Qanon shaman...likely to get a new trial considering the government withheld video evidence from the defense....

.
Same as you idiots calling the 2020 riots as "mostly peaceful" i.e. wishful thinking.

And the new footage may show some agent provocateurs amongst the J6 people, so we shall see.
Most protests are peaceful. You tried to blame the police for January 6th turning into a riot.

That’s pathetic.

Meanwhile you say nothing about the media and politicians feeding them a constant stream of bullshit to stoke anger and outrage until it boils over into violence.

As for your supposed agent procateurs, that’s still pathetic. You have to invent fantasies to avoid the reality.
 
There was no immediate threat.

Riot controlled police are allowed to wade into a riot with MP-5's on full auto?
There was indeed an immediate threat. I don't understand why more of the traitors were not shot.
 
Most protests are peaceful. You tried to blame the police for January 6th turning into a riot.

That’s pathetic.

Meanwhile you say nothing about the media and politicians feeding them a constant stream of bullshit to stoke anger and outrage until it boils over into violence.

As for your supposed agent procateurs, that’s still pathetic. You have to invent fantasies to avoid the reality.

I said maybe, unlike you I don't assume facts not in evidence, or blindly obvious that anyone not an SJW cuck can see them.

So if someone thinks an election was fraudulent, they should just sit there and take it?
 
Actually in the case of CHAZ/CHOP it was the people in charge handcuffing the police. They didn't do their fucking job.

In most of these cities the same problem applied, left wing governments not wanting to crack down on left wing protesters.

In DC the Capitol Police and the DC police were both controlled be lefties, and as we saw were perfectly fine with shooting an unarmed woman, but they didn't have the numbers required to respond because their managers fucked up.

CHAZ wasn't a BLM riot, ya moron.

face-palm-gif.278959
 
I said maybe, unlike you I don't assume facts not in evidence, or blindly obvious that anyone not an SJW cuck can see them.

So if someone thinks an election was fraudulent, they should just sit there and take it?
No, they should present evidence of said fraud.
 
Figures you don't understand the term. You don't get to use deadly force on one person to convince others to back down.

the others being encouraged were the other people on her 1/2 side of the door.

Show me in deadly force protocols where you can use deadly force as an example to others to stop doing what they are doing.

The police were going to shoot anyone coming through those doors and windows. She just happened to be the only one dumb enough to do so.
 
The police were going to shoot anyone coming through those doors and windows. She just happened to be the only one dumb enough to do so.

One cop opened fire, not "the police".

He panicked and because he shot someone you despise, you want to give him a fucking medal.

hack.
 
There was no immediate threat.

Riot controlled police are allowed to wade into a riot with MP-5's on full auto?

Of course there was. There were still lawmakers and staff inside the House chamber. An unbarricaded door leading into that chamber was about 6-10 feet away from where Ashes Targetpractice got herself shot.
 
Yes, because when people perform fraud they make sure to send the evidence to everyone for review.......
If you have no evidence then you should shut up about it. Baseless accusations of fraud undermines democracy.
 
Of course there was. There were still lawmakers and staff inside the House chamber. An unbarricaded door leading into that chamber was about 6-10 feet away from where Ashes Targetpractice got herself shot.

That is not an immediate threat by any use of deadly force standard.

Except the one made up by the review commission to justify Babbit's murder.
 
If you have no evidence then you should shut up about it. Baseless accusations of fraud undermines democracy.

Not baseless, and any evidence shown to the likes of you would be dismissed or ignored anyway.
 
I said maybe, unlike you I don't assume facts not in evidence, or blindly obvious that anyone not an SJW cuck can see them.

So if someone thinks an election was fraudulent, they should just sit there and take it?
No, but you’re clinging to that maybe to inject false ambiguity that allows you to avoid having to mentally deal the reality you don’t want face.

If someone thinks the election was fraudulent, they have many options that don’t involve committing felonies. Believing you are owed something does not entitle you to take it from someone else.
 
No, but you’re clinging to that maybe to inject false ambiguity that allows you to avoid having to mentally deal the reality you don’t want face.

If someone thinks the election was fraudulent, they have many options that don’t involve committing felonies. Believing you are owed something does not entitle you to take it from someone else.

I am not ignoring the possibility, something your side would do even if evidence was thrown in your face.

Your side doesn't care about fraud because it works for you.
 

Forum List

Back
Top