Capitol Riot arrests (2 Viewers)

< Previous | Next >

Bigdaddysaints

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
182
Reaction score
355
Age
47
Location
Prairieville, La
Offline
Figured we should start a separate thread on the arrests and those involved in the storming of the Capitol. I know it has been talked about in the other thread a lot, but for the ones who just want to follow the ones arrested and/or charged, this will be an easier way to see updates on the investigations.

Link below is everyone who has been arrested. But we know there will be more.

The website seems to be updated with new information daily.

The ones who are getting the most air time:


Jake Angeli
1610987626331.png


Adam Johnson
1610987698358.png


Richard Barnett
1610987768489.png


Kevin Seefried
1610987811788.png


Eric Gavelek Munchel
1610987942709.png


Larry R. Brock
Lisa Eisenhart
Robert Keith Packer
Klete Keller
Aaron Mostofsky
Anthime Joseph Gionet
Peter Francis Stager
Christine Priola
 

Roofgardener

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2021
Messages
457
Reaction score
144
Location
East Midlands, UK
Offline
imagine that, RG using fake news, who'd thought it.. lol.. but he says main stream media can't be trusted, but it he saw it on Facebook, that's a trusted source. smh.
What on EARTH are you drivelling on about ? I seem to recall that my source was Forbes, but the number of 25,000 (or 26,000) was widely promulgated, including on some military PR sites. I have NEVER quoted from Facebook in these fora. And precisely WHAT did I post that is "fake news" ? I may occasionally make mistakes, but I don't deliberately post 'fake news'.

You, Sir, owe me an apology.
 

Roofgardener

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2021
Messages
457
Reaction score
144
Location
East Midlands, UK
Offline
Not to mention the fact that a bunch of loons had planned to kidnap the Governor of Michigan WITH zipties. To completely ignore that piece of context is just, well being intellectually dishonest at worst, at best, just ignorant.

How is that contextual with the Capitol invasion ? It was a year earlier, in a different state, with different motivations, and the protesters where escorted into the state building by police ?
 
OP
Bigdaddysaints

Bigdaddysaints

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
182
Reaction score
355
Age
47
Location
Prairieville, La
Offline
And is it a proportional response to build walls around the capitol, and man them with 26,000 national guard troops ?
What on EARTH are you drivelling on about ? I seem to recall that my source was Forbes, but the number of 25,000 (or 26,000) was widely promulgated, including on some military PR sites. I have NEVER quoted from Facebook in these fora. And precisely WHAT did I post that is "fake news" ? I may occasionally make mistakes, but I don't deliberately post 'fake news'.

You, Sir, owe me an apology.
none of the top quote ia true. they are not building walls around the Capitol and manning them with 26k troops.
were you saying that AFTER the insurrection attempt, they should not have put up fences and had troops guarding the Capitol since there were talks of other attempts by the Qcrazies up to the inauguration? do you think they should have had zero extra protection because of what happened on Jan 6th? you were against all the extra security?
you seem to think that there are walls and 26k troops there right now, which is in fact not true.
 

RebSaint

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
43
Reaction score
183
Age
46
Location
Alexandria, Louisiana
Offline
How is that contextual with the Capitol invasion ? It was a year earlier, in a different state, with different motivations, and the protesters where escorted into the state building by police ?
You have way of framing your posts in the form of rhetorical questions rather than genuine questions. The posts come off as genuine questions when they're really statements feigning ignorance when I think it's really willful ignorance. I don't post much anymore, but I'm damn sure not wasting gray matter responding to willful ignorance. I'm not convinced you're asking this "question" in good faith, so maybe somebody else can play your game.
 

Roofgardener

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2021
Messages
457
Reaction score
144
Location
East Midlands, UK
Offline
none of the top quote ia true. they are not building walls around the Capitol and manning them with 26k troops.
were you saying that AFTER the insurrection attempt, they should not have put up fences and had troops guarding the Capitol since there were talks of other attempts by the Qcrazies up to the inauguration? do you think they should have had zero extra protection because of what happened on Jan 6th? you were against all the extra security?
you seem to think that there are walls and 26k troops there right now, which is in fact not true.
All of my top quote was true. They build wire walls around the capital building, and there where 26,000 national guard there. Which part was false ?
 

DaveXA

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
2,521
Reaction score
1,839
Location
Vienna, VA (via Lafayette)
Offline
Except for the protester they shot dead ?
Only after she was waned repeatedly that she'd be shot if she and the group she was in breached the barrier. That area was sealed off to protect the members of Congress and staffers who were holed up there. I watched the video from more than one angle. The agent who shot her was likely told to defend that barrier with deadly force if breached.

Is it sad she died? Sure. Is it her fault? Yes.
 

CoolBrees

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2019
Messages
826
Reaction score
1,902
Age
44
Location
Portland, Oregon
Offline
Who cares if she was warned. She was a breaking and entering perp, that was aggressively crossing over a barricade inside the Capitol. The law gives the right to use deadly force in that situation

I only regret she wasn’t shot in the stomach so she would have suffered before she died.
 

efil4

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2019
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
1,726
Age
50
Location
Covington, LA
Offline
REally ? She was warned ? I didn't know that. Do you have corroboration of that ?
listen closely to the video.

Thats all the corroboration you will need.

Fact remains, she lost her life because of a false premise, co-opted by the POTUS at the time. What should be of great sadness to you is she indeed lost her life because she believed in something/someone who simply wasnt true/truthful.
 

RebSaint

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
43
Reaction score
183
Age
46
Location
Alexandria, Louisiana
Offline
listen closely to the video.

Thats all the corroboration you will need.

Fact remains, she lost her life because of a false premise, co-opted by the POTUS at the time. What should be of great sadness to you is she indeed lost her life because she believed in something/someone who simply wasnt true/truthful.
Translation: Some are only interested in questioning appropriate police procedures and responses because of agendas and the people who are being policed.
 

efil4

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2019
Messages
1,113
Reaction score
1,726
Age
50
Location
Covington, LA
Offline
Translation: Some are only interested in questioning appropriate police procedures and responses because of agendas and the people who are being policed.
uh huh.

sure thang.

gotcha.

you continue to believe what you wish to believe. Fact remains, a young woman is dead, not for a cause...for an ideology that had her break into the Capitol of the US, and continue on her rampage to where high-level government officials were being protected.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

< Previous | Next >

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored

Top Bottom