Ron, but I what I see is Ron didn’t say what you’re inferring that he stated.  Ron is saying that he can’t believe that Trump voters actually believe that Trump won the election.  It was very clear to me what he meant.  Secondly, Ron isn’t saying that no one died of COVID yesterday, he’s saying sarcastically that the media didn’t report on COVID deaths yesterday (for a change) due to the big news in D.C.  Sometimes sarcasm flies right over people’s heads.

  12. Ron Glick

    “Why do you suppose that so many Republicans support this?”

    Because the republican leaders have either been too afraid or too ambitious to take on the Trump Mob. But they now must realize that they have allowed the creation of a violent political movement they can’t control. What the Republicans leaders do now will determine whether we see escalating or deescalating political violence in the coming days and years.

    1. Keith Olsen

      LOL, just as the Democrat leaders have either been afraid or too ambitious to take on the BLM and Antifa mobs.  But they also now must realize that they have allowed the creation of a violent political movement they can’t control.Take a look at Portland for example.

      1. Alan Miller

        Even the mayor of Portland has had enough:

        “My good faith efforts at de-escalation have been met with ongoing violence and even scorn from radical Antifa and anarchists.  In response, it will be necessary to use additional tools and push the limits of the tools we already have to bring the criminal destruction and violence to an end.  Lawlessness and anarchy come at great expense and great risk to the future of our community.  It’s time to push back harder against those who are set on destroying our community, and take more risks fighting lawlessness.  Why would a group of largely white, young and some middle-age men destroy the livelihood of others who are struggling to get by?  [It is hard for me and others] to accept the reality that there are just some people on this planet who are bent on criminal destruction; that there are some people who truly just want to watch the world burn.”

        The nerve of such Republican mayors!  Oh yeah, Wheeler is a Democratic who, apparently and unlike ‘some people’, believes the Antifa EXISTS.

      2. Tia Will

        Keith

        Talk about false equivalency. When have you ever seen a major political figure on the left, let’s say at the level of Joe Biden Kamala Harris, Schumer or Nancy Pelosi invite thousands of followers to a specific location and then give a speech telling them to march to and disrupt a government function? That would be the equivalent of what Trump has done.

        There is no way you can “both sides” this one.

        1. Keith Olsen

          I’m sure I can pull up several quotes from Democrats where they incited disruption.  Don’t have the time right now, but a few already are coming to mind.

          1. Don Shor

            I’m sure I can pull up several quotes from Democrats where they incited disruption.

            Hey, Keith, the president of the United States incited a riot. The guy you support. There is nothing comparable in the history of the United States. All your deflection and distraction and ‘both-sides-isms’ won’t work.
            What happened yesterday was historically infamous. It is the tarnish that will remain with Trump and his whole brand forever.

      3. Richard_McCann

        Antifa is a small portion of the larger civil rights protests, 93% of BLM-related protests have been peaceful, and much of the violence at those protests have been instigated by law enforcement and reactionary instigators. (I posted documentation earlier on these points.)

        Reportedly 10,000 rebels were inside the Capitol yesterday. Nothing has been on that scale in the civil rights protests. And as  Tia points out, NO Democratic elected official has INVITED violence on businesses or government buildings. That wasn’t the case yesterday. (And if you’re going to try to dissemble and deny that, you’re just yet another apologist on the scale of those in Europe in the 1930s.)

        Yes, there are those in the GOP who are now increasingly afraid of what they’ve unleashed. Various articles have discussed this over the last 4 years. It appears to be coming to a head now.

        1. Hiram Jackson

          “Godwin’s law evoked.”

          If neo-nazis are the subject of discussion of the original article, is it fair to apply Godwin’s Law?  Asking for a friend.

      4. Bill Marshall

        Thank you for supporting Mo Brooks’ (R-Alabama) view… no Trump supporters there yesterday… all Antifa… ‘truth’ instead of ‘fake news’… Mitch McConnell was wrong in criticizing the rioters… like Mitt Romney, just wrong… no Republicans there, no ‘trumpettes’… all Antifa… it was all a set-up to discredit Trump/Republicans… yeah, right…

    2. Bill Marshall

      In both cases, both the Republican and Democratic folk can take or encourage action(s) to make sure there is no POTUS-led repeat in the next 13-14 days… that would take some courage, and do what is best for the Nation, as opposed to their personal ambitions…

       They also NOW must realize that they have allowed the creation of a violent political movement they can’t control.Take a look at yesterday’s POTUS induced Washington mob/riot, for example.

  13. John Hobbs

    “Like the fake Russian Collusion narrative and the impeachment based on basically nothing but partisan bias and hatred for Trump?”

    Outright lie. Bet he won’t own up.

    “Did anyone else notice that no one “reportedly” died of Covid, yesterday?  (Comment regarding the media, itself.)

    I suspect that they’ll resume dying today, or tomorrow (at the latest) – in reference to the media’s focus.”

    Contemptible lie. Off topic.

     

     

    1. Ron Oertel

      The comment regarding Covid was not to be taken “literally” – just noting how quickly the media’s focus can shift (to primarily one topic).

      Pretty sure that you know that.

    2. Bill Marshall

      John… we need to wait for 14-28 days to see if there will be any Covid-related deaths…

      If those involved contract Covid, due to lack of masks/physical separation, not convinced they should take up medical care/ICU space from others… but any services they get should be @ their own expense, not public, other ‘health insurance’, paid for by the rest of us.

    3. Alan Miller

      Contemptible lie. Off topic.

      I understood his point.  Why didn’t you?  Making a point by stating the ridiculous is a tried and true way of making a point.

      1. Richard_McCann

        Alan

        Ron O is so unartful at those kinds of comments that it’s really impossible to tell when he’s trying to be humorous. And given that he had already admitted to not being aware of one of the most salient news items for the last 2 months, it wasn’t hard to believe that he had missed that too.

        (BTW, the humorous way to do that would have been “And in other news today….  ;^). Instead, he made the equivalent of a bad, objectionable joke which is just downright embarrassing.)

        1. Ron Oertel

          Ron O is so unartful at those kinds of comments that it’s really impossible to tell when he’s trying to be humorous. 

          Sometimes, I forget to use the winking face.  😉

  14. Ron Oertel

    Well, folks – I think we accomplished something here, today.  Don’t ask me what.

    Oh yeah – a colossal waste of time?

    Hell, I haven’t even seen any witty remarks, so far.

    1. Richard_McCann

      As a true Internet troll, you got what you wanted. If you’re willing to interact constructively instead of obstinately sticking to your position even when the factual basis has been pulled away, then we might both  accomplish something and had a shorter discussion.

      If instead you had posed questions such as why are these Trump voters still so angry and what might be viable solutions to their desires other than capitulation to authoritarianism? Then we might have had a productive conversation. But you aren’t really interested in solving the problem–you’d rather just argue.

      1. Ron Oertel

        If instead you had posed questions such as why are these Trump voters still so angry and what might be viable solutions to their desires other than capitulation to authoritarianism? 

        Actually, I did pose that question to David, worded in a different manner.  Though I wouldn’t expect him to know the answer.

        In any case, I think this is the more interesting topic.  That is, why do they think that Trump won?

        Trump himself seems to honestly believe that, as well.

        1. Richard_McCann

          First, Trump believes he won because he’s a narcissist (truly) and conceding that he might have lost would destroy his view of himself as a “winner” (perhaps to the point of suicide!) He has constructed a world view in which he grabs for distorted rumors that he transforms into facts to support that view.

          As for Trump supporters, many of them live in an echo chamber that reverberates falsehoods that support their worldviews and they reject anything that tries to interject different information into that chamber. (No, Robert Putnam was wrong about who is in the echo chamber.) Stumble on any discussion group on social media and you can see this phenomenon.

          And just importantly, loyalty is the single most important aspect of political life for these individuals. To Republicans, personal loyalty is a paramount trait over any other. (I’m trying to find one of the polling results that show this.) This means that they will believe the word of the person they support over what anyone else says. It also means that they will discredit anything said by someone that they view as disloyal.

          So you have on one hand the personal political ambitions of a key leader and on the other hand extreme loyalty to that individual. This is how strongmen have risen to power many times in history. The Nazis and Bolsheviks refined this approach.

        2. Ron Oertel

          I can’t imagine Trump committing suicide, under any circumstances.

          As for loyalty, it seems to me that Trump is about the least-loyal person I’ve ever witnessed.  Turns on his own allies, in a flash.

          Why some Republicans are so loyal to him is beyond me.

          I don’t understand why anyone goes into politics, unless they’re driven by some internal goals and values. Losing on those terms is not the worst thing in the world.

          But unlike some, I don’t hate Trump. I see some good points, as well. (Not enough of them.) I don’t think I’ve ever voted for a Republican, anyway. Though I wouldn’t necessarily cross that off my list.

        3. Alan Miller

          I can’t imagine Trump committing suicide.

          That was quite artful.  Though it is difficult to commit suicide with a crayon.

          And it’s a Double Godwin Thrusday!

        4. Keith Olsen

          And it’s a Double Godwin Thrusday!

          Good one, I noticed that too.  It amazes me how this is being compared to Germany and of course the race card has been thrown around too.

        5. Bill Marshall

          That is, why do they think that Trump won?
          Trump himself seems to honestly believe that, as well.

          That’s what cults do… think Jim Jones… followers drinking ‘kool-aid’…

          A posit would be that Trump (‘like Jones’ believes(d)he was a ‘savior’… as did David Karesh… and found followers)… Jamestown and Waco did not turn out well…

          Trump and his words, behavior, tanked not only his aspirations, but those of two Rebulican Senators from Georgia (who were ahead but didn’t quite make 50% in November)… his rhetoric and behaviors (and personal appearances in Georgia) since Nov 3, likely lost those two Georgia seats… so he lost the election, despite multiple efforts to ‘prove’ he actually won “in a landside”, so the presidency, house, and senate effectively all all under Democrat control… a ‘trifecta’, as it were…

          And with inviting a mob, inciting them (along with his buddy, Rudy), then sending them off to do his bidding (he said, he’d be along with them, but probably meant by TV/internet news, not physically), he has divided the Republican Party (and did further for the nation)… if he was true ‘military’  (as Commander in Chief?)… he might qualify for a ‘Section 8’… as it stands, he appears to qualify for the 25th amendment provisions… with only 13 days left, he may “get a pass”… but if he tries to pull off any more destructive mischief, I hope Pence and the Cabinet pull his plug to prevent further damage to the American people… quickly…

          Or he could resign…

      2. Ron Oertel

        As a true Internet troll, you got what you wanted. If you’re willing to interact constructively instead of obstinately sticking to your position even when the factual basis has been pulled away . . .

        I don’t recall putting forth a “position”.

        1. Alan Miller

          Usually, calling someone a troll on the Vanguard isn’t allowed.

          That’s what they SAY, but what they mean is, ‘calling someone a troll . . . who thinks like we do . . . is not allowed’.

      3. Bill Marshall

        … questions such as why are these Trump voters [I’d actually not include all Trumps voters, but focus on the ‘cultists of Trump’ a much smaller segment] still so angry and what might be viable solutions to their desires other than capitulation to authoritarianism?

        The viable solution is what most of us had to do in 2016… “deal with it”… simple… seek anger management therapy, if necessary…

        Maybe actually look for ‘common cause’ solutions that are within the first std. deviations between uber-conservative and uber ‘progressive’/liberal…

        Just a thought…

    1. Keith Olsen

      Did they do the same with Antifa and the BLM rioters who burned, looted, threw bricks at police, caused all kinds of mayhem and destroyed businesses?

  15. Ron Oertel

    Protester, rioter – sure.

    But, might it have been at least a little tempting to sit at the podium in the Senate, like that guy did?  Declaring oneself “king” for a moment?

    1. Ron Oertel

      At least one bang of the gavel?

      In any case, I’m glad that they didn’t destroy the place\- any more than they did. It did not that this was their intent.

        1. Ron Oertel

          That’s my impression, as well.

          They certainly weren’t tearing down those statues or breaking stuff, as they walked through the lobby/room. Almost looked like a group of tourists walking through, at that point.

          Nor did they attack anyone that I’m aware of, other than the police (which is, of course, bad enough).

          I suspect they wouldn’t have physically attacked any of the politicians (had they run into them), but who knows. Pure speculation.

        2. Alan Miller

          I suspect they wouldn’t have physically attacked any of the politicians

          Only the Democrats and the Republicans who wouldn’t support Trump’s efforts to overturn the election (such as Mike Pence, who definitely would have been attacked).

        3. Alan Miller

          I actually changed my comment, but the shot clock spazzed-out again.

          (such as Mike Pence, who had a bullseye painted on him by his own President — how weird is that?)

        4. Ron Oertel

          Pretty weird.

          I don’t know – it’s difficult for me to imagine the whole group of those people attacking politicians, without some coming to at least some of their senses.

          But, I guess that possibility is why police drew their weapons (and apparently used them, in one case).

          I would imagine that a lot of other people would hurt Trump (if they could), as well.

  16. Ron Oertel

    Here’s something else to ponder:

    What are the odds that the one woman (yeah, I know – probably more than one) is the only person who reportedly died as a result of a violent confrontation?

    And that occurred about the same time that someone else noted to me the preponderance of men.

      1. Keith Olsen

        I found that odd and highly suspect.  I’m sure more facts will come out but you don’t think maybe breathing in tear gas had something to do with it?

        1. Ron Oertel

          Good guess.

          Seems doubtful that the 3 deaths would have suddenly occurred without some kind of “assistance”.

          I might bring up Covid again here, but someone might find that (rightfully) distasteful, this time. And I don’t have any crayons.

          As you can see, I’m pretty much just causing trouble, at this point. 😉

          But honestly, I’m not so deeply-disturbed by what occurred as some others might be. I didn’t view it as a serious threat to democracy. It was a disruption.

          1. Don Shor

            it wasn’t a coup or an insurrection

            That is precisely what was attempted. They attempted to halt the peaceful transfer of power by occupying the Capitol building.

          2. Don Shor

            It was an attempted coup and clearly a violent insurrection by supporters of Donald Trump. From the Capitol police:

            Statement of Steven Sund, Chief of Police, Regarding the Events of January 6, 2021
            January 7, 2021 Press Release
            United States Capitol Police (USCP) officers and our law enforcement partners responded valiantly when faced with thousands of individuals involved in violent riotous actions as they stormed the United States Capitol Building. These individuals actively attacked United States Capitol Police Officers and other uniformed law enforcement officers with metal pipes, discharged chemical irritants, and took up other weapons against our officers. They were determined to enter into the Capitol Building by causing great damage.

            As protesters were forcing their way toward the House Chamber where Members of Congress were sheltering in place, a sworn USCP employee discharged their service weapon, striking an adult female. Medical assistance was rendered immediately, and the female was transported to the hospital where she later succumbed to her injuries. She has been identified as Ashli Babbitt.

            As per the USCP’s policy, the USCP employee has been placed on administrative leave and their police powers have been suspended pending the outcome of a joint Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and USCP investigation.

            As these other violent events were unfolding across the Capitol Complex, the USCP officers were simultaneously responding to a report of a pipe bomb in the 300 block of First Street, SE, and a second pipe bomb in the 400 block of Canal Street, SE. A suspicious vehicle was also identified in the 300 block of First Street, SE, at this time.

            The USCP Hazardous Materials Response Team determined that both devices were, in fact, hazardous and could cause great harm to public safety. The devices were disabled and turned over to the FBI for further investigation and analysis.

            The suspicious vehicle was thoroughly investigated by the USCP, FBI, and ATF. It has been cleared of any hazards. The USCP arrested the vehicle’s owner along with 13 additional suspects for unlawful entry of the U.S. Capitol. The USCP is continuing to review surveillance video and open source material to identify others who may be subject to criminal charges.

            The Department is grateful for the assistance provided by more than 18 local, state, and Federal law enforcement agencies and the National Guard. More than 50 USCP and MPD sustained injuries during the attack on the Capitol. Several USCP officers have been hospitalized with serious injuries.

            The violent attack on the U.S. Capitol was unlike any I have ever experienced in my 30 years in law enforcement here in Washington, D.C. Maintaining public safety in an open environment – specifically for First Amendment activities – has long been a challenge. The USCP had a robust plan established to address anticipated First Amendment activities. But make no mistake – these mass riots were not First Amendment activities; they were criminal riotous behavior. The actions of the USCP officers were heroic given the situation they faced, and I continue to have tremendous respect in the professionalism and dedication of the women and men of the United States Capitol Police.

            The USCP is conducting a thorough review of this incident, security planning and policies and procedures.

            https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/statement-steven-sund-chief-police
            Don’t downplay this. Don’t try to draw false equivalences. Call it what it is and condemn it.

        2. Ron Oertel

          I would think that it would have to be much more organized (and armed) than it was, to have any chance of accomplishing that.

          Capturing/occupying the capital building (alone) wouldn’t accomplish that, either.

          And even that would only be temporary.

          And frankly (because I’m not), I still have at least some faith that Trump himself wouldn’t want that. But he simply doesn’t have enough power, regardless.

          After everything that’s occurred over the past year or so, I have even more faith in the systems than I did. Pretty impressive, really.

          1. Don Shor

            The US Capitol Police confirmed the death of one of their officers late Thursday from injuries suffered when a mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol a day before.

            Capitol Police said in a statement that Officer Brian D. Sicknick died at approximately 9:30 p.m. ET Thursday “due to injuries sustained while on-duty.”
            The death is being investigated by the DC Metropolitan Police Department’s homicide branch, the US Capitol Police and their federal partners.
            “Officer Sicknick was responding to the riots on Wednesday, January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol and was injured while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed. He was taken to a local hospital where he succumbed to his injuries,” the statement read.

            Anything more to say, Keith?

          2. David Greenwald

            Something to keep in mind, if someone wanted to aggressively charge it – Trump could be hit for inciting a riot, a felony and two people dying would then make it felony murder. Just throwing that out there.

        3. Keith Olsen

          What did we hear during all the rioting this past summer,
          ‘Nothing else we can do to let our voices be heard’, maybe that’s how these DC protesters felt.

          1. David Greenwald

            You’re focused on a group of people not even involved in one of the more monumental issues in recent history. Ignoring the reaction of many responsible Republicans, and seemingly looking the other way at Trump’s bizarre conduct that moved things to a point where shots were fired inside the capitol, people are dead, the Presidents faces potential impeachment and perhaps removal (though unlikely). If you want to both sides this, enjoy.

        4. Alan Miller

          Something to keep in mind, if someone wanted to aggressively charge it – Trump could be hit for inciting a riot, a felony and two people dying would then make it felony murder. Just throwing that out there.

          I hope they do.  I pray they do.

    1. Alan Miller

      the one woman

      From the videos, they just broke out the windows in the doors, and she, being in good shape and more flexible than the men there (cuz women are, deal with it) and also trained in the military, saw an opportunity to leap up and through the small window and be the first through, probably with the intent to open the doors from the inside and let everyone else in.

      Problem was, in one angle on one video, you can see an officer on the far side of the door holding a gun towards the door aimed straight towards the mob, probably four feet from her.  He was probably yelling that he would shoot, but in the cacophony of noise on the far side, I doubt anyone could hear.  I don’t think she needed to be shot, since she wasn’t armed – but a couple of things may have played into her getting shot.  One – the officer appeared to be alone on that side and may have feared she would let everyone else in and he would be overwhelmed; and Two – it’s possible that the hallway they were breaking into led to locations where politicians were inside – in which case he may have had orders to shoot to kill.  I don’t know.  In any case this was tragic as thousands of protestors did what she did and breached doors in the building.  Wrong place, wrong time.  I do hope they arrest every one of them that they can identify.  Including their instigator.  I believe he lives on Pennsy Ave for a few more days if you’re looking for him.

      I found the ‘ . . . and QAnon’ comment earlier by DG offensive.  No, I don’t believe any of that S, but I don’t believe a lot of leftie S either.  Associating someone in a dismissive fashion like that because of their beliefs demonizes them and makes them less human in the eyes of the ‘other side’, which both sides are doing and is what is allowing for violence.  (censored) people who dehumanize.

    2. Bill Marshall

      Ironic… as you wrote that, another person died as a result of injuries due to the mob attack/”violent confrontation”… male… ‘police’ officer… so much for “odds”… at least he died DEFENDING the Capitol (and the folk inside, and a constitutional process underway), instead of ATTACKING it…

      Oh… and they did not “reportedly died”… they’re dead… just ask their families…

      Dead is dead.

  17. Bill Marshall

    They attempted to halt the peaceful transfer of power by occupying the Capitol building.

    Well, you can put it that way… but I figure, including the acts of the parlimentarians, the mob’s purpose was not to ‘occupy’, but to go several steps farther… to destroy, adulterate, and/or substitute ‘alternative slates’ of the official records of the Electoral College results, before they were ‘certified’… I strongly suspect the parlimentary folk sensed that, as well… while they were ‘under threat’, from who knows what, they quickly acted to secure those documents, take them with them when they were evacuated from the House Chambers…

    To protect thoses documents from being destroyed, adulterated, and/or substituted… which I suspect was the real goal of the ‘trumpettes’… to either change results, or bring them into question… furthering Trumpian goals… we may never know what their “orders” were… but the parlimentarians thwarted that, effectively… at least a paragraph in a new ‘Profiles in Courage’… seems like a minor thing, not much covered in the media, but their actions were very significant… I strongly suspect they had the same motivations, probably superior training than I’ve had… we were taught, always 3 folk in a pollong place… at least 3 sets of eyes on where ballots were at any given time… I suspect all 4 were present with the secure EC ballot confirmations (except for maybe a ‘potty break’ for 1 at a time, all during their time in ‘sequestration’), as do all poll workers in Yolo County… this ‘mantra’ is imbued in ‘poll workers’…

    That’s why I resent, BIG TIME, allegations of election fraud/tampering… pet peeve of mine… no matter our party (or lack of) affiliation, we protect the public.  I am very aware of the ‘chain of custody’ of ballots, and how that is maintained in YC throughout.  Those who question that, anywhere in the country, in 2020… well they may be ‘trumpettes’ or Q-Anon type folk… the process is not “perfect”, but damn solid… local Republican and other “observers” praised what they saw in our VAC in November…

    1. Alan Miller

      … I strongly suspect the parlimentary folk sensed that, as well… while they were ‘under threat’, from who knows what, they quickly acted to secure those documents, take them with them when they were evacuated from the House Chambers…

      I would gladly sacrifice a stack of papers that could all be replaced, to return the life of the one person who was shot.  And yes, I would say the same if Trump had narrowly won and the Capitol were stormed by leftie mobs with a few QAnon insurgents (or ‘journalists’) and a person of color were shot.  And yes, I don’t think the guards at the capitol would have been letting leftie crowds through the barriers and taking selfies with them.

  18. Jim Frame

    “Many were hit with lead pipes, he added.”

    I give the guy a pass for using a colloquial term, but I’d bet a hundred bucks that there were no lead pipes in use at yesterday’s riot.  Most people wouldn’t even know where to obtain one these days.

    It’s kind of like saying “cement” when you mean “concrete.”

  19. John Hobbs

    “Anything more to say, Keith?”

    He has repeated the same seditious lies for months now.

    The shallowness of many responses here reflect the indifference of many white Americans to anyone else’s trauma. The group of entitled insurrectionists who willfully destroyed public property, disrupted a constitutionally required process, and killed at least one officer and those who incited them, including but not limited to Trump, and the GOP senators who encouraged them before and after the event should all be prosecuted for treason.

    1. Alan Miller

      The shallowness of many responses here reflect the indifference of many white Americans to anyone else’s trauma.

      Thank God being insensitive to anyone else’s trauma is limited to white people 😐

      The group of entitled insurrectionists who willfully destroyed public property, disrupted a constitutionally required process, and killed at least one officer and those who incited them, including but not limited to Trump, and the GOP senators who encouraged them before and after the event should all be prosecuted for treason.

      I agree that at least some of them should – starting with the officers who removed barriers to allow the protestors into the Capitol unimpeded.  And hopefully Trump will at least be held responsible for inciting this mob.

    2. Ron Oertel

       

      Thank God being insensitive to anyone else’s trauma is limited to white people 

      I’m not sure that (fill-in-the-blank skin color) people are automatically/consistently concerned about others with the same (fill-in-the-blank skin color), either.

  20. Ron Glick

    “What did we hear during all the rioting this past summer,‘Nothing else we can do to let our voices be heard’, maybe that’s how these DC protesters felt.”

    Didn’t you think those responsible for crimes should be prosecuted last summer? Don’t you think those responsible for these crimes, including murder of a police officer, should be prosecuted?

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for