"If This Be Treason . . ."

.... No "wallet analogy" needed - no "common sense" compare.

IF the police are holding the door open and inviting people
to enter - it's NOT "breaking and entering"... Not arguing
technicality - but stating FACT...

And surely before YOU call it "illegal trespass" or something
along those lines - the police are holding the doors OPEN.

#### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again

The problem is your interpretation of events. The police were holding open the doors rather than being assaulted by a mob. It still doesn't make what they did not a crime.

"In general, ignorance of the law is not an excuse for criminal behavior,"

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ca...-waving-video/
https://abcnews.go.com/US/defense-do...ry?id=75976466
https://heavy.com/news/did-capitol-p...protesters-in/

It's called using your common sense. If you find a wallet full of money and you keep it common sense should tell you that's theft. By walking past barricades and following other rioters into the capitol building on Jan 6 your common sense should tell you to "not go in" whether the police are standing aside or not. You are arguing a technicality. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

That all happens in a perfect world. The world isn't perfect in fact it's quite fucked up, with a lot of fucked up people that don't give a shit. Common Sense should tell ya that.

The problem is your interpretation of events. The police were holding open the doors rather than being assaulted by a mob. It still doesn't make what they did not a crime.

"In general, ignorance of the law is not an excuse for criminal behavior,"

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ca...-waving-video/
https://abcnews.go.com/US/defense-do...ry?id=75976466
https://heavy.com/news/did-capitol-p...protesters-in/ Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Well if the Mob was that overpowering the Police should have opened fire on them. After all they were forcibly entering the Capital. The Police were suppose to protect the Capital, right?

It's called using your common sense. If you find a wallet full of money and you keep it common sense should tell you that's theft. By walking past barricades and following other rioters into the capitol building on Jan 6 your common sense should tell you to "not go in" whether the police are standing aside or not. You are arguing a technicality. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

That all happens in a perfect world. The world isn't perfect in fact it's quite fucked up, with a lot of fucked up people that don't give a shit. Common Sense should tell ya that. Originally Posted by Levianon17

Anyone who tries to use this as a defense in court is either a liar or an idiot.

Well if the Mob was that overpowering the Police should have opened fire on them. After all they were forcibly entering the Capital. The Police were suppose to protect the Capital, right? Originally Posted by Levianon17

You are arguing my point. No the police should not have shot the protesters outside the building because not everyone was rioting. Death should not always be the result of trespassing. But just because the doors were open doesn’t mean that’s an invitation either. Some of the people there did “break and enter” and some people were “trespassing“. No one should get a pass because they believed they were “invited”.

.... No "wallet analogy" needed - no "common sense" compare.

IF the police are holding the door open and inviting people
to enter - it's NOT "breaking and entering"... Not arguing
technicality - but stating FACT...

And surely before YOU call it "illegal trespass" or something
along those lines - the police are holding the doors OPEN.

#### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again

I doubt you will find any RELIABLE sources that support your claim that people were "invited" into the Capitol on Jan. 6. Security forces were greatly outnumbered and quickly realized that not attempting to stop the rioters from entering the Capitol was in their best interest.

Lie: The rioters were invited into the Capitol by police

A common refrain from January 6 rioters, and some of their Republican defenders, is that they were welcomed into the Capitol by police officers.

Trump said in a book interview in March that “the Capitol Police were ushering people in” and “the Capitol Police were very friendly. You know, they were hugging and kissing.” The claim has been echoed by Trump supporters. For example, Trump-endorsed Republican Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake declared at a Trump rally in October that the people being held in jail over the Capitol attack “were invited in by Capitol Police.”

Facts First: The claim that the rioters were invited into the Capitol is false. Again, about 140 police officers were assaulted while trying to stop the mob from breaching the Capitol. There were hours-long battles between police and rioters near some entrances. CNN obtained footage from police body-worn cameras showing how dozens of officers engaged in hand-to-hand combat with rioters in a desperate effort to keep them out of the building.

There are plenty of instances where rioters waltzed into the Capitol without a fight, but only after they had stormed past barricades and, in some cases, even stepped through broken windows. In some areas, police were so outnumbered by the mob that they retreated, stood aside or tried to politely engage with rioters to de-escalate the situation rather than fighting or making arrests, but that is clearly not the same as welcoming rioters into the building.

Since we don’t have video of every single encounter between police and rioters, it’s theoretically possible that some tiny number of officers did invite rioters in. The Capitol Police announced in September that three officers were facing discipline for unspecified noncriminal “conduct unbecoming” that day, while three others were facing discipline for other policy violations.

But no evidence has publicly emerged to date of even one officer inviting a rioter into the Capitol. And even if a few isolated incidents emerge in the future, it’s clear that this was not a widespread or systemic occurrence as Trump and others suggested.

Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger said on CNN in September: “The officers that we have investigated and disciplined, the cases that we investigated, they run from minor infractions to officers making very poor judgments for more serious misconduct. But this notion that the Capitol Police were somehow allowing these folks into the Capitol, inviting them in, helping them, just simply not true.”

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/04/polit...ies/index.html

"Footage captured by Marcus DiPaola, a freelance journalist working at TikTok, has been viewed more than 30 million times on Twitter and more than 1.7 million times on TikTok.

Many who have shared the clip have suggested it shows police letting people get close to the building. One Twitter post that featured the clip alongside the caption: "the police opened the f***ing gates" has been shared more than 200,000 times.

However, officers only backed away after being threatened while being vastly outnumbered, DiPaola said.

"They definitely didn't just open the barriers, the pro-Trump rioters made a fist like they were going to punch the cops, which is why I started recording, then they backed off the barricades," he told Newsweek in an email when asked for extra context to the clip.

"Completely outnumbered, there wouldn't have been any point in fighting. The rioters moved up the steps of the capitol pretty quickly, capitol police tried to hold them back but they didn't have riot shields and really got pushed around."

https://www.newsweek.com/capitol-pol...-video-1559728

You are arguing my point. No the police should not have shot the protesters outside the building because not everyone was rioting. Death should not always be the result of trespassing. But just because the doors were open doesn’t mean that’s an invitation either. Some of the people there did “break and enter” and some people were “trespassing“. No one should get a pass because they believed they were “invited”. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

That's right killing should be the last resort. That has to be made obvious in a criminal proceeding too, by showing there was no other recourse. That's why I question the justification of the Ashli Babbitt shooting.

I doubt you will find any RELIABLE sources that support your claim that people were "invited" into the Capitol on Jan. 6. Security forces were greatly outnumbered and quickly realized that not attempting to stop the rioters from entering the Capitol was in their best interest.

Lie: The rioters were invited into the Capitol by police

A common refrain from January 6 rioters, and some of their Republican defenders, is that they were welcomed into the Capitol by police officers.

Trump said in a book interview in March that “the Capitol Police were ushering people in” and “the Capitol Police were very friendly. You know, they were hugging and kissing.” The claim has been echoed by Trump supporters. For example, Trump-endorsed Republican Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake declared at a Trump rally in October that the people being held in jail over the Capitol attack “were invited in by Capitol Police.”

Facts First: The claim that the rioters were invited into the Capitol is false. Again, about 140 police officers were assaulted while trying to stop the mob from breaching the Capitol. There were hours-long battles between police and rioters near some entrances. CNN obtained footage from police body-worn cameras showing how dozens of officers engaged in hand-to-hand combat with rioters in a desperate effort to keep them out of the building.

There are plenty of instances where rioters waltzed into the Capitol without a fight, but only after they had stormed past barricades and, in some cases, even stepped through broken windows. In some areas, police were so outnumbered by the mob that they retreated, stood aside or tried to politely engage with rioters to de-escalate the situation rather than fighting or making arrests, but that is clearly not the same as welcoming rioters into the building.

Since we don’t have video of every single encounter between police and rioters, it’s theoretically possible that some tiny number of officers did invite rioters in. The Capitol Police announced in September that three officers were facing discipline for unspecified noncriminal “conduct unbecoming” that day, while three others were facing discipline for other policy violations.

But no evidence has publicly emerged to date of even one officer inviting a rioter into the Capitol. And even if a few isolated incidents emerge in the future, it’s clear that this was not a widespread or systemic occurrence as Trump and others suggested.

Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger said on CNN in September: “The officers that we have investigated and disciplined, the cases that we investigated, they run from minor infractions to officers making very poor judgments for more serious misconduct. But this notion that the Capitol Police were somehow allowing these folks into the Capitol, inviting them in, helping them, just simply not true.”

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/04/polit...ies/index.html

"Footage captured by Marcus DiPaola, a freelance journalist working at TikTok, has been viewed more than 30 million times on Twitter and more than 1.7 million times on TikTok.

Many who have shared the clip have suggested it shows police letting people get close to the building. One Twitter post that featured the clip alongside the caption: "the police opened the f***ing gates" has been shared more than 200,000 times.

However, officers only backed away after being threatened while being vastly outnumbered, DiPaola said.

"They definitely didn't just open the barriers, the pro-Trump rioters made a fist like they were going to punch the cops, which is why I started recording, then they backed off the barricades," he told Newsweek in an email when asked for extra context to the clip.

"Completely outnumbered, there wouldn't have been any point in fighting. The rioters moved up the steps of the capitol pretty quickly, capitol police tried to hold them back but they didn't have riot shields and really got pushed around."

https://www.newsweek.com/capitol-pol...-video-1559728 Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

They were unprepared and untrained. In 1968 the Chicago Police were in a similar situation during the Democratic National Convention. They kicked the ever living shit out of everybody. It's because they were well equipped, well prepared and well trained. The Capital Police failed at their mission.

I doubt you will find any RELIABLE sources that support your claim that people were "invited" into the Capitol on Jan. 6. Security forces were greatly outnumbered and quickly realized that not attempting to stop the rioters from entering the Capitol was in their best interest. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

... First off - I didn't claim there that people were "invited in"
- what I mentioned is that the police were holding the doors
open for people to enter.

And your Newsweek "fact check" opinion-piece there even
mentions that there's video evidence of this.

And secondly - there IS video of this - and the "Shaman" bloke
surely being led-about the Capitol building, ESCORTED by
police, as-if the fellow was a proper honoured guest.

... Your opinion-piece also mentions that police there
were overwhelmed... Hmmmmm... Might THAT be because of the
lack of National Guard?? ... Reckon so...

#### Salty

Anyone who tries to use this as a defense in court is either a liar or an idiot. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

It would be a great defense because it's the fucking truth.

These Death to America demonstrators and protest organizers should be pursued with the same legal vigor as have those who entered the nation’s Capital on January 6th of 2020. Originally Posted by ICU 812

Well, yeah. If somebody destroys property or assaults police he probably deserves jail time. If he just yells "Death to America" or "Hang Mike Pence" and peacefully trespasses on government property, then probably not. Maybe he deserves a probated sentence or community service, but not jail.

Well if the Mob was that overpowering the Police should have opened fire on them. After all they were forcibly entering the Capital. The Police were suppose to protect the Capital, right? Originally Posted by Levianon17

That's right killing should be the last resort. That has to be made obvious in a criminal proceeding too, by showing there was no other recourse. That's why I question the justification of the Ashli Babbitt shooting. Originally Posted by Levianon17

They were unprepared and untrained. In 1968 the Chicago Police were in a similar situation during the Democratic National Convention. They kicked the ever living shit out of everybody. It's because they were well equipped, well prepared and well trained. The Capital Police failed at their mission. Originally Posted by Levianon17

I’m not following you Levianon. Didn’t the police do an excellent job, just killing one person? January 6 could have made Kent State look like a cake walk. The police kept their cool under extreme conditions.

I think you’re being sarcastic in one of the posts above but I don’t know which one.

I’m not following you Levianon. Didn’t the police do an excellent job, just killing one person? January 6 could have made Kent State look like a cake walk. The police kept their cool under extreme conditions.

I think you’re being sarcastic in one of the posts above but I don’t know which one. Originally Posted by Tiny

No, Police at the Capital failed their mission. Yeah one person was shot. If Police outside the Capital were doing more pushing instead of being shoved Ashli Babbitt and the rest never would have made it inside and she wouldn't have been shot. Incidents like this the Police do not use restraint, you don't bargain with assholes that's what they did.They moved barricades, they opened doors, they walked around the Capital with protesters.Those aren't good tactics. They should have had some K9's out there right there on the steps of the Capital. It looked like to me they wanted this shit to get out of hand. I'll tell ya this Jan.6th won't be the last incident of this nature, in fact I expect to see worse.

Oh, they wanted them in there for sure. With everyone’s lives being worse under Biden due to lack of disposable income, it’s all they have to campaign on. Trump’s policies are much more palatable to Americans, and democrats know it, so nearly every commercial etc will be based on January 6. The Trump campaign will be all about policy and Biden’s failure, hoping people will look past his boorish personality, and Biden’s will be nothing but scare tactics. Negativity is effective, more so than positivity many times, so it should be an interesting election.

Of Guideline # 6 . . .

#6 - Respect the topics presented by those who start a thread. Attempts to derail a thread or change it's direction is referred to as thread hijack and will be discouraged. Attempts to guide a thread in the right direction are appreciated, while responses to posts which hijack a thread are not.