Maria Bartiromo calls Ashli Babbitt 'A wonderful woman'...

It isn't. But evidently if you are on any given side of the isle, it is. Demonstrates the tragic loss of sensibilities in this nation, and why the American Experiment has failed.

 

Yeah...... grand juries impanelled to make decisions. Sworn testimony released. Transparency in the process. We could all state all of the relevant facts in all but one of these cases. I wonder why?

So it is your claim that a secret process would suffice with a high profile case where an unarmed black man was killed would have sufficed for you and you would not express one negative thing about that lack of transparency? You can make that claim if you so choose. I do not believe you. I suspect others dont either. Its your credibility at stake. Not mine. I believe my position is far more believable. The reader can decide for themselves however.

 

She was shot by a Capitol Policeman sworn to protect Congress when she and 20 co-insurrectionis where yelling death threats and mayhem at Congress and trying to get at them to make good on their threats.

 

Precisely. Well said.

The reason why is the same as it always is when this happens- it's to cover up the facts of the case.

 

There is not a legal precedent that one person can be shot because of the actions of anyone else. Without a weapon, a siongle lady coming through a door poses little to no threat. If he had belief that she was reaching for a weapon, that would provide the necessary justification. We should know whether that belief existed and whether that belief was reasonable.

When those BLM protesters were chanting "what do we want?....DEAD COPS", that reality in no way gives justification for shooting someone else at that protest.

 

No where in your statement is a justified reason for shooting and killing this young woman.

And to call them "insurrectionist" is hyperbole.

 

What I expect is equal application of the law. You will have to forgive me if I do not believe that is occurring.

I admittedly disagree with BLM on most of their conclusions (not all ), but I most certainly support their pleas for transparency in the process. I see my position as intellectually consistent. I see the people rejoicing over her death and the officer being cleared in private, while simultaneously supporting BLM, as being intellectually inconsistent.

 

You may petition for redress yet that has already been substantiated. The next step is to protest...You are being naïve by thinking that you have any power past the question mark.

 

Isn't that their job? Why is the capitol police actions any different than a street cop?

 

Any power past the question mark? Huh?

This is a political chat board. People post their opinions. Is this surprising to you?

 

It wasn't a "secret process", The US Attourney very publicly executed HIS responsibility to review the case, he determined that evidence was lacking to bring charges or impannel a grand jury. I'm sure the same process took place in the Floyd case only it was determined that further action was warranted.

 

Power trip issues. Hilarious.

Stop the steal!

She died because of Trump, and his power trip issues.

 

You clearly do not understand the meaning of the term public process. A public declaration after the fact does not qualify as such.

I am surprised you do not understand that very obvious distinction.

 

Ridiculous.

Trump and cantaloupes have something in common. Orange you say? No. They're both brainless.

 

And nobody cares what you say. It's on video.

 

Ashli Babbitt and her fellow insurrectionist were and imenent and present danger to Congress, watch the recent videos and that is clear.

You call the what you like, I'm calling them what they are/were.

 

You clearly don't understand the legal process.

 

LOL. I am happy to let this statement go up against what I have said on the matter. Go ahead and roll with your belief/claim that this was a public process because they made a public statement on the subject.

Its your credibility. Not mine.

 

Well, alrighty then. Yes you and your understanding of law are laughable.

Grand Juries are impaneld by a District Attorney or, in this case, The United States Attorney AFTER they have reviewed the case and believe charges are warranted. The Attorney in charge of the Floyd case thought further action necessary, the Attorney in charge of the Babbitt case did not; that is how it works.

 

So you mean that you would never complain about a non transparent process, and the phrase "thats how it works" covers everything for you?

I do not believe you, but you can roll with whatever position that you wish. It is your credibility on the line with such a position, not mine.

 

I mean I'm willing to let OUR laws, AS THEY ARE WRITTEN, run their course. <-period

Frankly I don't give a **** if you believe me or not. I'm willing to let my credibility stand on it's own.

 

January 6th, if anything, proves the American Experiment is working and succeeds. An attempted insurrection by AmeriCANs failed and a just and legal election STOOD. A despotic man was escorted from OUR White House and his lawful successor IS PRESIDENT.

 

I do not believe you. I find your position to be intellectually dishonest. It is not all about me however, and individual readers can decide for themselves. If you are comfortable how you present your positions, then let readers go ahead and judge for themselves.

I care about my own credibility. Nowhere is it written that you must as well.

 

I think the moral of this story is that the Capitol is sacred and belongs to the Democrats from where they give the edicts to brutalize, loot, pillage, deface, and burn down the rest of the evil, meaningless nation in surround.

 

I think capital is something you invest.