Truth Will Out in the End.


“President Trump was wrong. I had no right to overturn the election and his reckless words endangered my family and everyone at the Capitol that day, and I know that history will hold Donald Trump accountable . . . Tourists don’t injure 140 police officers by sightseeing. Tourists don’t break down doors to get to the Speaker of the House or voice threats against public officials . . . Make no mistake about it, what happened that day was a disgrace, and it mocks decency to portray it in any other way”

56 thoughts on “Truth Will Out in the End.

  1. Mike Pence is wrong. He says he had “no right to overturn the election,” but it is also true that he had no right to certify the election over the objections of the senators present in the proceedings that day.

    One doesn’t have to be a Trump supporter to see that the institutions of our government broke down during the 2020 election and faltered in response to the riot. The first, most important solution we should pursue is reform of our approaches to collecting and counting votes so that more citizens have more confidence in the process.


    1. “[Pence] had no right to certify the election over the objections of the senators present in the proceedings that day.”

      To put this politely, you really should do a little research before asserting nonsense. Pence followed the procedures detailed in the relevant law. He did not personally decide anything.

      State by state the opportunity to object to their Electoral College votes was made available. If even one Senator and one House member objected to a particular state the joint session would be suspended and each house vote on the objection.

      In the event only two states had both a Senator and a Congressman making an objection – Arizona and Pennsylvania. Both houses voted to accept their votes and the process continued. There were several other Biden states that Congressmen objected to, but no Senator would join them.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. RE: “To put this politely, you really should do a little research before asserting nonsense.”

      You should wise up before making irresponsible wisecracks.

      Your own description of the relevant law proves my assertion that Pence “had no right to certify the election over the objections of the senators present in the proceedings that day.”

      The proceedings were interrupted by the riot and were completed after hours, out of public view. Pence’s claim that he had “no right to overturn the election” may be accurate, but it is misleading.


      1. …”but it is misleading.”

        Only to those easily misled.

        Pence followed the law. Objections were heard and voted on, IAW the law.

        You are lying to yourself to say that Paul’s post was misleading.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. RE: “Objections were heard and voted on, IAW the law.”

          Yes, as I stated. In a rushed, non-public setting obviously influenced by the days events.


          1. When some of the “public” has trespassed and committed violent acts, including calling for the hanging of the V-P, a little discretion is called for.


        1. RE: “So how was Pence wrong or misleading?”

          He said he had no right to overturn the election, implying that he had a write to certify it. I note that it is misleading to think of it this way, since Pence could not have acted alone.

          The reason I make this point is because some people — you, perhaps? — claim that Pence had no alternative but to certify the election. Had the certification proceeded without the distraction of the riot and in full public view it might have gone differently, but we’ll never know.


          1. “. . . implying that he had a write to certify it.”

            He implied no such thing. His role was absolutely limited to presiding over the joint session of Congress and following the procedures which is exactly what he did.

            And how do you think that certification would have gone differently if the proceedings had not been interrupted by the violent mob Trump dispatched to “stop the steal?” You think Trump would still be President?

            I will answer for you. There MIGHT have been more votes on individual states than the two that were held. And ALL of those objections would have been rejected just like Arizona and Pennyslvania were. But after the violkent attack by Trump supporters, Republican Senators no longer had the stomach to make those pointless objections.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. “ He said he had no right to overturn the election, implying that he had a write to certify it.”

            No it doesn’t. It means he had to certify it. The certification was the law, not a “right”.

            It proceeded just as prescribed, with objections and debate, just had to wait to get the mob out and secure the area. If what you assert that we’ll never know, we’ll then perhaps Team Trump should have not held a rally to stop and delay it.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. You have got to admire the chutzpah of people who continue to support the violent attack on our government and now whine “We’ll never know” what would have happened without it. Shameless.

            Liked by 1 person

      2. If Pence allowed to proceedings to continue according to law despite a vicious, violent attempt to prevent from doing so by Team Trump, I would say you are wrong.

        Disagree? Prove it.

        That you personally were not able to be present, well that ship sailed when tried to storm Congress through his minions.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. Pence was right up to the point the process was interrupted. I am not sure if the actions after the process resumed was by the book or not, I have not researched that.

      But he is wrong about “140 officers injured” at least by the rioters. Most of the injuries were chemical burns from the officer’s comrades spraying the crowd, and trampling injuries caused by the panic from those sprays.


      1. “But he is wrong about “140 officers injured” ”

        Uh, no.

        NOBODY would have been injured had the insurrectionists not attacked the Congress. ALL the injuries were caused by Trump and the insurrectionists no matter what the proximate cause and that includes the death of Horst Wessel, uh, I mean Ashli Babbitt.

        I did the research. The certification was done by the book. Pence followed the law to the letter. Objections where at least one Senator and one Congressmen put it forward were entitled to votes in the separate Houses. They got them. That happened for Arizona and Pennsylvania. Some of the drooling MAGA Congressmen objected to other states but no Senator was willing to join them.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. So now it’s OK to make sport of Ashli Babbitt’s murder?

          I finally got a good look at the video of her shooting not cut short.

          There was not large crowd behind her, no more than 3 or 4 men, and she was no threat to the officer. Further, there were at least 3 other Capitol police close behind her in riot gear and carrying A4s.

          So, now with the full video, I say again. Her murder was totally unjustified. Any White policeman who shot a Black protestor in the exact same circumstance would be in prison for the rest of his life.


          1. “So now it’s OK to make sport of Ashli Babbitt’s murder?”

            She was not murdered. Duh!

            She was killed while violently attacking the seat of our government.
            The joke here is the people like you who would make her a martyr in a “righteous” cause. She was not a martyr. She was a victim – a victim of Donald Trump.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Again, there was no justification for shooting her. She was not a threat. We do not execute people for trespassing, or even interrupting a proceeding. Absent a reasonable threat of injury, from her, to the officer or someone else, self-defense does not apply, There was no dangerous crowd behind her, there were armed Capitol police there however.

            He may get away with it, but it was murder.


          3. I seem to recall that a concerned group of citizens, in appropriate business attire, and had some clipboards and petitions and wanted a minute with the Speaker.

            Is that the video you saw too?

            Liked by 2 people

          4. No, I saw a petite blonde with maybe 3 or 4 guys with her shot down right in front of other armed Capitol police.

            Neither she nor the few other unarmed people there were any threat to anyone. The situation was under control.

            Again, if it had been an unarmed BLM protestor with a few violent people in a crowd behind her shot under the same circumstances, cities would be burning and you would call it justified.

            He killed her because he was trigger happy and knew there would be no consequences.


          5. The chamber entrance was just beyond that door. This was the last stand. One man with a gun and shouting warnings. And he was very visible and so was the gun.

            Door being smashed open, I guess he should have waited until the mob overpowered him so he could get disability.

            I am sure he heard the chaos, and shouts through earphones of fellow officers screaming.

            Oh, yeah, the classic armchair quarterback musings.

            Bringing up the race card again? You have repeated that many times.

            The officer was the only patriot on the video and you denigrate him. And you say he was trigger happy.

            You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

            Shameful. IMO

            Liked by 2 people

          6. I saw the video.

            There were only a handful of unarmed men with her, and almost as many armed Capitol police right there with them,

            She was no threat, nor were the men with her. The situation was controlled.

            Was the officer trigger happy, or a coward, or just out to shoot someone? I can’t say for sure, but if I shot someone under those circumstances I would expect to go to prison.

            You cheered Officer Chauvin going to prison for holding George Floyd down too long. Floyd was a big man who actively fought the police, Chauvin refrained from shooting him even though he had far more cause.

            Is it now just Ok to kill Trump supporters?


          7. So, it was Ok to kill Babbitt because someone else someplace else at another time committed an act of violence.?

            She was not committing a crime that justified execution, nor was she likely to commit a serious crime if she left the area, so the only justification for deadly force would be if she was an immediate threat to the officer or another person.

            Self defense is decided on the circumstances as a reasonable person would see them in that case. Nothing anyone else did at another time and place has any bearing on it.

            There is no reasonable justification from the officer’s point of view for him to be in immediate fear for his life or the life of another from the actions of Ashli Babbitt.

            That makes it manslaughter at the least and likely 2nd degree murder. You go on and on about guns and crimes committed with them. Well, the law applies to policemen too, and Trump supporters are not a lower life form who can be killed on a lesser standard.

            Tell me the justification for the officer shooting her? Not someone else in the room. her.

            There is none.


          8. “Is it now just Ok to kill Trump supporters?”

            I responded that they are not the ones getting murdered.

            You brought it up with a silly accusation.

            Liked by 2 people

          9. No, I am staying on topic.

            Ashli Babbett’s shooting is one case, not part of some alleged collective.

            Her shooting was either justified by the particular circumstances surrounding it or it was not, Nothing other than the immediate circumstances of the shooting is relevant.

            And the video we just got shows very clearly it was not. It was murder.


          10. Nope. Don’t it buy that. It is to the credit of the officers under a massive attack by crazed, armed thugs that more were not shot. Tragic?Yes. Murder? No way.

            It really pays to knock on a door and ask to come in. Not smash them to attack Congressmen.

            Verdict, not guilty.

            Liked by 1 person

          11. No verdict. Hasn’t been tried yet. Hasn’t even been investigated by a grand jury.

            There was no massive attack by armed men at the location where Babbitt was shot. There were there or four unarmed men surrounded by armed Capitol police.

            Whatever might or might not have been going someplace else. where Babbitt was there was no threat.

            And no justification for shooting anyone.


          12. Don, I said “verdict, not guilty” as my opinion. I know there was no trial.

            You believe your tale, I’ll believe what I saw and witnesses attested to as far as the tragic , violent attack on Congress by MAGA and it’s supporters because they believed a total lie and, frankly, don’t like our country.

            That more people did not die that day is a miracle. Stopping that mob at the last door probably saved lives. I would hate to think that had they plowed through that door and made to the chamber then restraints by the police would have lifted.

            This is what happens when people are swept up in a fury by a demagogue. A fury with little or no basis in reality, but fed by anti-American gangs who want some sort of all-White fantasyland that granddad may have created through force and terror. And, frankly, in a country that the gun lobby has saturated with guns to a degree never seen in history.

            Where was the religious persecution, abject poverty, political repression, torture and all the other reasons people revolt? Those folks who rioted were not suffering anything other than disappointment that their leader lost and lost big.

            And now we know this whole mess was planned and executed with the assistance of full scale power of the biggest MSM that many used as their sole source. And that is government interference into media for real, not withholding a few tweets. Trump owned MSM and shoved lies down our throats.

            So, back to the shooting. Trump caused it, MAGA carried it out and people died…thankfully very few. You want to play games from your BarcaLounger, fine. But that does not mean it’s true.

            There was a photo of Tarrio and his lieutenant the other day arm in arm. Tarrio was in full regalia, tactical vest, clips, rings, body armor, etc.

            No problem, we used play army too…as 10 year olds. But very visible is the can of White Claw in a pouch of his vest. It is a f#cking game for them to attack our nation. No other reason…just a game.

            Liked by 2 people

          13. You do realize that absolutely none of that is relevant, right?

            It doesn’t matter what Trump said, it doesn’t matter what was going on in other parts of the building.

            The only thing that matters in that shooting is whether Babbitt, and maybe the few people with her, were an immediate threat, They weren’t, They were effectively surrounded by other armed Capitol police.

            You can’t shoot a person because someone else, someplace else, is dangerous.


          14. You were not there. You are not a police officer. You are misinformed. You are attempting to have a police officer tried in the court of Don’s opinion. Ms. Babbitt died because she chose to break the law and was in front of a mob that was coming for The Speaker of the House and the Vice President. You may think those things are irrelevant. But you would be wrong.

            Liked by 1 person

          15. Watch ALL of the video at the time. Listen to the communications between the officers scattered throughout the Capitol . The mob was every where. When one small head sticks its way through a broken window in the middle of a riot, there police have a duty to protect their charges. They have no idea if that head is attached to a gun. Especially when you consider ALL of the violence that occurred that day.

            Ms. Babbitt was the victim of her poor choices. If she had not been on the front line of those advancing on the House Chamber, she would not have been shot. Maybe the four bodies behind her should have NOT pushed her to the fore.

            Liked by 1 person

          16. What was on the radio was irrelevant. What was happening elsewhere was irrelevant. There had been no shots fired anywhere, so there was no reason to presume she had a gun, You can’t shoot based on your suspicions.

            The only thing that mattered in the offer’s shoot-no-shoot decision was what was in front of him. Was she an immediate threat or not? If not, then he was not justified. If he was influenced by fear of what was happening elsewhere then that elevates it from manslaughter to 2nd degree murder.


          17. “What was on the radio was irrelevant. ”

            Bullshit. The entire building was under siege. THere were tiores throughout chaing cops ad breaking in doors.

            Let me ask you this. If you hear someone breaking in your font door, would you wait and see if that “little blonde head” was armed, or would you shoot first and ask questions later?

            Yeah. Time to shoot the mailman.


          18. “. THere were tiores throughout chaing cops ad breaking in doors.”

            That should have read “There were rioters throughout chasing cops and breaking in doors.”


          19. “No, I saw a petite blonde with maybe 3 or 4 guys with her shot down right in front of other armed Capitol police.”

            Well, I saw a group of insurrectionist bashing down the last barricade between themselves and the people they were out to harm. I saw a policeman behind that barricade with his weapon drawn warning people to cease and desist. I saw the barricade give way and Babbitt leading a charge of an unknown number of thugs climbing through. I saw a policeman doing his duty. And, if he had let them pass without further action MAGA shitheads would be arguing that they were being welcomed into the Capitol and had no idea they were committing crimes.

            Your calling this “murder,” calling this policeman “trigger happy,” and eager to kill is beyond despicable. And doubly so since you have found ways to excuse every single instance when a black man or boy was gunned down by police. It is always THEIR fault because they did not obey lawful police instructions quick enough. But Ashli Babbitt was “murdered.” You do not think of yourself as a racist. Maybe you should re-think? There could not be a more vivid example of white privilege than the double standard you exhibit on this tragedy caused by Donald Trump.

            Liked by 1 person

          20. Go back then and look at the video just released and not the cut and paste job by the Committee. There were three or four mostly elderly men with her, with three or more armed Capitol police alongside.

            There was no large mob there, Maybe someplace else, but not with her.

            Those Capitol police were on her quick enough after the shooting to push away the doctor trying to save her while the blood was still spurting from her neck.

            Maybe someplace else there was threat, but not there.

            That makes in murder, whether the corrupt DC prosecutors will do anything about it or not.


          21. …”whether the corrupt DC prosecutors ”

            Prove that the DC Prosecutors are corrupt. Go ahead. Provide evidence of corruption by that office. Your opinion is not proof, no matter how many times you attempt that.

            Liked by 1 person

  2. “Go back then and look at the video . . .”
    I have seen the video several times. Yes, there were armed police on the outside of the barrier urging people cease and desist. They seemed at a loss as to what to do and were milling about and doing little to control the aggressors.

    But the RELEVANT facts are clear.

    1. The crowd was bashing at the glass barricade of the last door before the inner sanctum.
    2. A policeman on the far side had his gun drawn telling them to stop.
    3. The barricade gave way.
    4. Babbitt jumped through the barricade.
    5. The policeman pulled the trigger
    6. Babbitt was hit and fatally injured.
    7. The mob stopped pressing to get past that point.

    You say the shooting was “murder” because there was no threat. Bullshit. Obvious bullshit. Babbitt’s height nor the ages of the thugs is not relevant to the threat – they were the spearhead of a mob.

    The double standard you are exhibiting is both laughable and telling. Police are always to be obeyed or else has been you standard until now. What is different? You are someone who strongly supports the “Stand your ground” body of law which authorizes deadly force against tresspassers but you call this defense of the Capitol against violent rioters “murder.” What is different?

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s