jross

Sure it could be incompetence. BIAS will naturally be against the person causing the disruption. Unless that girl is in a very wrong physical way or something was seen, I wouldn't expect them to go back to inquire who was involved with holding them (to discover one sided assault). Note that the officers also didn't charge her with a crime and she walked out on her own accord. She was probably in shock but we don't hear her on body camera footage informing others that she was assaulted while being escorted on a long walk out to the building exit.

Most of the J6ers were rightfully pardoned, unquestionably. AND pleny of them should still be in jail. You don't get to do violence and get out of jail free. But because the DOJ was weoponized and made worse that it was preknown to occur, and the smallest of 'offenses' prosecuted and lives unnecessary damaged because of it, and entirely spun wrongly in a way that still has people in a trance, I supported pardoning everyone as a Masvidal message.

She is definitely to blame for what occurred. She didn't lead the mob or break any windows herself, but she was in the mob, and tried to climb through a broken window... and it was reasonable to expect a violent retort. Her entering through the broken window dismisses any consideration if she was one of the grandmas that walked through doors that gov funded staff were holding open. Interesting her family settled a 5M lawsuit with the gov, without going to trial and without the Gov admitting fault. I think she was definitely at fault, unarmed, hands up and all. The police have a right to defend, certainly with guns, against a mob entering broken windows getting close to where officials are. If we determined 50 years from now that J6 was an insider job or that the FBI allowed it to occur, or that the 2020 Election was indeed rigged... she still would be to blame in the context of the situation.

Does it cause you psychological discomfort to accept they didn't know she was assaulted, until seeing videos after?

There are plenty on film saying so. Famous people. Elected people. Of course not the whole party.

Do you realize your words are as toxic as Trump? You just have a different opinion of who to call scum.

Be real. Blake isn’t legally to blame for being assaulted but she is absolutely responsible for the situation that produced it. If she was not there recklessly instigating the fellas wouldn’t have been assaulting her or anyone else. She did commit a misdemeanor regardless of whether she is charged. That doesn’t mean she can be assaulted.

^^^ Yes. The heckler could be charged with a misdemanor by law. https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2917.12

What this does is establish that the law defined fighting words, and a court case literally uses “fascist” as an example of words said to a person that could qualify. There is a long history of crowds responding to the Blakes of the past in this way and much worse. It doesn’t make it for the crowd to assault Blake.

Not serious... Dead attempt given the scale of response obviously matters, not to mention Blake was protesting at someone else's event versus Kirk being an invited speaker at his own event.

Anyone with a tiny understanding of human nature knows that attending an emotionally charged political rally of thousands of opponents to loudly protest is a high-risk, provocative act. The court once defined "fighting words" as those that "by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace." The test was what men of common intelligence would understand would be words likely to cause an average recipient to fight. This changed because the violent retort could get out of hand and because we no longer have a shared common intelligence. Blake presents herself as the type of person belonging to the group that champions words are violence...

Fans of Ted Lasso. Memory of a goldfish.

Not so long ago, calling someone a fascist without a disarming smile was legally considered fighting words. There was even a time in history when the public actually had a duty to step in and handle a disruption like that. This dummy (and victim) knowingly instigated this. She was loud, angry, disrespectful, and intentionally caused a scene in the middle of a massive crowd that was completely against her.

Did anybody here or elsewhere say the assaulters should not have been removed? The people in charge of removing them were not aware she had been assaulted. Kevin Bacon say "Hollow, man."

Fraud is not a prioritized reason to avoid socialized health care.

^^ Awake in a trance ^^

No burka that I'd seen. Yes been invited to his apartment a few times. Wife does not speak english and I did not interact with her much. They recently moved... I worked with a Muslim girl who wore blue jeans inside and a burka outside. First time I joined her team on a large lunch outing I had no idea who it was.

Male. Indian. Sunni. Engineer. I hired him. Managed him. Managed a manager of him. Worked on a different team as him later as more peer situation. Had lunch, etc. for a decade. Spent time in and occasionaly outside of work. We discussed religion. He prayed privately at work. Arranged marriage. Warm eyes. Smiles. Open body language. Attentive. Soft-spoken. Listens without interruption. Warm with collegues and difficult people in difficult situations. Brought Indian food from home to share with collegues. Mentored others and had knowledge sharing sessions. You just instantly feel relaxed and not threatened. More giver than taker. Didn't drink, gamble, make money off interest, complain, raise his voice, not argumentive. Respected where we ate. Hand over heart humble. More Christlike than most Christains.

Trump doesn't cheer the assault. The lady is on camera yelling before she is assaulted (and later says as much) This was not a display of fascism.

Unfortunately this video is still the best I've seen, but its enough. The camera holder is far away and zooms in on this lady. The entire crowd is already staring at the lady. Her mouth is wide open and her body posture is that of someone yelling. The first man to 'assault' her isn't close enough to assault her yet. You can see this in second 6. She isn't looking at the first assaulter until he reaches her in second 7 / 8.

It was really disgusting, but why are you allowing emotions and bias to lead to even more statements and claims that are objectively wrong?

Body cam from deputies as well as the sheriff confirm the deputies did not see the punch. Doesn't sound like fascism to me. https://www.wfmj.com/news/local-news/bodycam-video-released-from-altercation-at-trump-rally-in-youngstown/article_462b3203-d86e-413e-ae4c-f92104530e6f.html https://www.newsweek.com/ohio-sheriff-investigate-punch-heckler-trump-rally-12614522

Some things are missing here. Fascism would be one-party rule with Trump as the dictator, where Trump controls the media and speech. Blake would be assaulted and removed for her shirt or just for appearing gender-confused. She would probably be refused a ticket, refused entry, or assaulted while attempting to enter. Security would have assaulted her and celebrated the mob for assaulting her first. Trump would be celebrating the assault. And this sort of thing would be happening in multiple places as a way of life rather than one-off chaos. Then the media spin would be different than it was...

No. Put yourself in the shoes of security. Not only can we watch on video that the assault was over ( i recall looking for it originally ), but security claims they didn't see it.

In the moment, she was the problem. When security got there to remove her she was being held under control rather than assaulted. And she didn't report being assaulted... Removing hecklers is standard security. Assaulters bragging after is disgusting but it isn't fascism.