# Hey, You Damned Liberals!



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Chauvin is now found guilty of murder. What about the cop who killed this unarmed woman. She was my sister. She was our (military) sister. She meant nothing to the damned liberals or their "press."
So, where are the tears? We cried for over a year for a drug addict who died at the knee of a man called Chauvin.

What is the name of the coward who shot and killed Ashli? 









Officer Cleared In The Shooting Death Of Ashli Babbitt During Capitol Riot


The investigation determined the officer did not act with bad purpose or in disregard of the law.




www.npr.org





SAY HER NAME!!! SAY IT!!!
Damned fearful company. Afraid that Facebook will suspect you have a backbone?
Ashlii is dead, masks don't work, Epstein didn't kill himself and where is Nick?


----------



## A Watchman (Sep 14, 2015)

The truth or facts don't matter anymore and are not disclosed. It's all about following the script of the agenda.


----------



## Black 5 (Apr 6, 2020)

Accept that she was not a member of a protected class. Some animals are more equal than others, and the closer your ancestors are to central Europe, the less protection you have unless you join the leftist guilt ridden union and pay your dues.


----------



## Black 5 (Apr 6, 2020)

A man emulates the behavior of the protected classes and gets banned. 
You asked me questions the other day auntie, and i think you may be seeing why I chose not to respond, for actions speak louder than words, so I'm told.


----------



## Auntie (Oct 4, 2014)

I have been told that too.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

She was committing a crime.
Should she have been shot, and the others not?
That was a split second decision by the officer charged with protecting those that this woman was attempting to come through the window to confront.
Myself, I would have shot a lot of them.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Myself, I would have shot a lot of them.


For what crime?
Is it possible to trespass in "the people's house"?
Did vandalism become a lethal force situation?
Did she threaten harm to anyone?


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

If i was given the task to guarding and protecting the Congress members, and wild acting people started breaking down the door to the House chambers where many individuals were still there, yes I absolutely would shoot.
That woman, and those immediately with her, were actually breaking down the doors. to where the people I was charged to protect were hiding. I could only assume they meant harm.
That part was not a peaceful protest. Not by any means.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Destruction of property is absolutely not peaceful. No debate there. But vandalism and trespassing are not lethal force crimes in public.
The congress critters had long-since been evacuated, and there were no threats made against them or anyone else, at least not by this woman.
The officers in the hallways with her were not shooting, and were trying to control the situation. But the unidentified officer shot an unarmed person through a door without sufficient justification.
Two days ago, a white cop shot a 16 year old black girl who was actively attempting to murder another girl, and the riots started immediately.
Yet this gets no scrutiny beyond an internal investigation?
That's not justice.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

There still were Congressmen in the chamber when the doors were being broken down.


----------



## ErickthePutz (Jan 10, 2021)

rice paddy daddy said:


> There still were Congressmen in the chamber when the doors were being broken down.


Yep. These facts just ruin the day of all the conspiracy nuts...


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

I frankly think the entire thing was a setup. The ONLY person who looked surprised when that mysteriously anonymous officer shot Ashli, was Ashli. 

How is that for a conspiracy theory, Putzy Ol Boy?


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

i don’t understand why she continued through the door while she had a pistol pointed at her.

That would tell me her intentions were not to talk. At that point the officers could’ve been fearful their weapons would be taken and used against them. A very real possibility.

It’s a regretful chain of events that ultimately led to her death, truly a sad outcome for everyone involved.
I do not believe her shooting was politically motivated by the officer.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

So when the left did the same thing to the Wisconsin State Capital building, that was different because it was the left doing it? Pelosi and Schumer praised the protesters. There were people attacked, fires set and they occupied the building. Ya gotta protect the unions.

But when protesting something as silly as an election, then the protesters must be stopped at all costs. She committed a crime and had to die for it. 

Yet a cop shot someone trying to commit murder and now he's the bad guy. 

In a truly peaceful protest, sort of like when Trump was elected, they smashed, burned and threatened to blow up the White House. And we know, because we've been told, that Minneapolis, Portland and Seattle are all peaceful protests. 

I think I see a pattern here.


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

I consulted a police officer and his reply was similar to what I posted.

He said “ anytime a police officer has his weapon drawn and pointed at a suspect giving commands to stop and the suspect continues their advancement, it’s grounds for the use of deadly force “

I agree with that completely. The totality of the event didn’t matter, it was that one direct interaction between the women and the police officer.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Ranger710Tango said:


> I consulted a police officer and his reply was similar to what I posted.
> 
> He said “ anytime a police officer has his weapon drawn and pointed at a suspect giving commands to stop and the suspect continues their advancement, it’s grounds for the use of deadly force “
> 
> I agree with that completely. The totality of the event didn’t matter, it was that one direct interaction between the women and the police officer.


If the person had any reasonable chance of reaching the officer, that would be true. It is not true when the person's potential advancement is blocked by an obstacle and the officer is behind cover 20-30 ft away and other officers right next to the person see no such threat.
This was a nervous officer who pulled the trigger on someone who was not a deadly threat. The other officers next to her saw no reason to employ weapons.
He made a cowardly decision, in my estimation, and they are protecting him from it.
What other officer involved shooting can you think of where the officer is never identified?
This is a blue wall of protection for a bad shoot. Period.


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> If the person had any reasonable chance of reaching the officer, that would be true. It is not true when the person's potential advancement is blocked by an obstacle and the officer is behind cover 20-30 ft away and other officers right next to the person see no such threat.
> This was a nervous officer who pulled the trigger on someone who was not a deadly threat. The other officers next to her saw no reason to employ weapons.
> He made a cowardly decision, in my estimation, and they are protecting him from it.
> What other officer involved shooting can you think of where the officer is never identified?
> This is a blue wall of protection for a bad shoot. Period.


I wasn’t present nor have I spoke to the officer so it’s impossible for me to form an opinion based on anything other than what I know. 

What’s known is she was breaching a door and failed to stop while being directed so at gun point. According to the police officer I spoke with, that gave him the authority to use lethal force if he thought his weapon could be taken. It was his choice, he chose to shoot. 

I feel like the mob in which she was a part of would have and I believe eventually did breach the door. If not that door, another door. 

The officer not being identified is most likely for his own protection. If the current law reads that his/her name can be withheld then it’s up to someone to challenge the law or change the law. 

That’s the process.

Terrible outcome for everyone. I’m sorry she was killed but she played a major role in her own death that day.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Ranger710Tango said:


> I wasn’t present nor have I spoke to the officer so it’s impossible for me to form an opinion based on anything other than what I know.
> 
> What’s known is she was breaching a door and failed to stop while being directed so at gun point. According to the police officer I spoke with, that gave him the authority to use lethal force if he thought his weapon could be taken. It was his choice, he chose to shoot.
> 
> ...


Then I'd like to know where the communication broke down between the officers that were right next to her with automatic weapons, and the officer that decided to end her life for a supposed fear that his weapon could be taken.
The others clearly had no such fear.
This was a nervous cop who made a stupid decision out of panic. No other officer that day, even those within arm's reach of the mob, felt the need to shoot.
I have no idea what the law would say on the matter, but it should be in public record since these are civil servants.


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> Then I'd like to know where the communication broke down between the officers that were right next to her with automatic weapons, and the officer that decided to end her life for a supposed fear that his weapon could be taken.
> The others clearly had no such fear.
> This was a nervous cop who made a stupid decision out of panic. No other officer that day, even those within arm's reach of the mob, felt the need to shoot.
> I have no idea what the law would say on the matter, but it should be in public record since these are civil servants.


The communication probably broke down during the riot. 

It’s irrelevant if other officers didn’t shoot. 

Was the officer nervous ? Probably so, hundreds of people were about to take over what they’re in charge of protecting. 

Was it stupid for the officer to shoot ? That’s irrelevant, what’s relevant is if the shoot was legal. 

I believe it was a legal shoot. 

All of the above is my opinion.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Ranger710Tango said:


> The communication probably broke down during the riot.
> 
> It’s irrelevant if other officers didn’t shoot.
> 
> ...


I'll contend that it is not irrelevant what the other officers, closer to the actor, were doing.
Their inaction shows a clear difference in interpreting the scene.
Multiple officers in her immediate vicinity saw no reason for lethal force.
One officer at a distance away chose to shoot.
That reveals poor decision making(aka, stupid decision), and that officer should no longer be an officer.

Should force have been used to extract those people? Yes, that's reasonable. They were unarmed and it would have been relatively easy to do.
Did anything the woman did rise to the level of deadly force? Not even close, in my opinion.


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

It’s pretty simple. If a cop perceives a threat and has his weapon in his hand pointed at the person and the person fails to obey commands while continuing forward progress, the officer has the option to use deadly force. 

So from what I’ve seen all those things took place. 

Should he have waited until she could reach out and touch the gun ? 

We both have our opinions but I doubt the officer went to work on Jan 6 planning to shoot a person. 

It sounds crazy to even have to say......but maybe she shouldn’t have been trying to breach a door at the capital during a riot and then maybe should’ve stopped when she saw the pistol aimed at her. Her not stopping is reason enough to believe she was an eminent threat.

She was trained by the military. She knew better. I think she was mentally ill.,,,.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

I won't cast aspersions upon the dead. I also make no assumption that she saw the officer who fired.
The video I saw of the incident showed a wide angle of the gun being produced from the side of the hallway. If I had to take a wild guess, I'd say he was 40-50 degrees to the left of dead ahead of her down that hallway.
We have no way of knowing if she knew the officer had his gun pointed at her.

Since we're playing the maybe game...
Maybe the officer shouldn't have been pointing his gun at an unarmed person who was making no threats against anyone, but only committing acts of vandalism.
Could any officer claim this same protection as long as they pull their gun out and point it upon first contact in all interactions?
That's a dangerous precedent.
There must be a perceived threat of force or deadly force before a gun is produced. Vandalism does not rise to the occasion.

We both agree she should not have been conducting herself in the manner we see in the video.
If only everyone would abide by the rules of civility... and unicorn farts powered our electric grids.


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

If an officer perceived a threat, they can pull their weapon and point it at you. 

If you advance and are not obeying commands to stop, the officer can use deadly force. 

Example. If my car tag came back stolen and a cop initiated a traffic stop on me......he would follow felony stop protocol. 

That means he would get me out of the car at gun point. 

If I turned and started to to approach the officer and disobey commands, and he perceived a threat he can use deadly force. 

I actually had that happen. Except I complied. Some how my tag was reported stolen, It wasn’t stolen. 

You think a cop can shoot an unarmed naked person and it be ruled justified ? It sure can 

Google search “ gil collar killed by police “


https://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/27/white-teen-gilbert-collar-killed-by-black-cop-trev/



There’s a difference between having to shoot and the legal authority to shoot. 

Did these cops have to shoot ? Maybe not, but they have the law on their side and hind sight is 20/20. These cops might would do things differently if they could tell the future but at the moment they reacted, lawfully.


----------



## A Watchman (Sep 14, 2015)

Ranger710Tango said:


> I think she was mentally ill.,,,.


I am not condoning what she did, but to suggest she was mentally ill is way over the top and a ridiculous accusation. More logically, she had deep-rooted beliefs and was willing to go to the extreme to protect them and try to derail an injustice and threat to her beliefs.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Its all rather simple;

White bitch deserved to die. Media and Government have spoken. Get back to work and make your tax payments on time you pasty white devils.

(This has been a public service announcement from your over-seer-ers!)


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

If people should be mad at something, it should be the nut jobs who push the consistently failing an evolving Qanon conspiracy. This false narrative was one of the driving forces that motivated this woman to storm the Capitol, in an attempt to interrupt a constitutional process concerning the US election. That whole failed insurrection certainly brought on a lot of loss and will be remembered forever.


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

theprincipal said:


> If people should be mad at something, it should be the nut jobs who push the consistently failing an evolving Qanon conspiracy. This false narrative was one of the driving forces that motivated this woman to storm the Capitol, in an attempt to interrupt a constitutional process concerning the US election. That whole failed insurrection certainly brought on a lot of loss and will be remembered forever.


Hmmmmm. And how is this different from the nut jobs who pushed the consistantly failing russia collusion conspiracy?


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

Chiefster23 said:


> Hmmmmm. And how is this different from the nut jobs who pushed the consistantly failing russia collusion conspiracy?


I’m speaking specifically to the original post... We could go on all day in a game of off topic, compare and contrast. I didn’t claim the false Qanon conspiracy narrative is the same or different as anything.


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

A Watchman said:


> I am not condoning what she did, but to suggest she was mentally ill is way over the top and a ridiculous accusation. More logically, she had deep-rooted beliefs and was willing to go to the extreme to protect them and try to derail an injustice and threat to her beliefs.


We all have our beliefs and opinions. 

She claimed to be doing “ Gods work “ 

“ Gods Work “ by storming the capital in a riot. 

Sounds a bit mentally ill, That's my opinion and it’s a valid one.


----------



## ErickthePutz (Jan 10, 2021)

What “automatic “ weapon?


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

Chiefster23 said:


> Hmmmmm. And how is this different from the nut jobs who pushed the consistantly failing russia collusion conspiracy?


They never stormed the capital while at gunpoint.

Would you have went through that door while being commanded to stop by an officer of the law with a gun pointed at you ? I doubt you would. 

It’s suggests the person wasn’t in touch with reality to me.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

The problem here is hypocrisy. Kill any non democrat/communist and be protected. Kill some one that is in a liberal favored class and your a$$ is theirs. The difference in the comparisons of shooting and actions is clearly a political one. Burning and looting zones of homes or businesses is allowed with no interference while the US capitol is a free fire zone. If anyone deserves abuse it is our elected representatives that sell us down the river every damned time they can. That was no insurrection. Insurrection would be nailing the doors and underground passages shut , set the place on fire like the British in 1814 then shoot anyone escaping. That would be insurrection.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Ranger710Tango said:


> If an officer perceived a threat, they can pull their weapon and point it at you.
> 
> If you advance and are not obeying commands to stop, the officer can use deadly force.
> 
> ...


We have no way of knowing if she was given any order from that officer, or even knew of his existence.
It's a terrible precedent to claim that any cop can pull his weapon for any threat, issue any command in a random direction, receive zero feedback that anyone knows of his existence, and he then shoot at a person. We have no indication that he gave any commands or that she heard and ignored his possible commands. Nor whether she knew he was there at all to ignore his threat of force and proceed.
This should go to a court and have a jury decide.
Internal investigations are insufficient in such a complicated matter.


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> We have no way of knowing if she was given any order from that officer, or even knew of his existence.
> It's a terrible precedent to claim that any cop can pull his weapon for any threat, issue any command in a random direction, receive zero feedback that anyone knows of his existence, and he then shoot at a person. We have no indication that he gave any commands or that she heard and ignored his possible commands. Nor whether she knew he was there at all to ignore his threat of force and proceed.
> This should go to a court and have a jury decide.
> Internal investigations are insufficient in such a complicated matter.


The precedent was set years ago, this is nothing new. What’s new is the issue has become political. 

I’ll never actually know more than they’re telling because I wasn’t there. 

So my opinion is based on who was breaking the law when the incident occurred and in what context. 

Well it was a riot, that’s the context. His job is to protect the people in the chamber. He did his job in my opinion.

She’s on video trying to climb through the broken door. You don’t think they told her to stop ? 

She was a military police officer I believe. She knew better......


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Ranger710Tango said:


> The precedent was set years ago, this is nothing new.





Kauboy said:


> ...that any cop can pull his weapon for any threat, issue any command in a random direction, receive zero feedback that anyone knows of his existence, and he then shoot at a person.


No... this precedent has never been set, and doesn't match what you first described, but appears to be the chain of events shown in the videos we have.

The fact that we'll never actually know should be a red flag.
A civil servant in the people's house shot an unarmed woman, and they tell us nothing.


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> No... this precedent has never been set, and doesn't match what you first described, but appears to be the chain of events shown in the videos we have.
> 
> The fact that we'll never actually know should be a red flag.
> A civil servant in the people's house shot an unarmed woman, and they tell us nothing.


She was participating in a riot and was crawling through a door that had the glass broken out of it. 

I’m not going to second guess a cop that’s reacting to that. 

She started the chain of events that led to her own death. 

You protest outside, not by breaking glass out of doors and crawling through. 

I won’t lose any sleep over it after watching the video. I’m fine with it.

That’s pretty much all I can add to this one. 

Goodnight 🤙


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Ranger710Tango said:


> She was participating in a riot and was crawling through a door that had the glass broken out of it.
> 
> I’m not going to second guess a cop that’s reacting to that.


She was indeed, but was neither causing nor threatening harm to any person.
Yet you second guessed Officer Chauvin's decision to keep the unconscious Mr. Floyd on the ground after he had passed out.
In court testimony, a witness agreed that it was common to keep a combative subject on the ground even after they fell asleep or lost consciousness, due to the real threat that they could awaken and continue resisting.
Why does this young woman's killer get a pass when Officer Chauvin was simply following protocol and received your added scrutiny?

A jury should have heard this case, just like they did against Chauvin. Too many unknowns being intentionally kept quiet.
That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

What were/are the ROE for Capital Police during the mass of people coming in? Every dept, and mil, has different ROE.
Deadly Force is also different between, LE/Mil ( within each branch its different too, depends on what you are doing).
Was she a threat, apparently to David Baily it was. He is the most likely suspect. One other one that slips my mind.
After seeing the video, I dont think she was, but we didnt see it from his angle. 
Whats really disturbing is he shot at her while there were 3 to 4 officers behind her..
Comms were very poor..


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

People, People, People...listen up and listen good.

There be different rules for different fools. Y'all get that thru y'alls thick noggins and we all be better off.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> She was indeed, but was neither causing nor threatening harm to any person.
> Yet you second guessed Officer Chauvin's decision to keep the unconscious Mr. Floyd on the ground after he had passed out.
> In court testimony, a witness agreed that it was common to keep a combative subject on the ground even after they fell asleep or lost consciousness, due to the real threat that they could awaken and continue resisting.
> Why does this young woman's killer get a pass when Officer Chauvin was simply following protocol and received your added scrutiny?
> ...


I have nothing to add. I just wanted this post to be bumped up. @Kauboy said it as good as it could be said.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Ranger710Tango said:


> The precedent was set years ago, this is nothing new. What’s new is the issue has become political.
> 
> I’ll never actually know more than they’re telling because I wasn’t there.
> 
> ...





rice paddy daddy said:


> She was committing a crime.
> Should she have been shot, and the others not?
> That was a split second decision by the officer charged with protecting those that this woman was attempting to come through the window to confront.
> Myself, I would have shot a lot of them.


Then, you should be in jail.

No, that was not a split-second decision. The cop who shot the yute who was a split-second from shanking another girl made a split-second decision. 
It could be argued that Ashli was murdered. It should be argued in court. Still, we don't even know the name of the gunman who shot her down.
Yes, I said "gunman," instead of "police officer."


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

It was not a split second decision. Watch the video. He went back and forth several times before firing. He could have just as easily yelled at her, as it was quiet on his side, she would have heard him at the window.. He never presented himself to her. He cowardly shot from the side of a door frame, where she couldnt see him. 
Thats my opinion.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Bottom line, if she had not been led into lawlessness in her Trump zeal, she would be alive today.
I have no sympathy.
She should have known better.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Bottom line, if she had not been led into lawlessness in her Trump zeal, she would be alive today.
> I have no sympathy.
> She should have known better.


When you have made a statement that only gets likes from RangoTangoRumpWrangler and principal......you can be fairly certain you have said something wrong.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

stevekozak said:


> When you have made a statement that only gets likes from RangoTangoRumpWrangler and principal......you can be fairly certain you have said something wrong.


I stand by my statement.
Her total lack of judgement got her to a place she should not have been.
And, as a veteran herself, I can not believe how easily she was led. A clear lack of critial thinking.

If you will notice - every protestor that stayed outside the building is still alive today, and neither under arrest or being chased down by the FBI.


----------



## ErickthePutz (Jan 10, 2021)

Denton said:


> Then, you should be in jail.
> 
> No, that was not a split-second decision. The cop who shot the yute who was a split-second from shanking another girl made a split-second decision.
> It could be argued that Ashli was murdered. It should be argued in court. Still, we don't even know the name of the gunman who shot her down.
> Yes, I said "gunman," instead of "police officer."


“Gunman” now? What do your teeth kicking “cop” friends say. You are a perfect example of the technique of false “facts” circulating the Web...


----------



## Ranger710Tango (Feb 27, 2021)

stevekozak said:


> When you have made a statement that only gets likes from RangoTangoRumpWrangler and principal......you can be fairly certain you have said something wrong.


Just because you’re within the minority doesn’t make a person wrong. 

That’s why we have a republic rather than a democracy. Our founding fathers were fearful that the majority could possibly infringe on the minority so they created a representative republic.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

ErickthePutz said:


> “Gunman” now? What do your teeth kicking “cop” friends say. You are a perfect example of the technique of false “facts” circulating the Web...


Mr Putz,

Please enlighten me on the technique of fact "facts" circulating the web on who pulled the trigger of the gun and killed Ms Babbitt?

"Preciate it!


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

The family is now filing a civil suit.








Lawyer for Ashli Babbitt's Family Announces Civil Action Will be Filed


Terry Roberts, the attorney for the family of Ashli Babbitt, has announced they will be pursuing civil action against the police officer who shot her




nationalfile.com





We'll see if anything comes of it.


----------



## Any Beastie (Mar 19, 2021)

ErickthePutz said:


> Yep. These facts just ruin the day of all the conspiracy nuts...


Hey, you damned liberal!

What's the point of prepping if you're a liberal? 

................

I think the government will take care of you just fine. You should be busy doing some free shopping and social justice and inclusion right now, not squirreling bags of grain! 
If you're on here just to be a pain in the ass, it's working fine. But if you're on here to be morally superior and make yourself seem intelligent, You're failing. Every time you open your mouth I form an even stupider picture of you in my head. This is all said in a friendly tone with slightly gritted teeth, very little insult intended.


----------



## Swrock (Dec 14, 2018)

So an unarmed woman gets shot and killed.
Certain people here approve of it apparently.
BLM dont care. Wonder why?
Liberals dont care cause she was a Trump fan.
CNN loves it cause she was a Trump fan.
That stupid bitch Pelosi probably celebrated.
Biden too stupid to realize what's going on.
Let's


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Swrock said:


> So an unarmed woman gets shot and killed.
> Certain people here approve of it apparently.
> BLM dont care. Wonder why?
> Liberals dont care cause she was a Trump fan.
> ...


Exactly. As I said; Hey, you damned liberals!


----------

