4 ms·
I'll summarize the article: Ashli Babbit, the Trump supporter shot by Capitol police. Kevin Greeson, the Trump supporter that died of a heart attack due to na
by jevoten 3y ago
I'll summarize the article:
Ashli Babbit, the Trump supporter shot by Capitol police.
Kevin Greeson, the Trump supporter that died of a heart attack due to natural causes during Jan 6.
Rosanne Boyland, the Trump supporter that "appeared to have been crushed in a stampede of fellow rioters" (more accurately, was claimed to have been crushed, by prosecutors), actually died due to an amphetamine overdose. No crushing/trampling injuries are mentioned.
Benjamin Philips, the founder of a pro-Trump website called Trumparoo, died of a stroke.
Officer Brian D. Sicknick died of "multiple strokes that occurred hours after [his] confrontation with the mob. The medical examiner added, however, that “all that transpired played a role in his condition." What the NYTimes omits from this article, but is found in the NYTimes article they cite, is: "an autopsy found no evidence that Officer Sicknick had an allergic reaction to chemicals or any internal or external injuries, the medical examiner, Dr. Francisco J. Diaz, told The Washington Post"
Officer Jeffrey Smith of the Metropolitan Police Department killed himself after the attack.
Officer Howard S. Liebengood of the Capitol Police also died by suicide four days afterward.
So precisely zero deaths caused by the Jan 6 rioters. Keep this in mind when you see the riot called "deadly". https://www.city-journal.org/insurrections-and-double-standards https://www.city-journal.org/insurrections-and-double-standa... covers the hypocrisy in greater detail.
- felixgallo 3y agoman it's fun to minimize stuff, isn't it? Here, watch this and then soberly reflect whether or not you think violence occurred. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmtL27dqz6w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmtL27dqz6w
- jevoten 3y agoI already thought violence occurred before seeing that video. I even thought the shooting of Babbitt was justified - a trespasser ignoring warnings and directions to leave can generally be assumed to be a threat. What I was responding to is the frequent, deceitful, and hypocritical characterization of the riot as "deadly". Correcting willful lies about something, correcting its severity downwards, is not equivalent to saying it was good or peaceful. But it's a common tactic of people trying to demonize something - any claim of "it wasn't that bad" is met with "oh so you think it was good??" It's a basic false binary. To answer your question, no, it's not fun. But when minimizing stuff brings it closer to the truth, it is necessary.
- felixgallo 3y agoI guess I don't understand how a bunch of dead people resulting from the insurrection can be classified as anything other than dead. In what way do they not count? Does it excuse anything or make it ok if we parsed 'deadly' so narrowly as to not include the suicides and strokes? Fundamentally you & yours don't want to say 'deadly' because it sounds bad. Guess what, it is! You own that.
- jevoten 3y agoUsing "deadly" so broadly that a heart-attack at a water-park makes the water-park "deadly", makes the term lose all meaning. Of course this wordplay is not applied evenly to all movements.
- felixgallo 3y agoPlease describe how a water park is like an armed insurrection that breaches the capitol, assaults cops and drives some to suicide.
- jevoten 3y agoIn the way it causes deaths. I.e. not at all. Attributing suicides to the riot is especially strained.