I have previously written about the dubious investigations of the shooting of Ashli Babbitt on Jan. 6th and the alleged violation of the standards for the use of lethal force by the officer who shot her. I strongly disagreed with the findings of investigations by the Capitol Police and the Justice Department in clearing Captain Michael Byrd, who shot the unarmed protester. Now, Just the News has an alarming report of the record of Byrd that only magnifies these concerns.
Liberal politicians and pundits often refer to multiple deaths from the Jan. 6th riot. In reality, only one person died that day, and that was Babbitt, who was shot while trying to climb through a window. However, the media lionized Byrd and portrayed the killing of the unarmed Babbitt as clearly justified. That is in sharp contrast to the approach that the media has taken in other shootings by law enforcement.
An unjustified killing by police on that day was inconsistent with the public narrative pushed by the pundits and the press.
As I have previously written, what occurred on Jan. 6th was a disgrace. However, it was a riot, not an insurrection. (It was certainly not an act of terrorism as claimed by some Democratic politicians). A protest at the Capitol resulted in a complete breakdown of the inadequate security precautions, a failure that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi privately admitted but only recently was disclosed.
The failure of Pelosi and others to properly prepare for the protest, despite the offer of President Donald Trump of 10,000 National Guard troops, does not excuse the conduct of the rioters who attacked the Capitol, interrupted the constitutional process, and committed property damage.
Babbitt was one of those rioters. She was wrong in her actions, but the penalty for breaking a window and unauthorized entry is not death in this country. I previously spoke with her mother, Micki Witthoeft, and her husband, Aaron Babbitt, about their continuing effort to expose what occurred that day.
The new report confirms what many of us had previously heard about the Byrd controversy.
Babbitt, 35, was an Air Force veteran and Trump supporter who participated in the riot three years ago. She was clearly committing criminal acts of trespass, property damage, and other offenses. However, the question is whether an officer is justified in shooting a protester when he admits that he did not see any weapon before discharging his weapon.
Just to recap what we previously discussed in the earlier column:
When protesters rushed to the House chamber, police barricaded the chamber’s doors; Capitol Police were on both sides, with officers standing directly behind Babbitt. Babbitt and others began to force their way through, and Babbitt started to climb through a broken window. That is when Byrd killed her.
At the time, some of us familiar with the rules governing police use of force raised concerns over the shooting. Those concerns were heightened by the DOJ’s bizarre review and report, which stated the governing standards but then seemed to brush them aside to clear Byrd.
The DOJ report did not read like any post-shooting review I have read as a criminal defense attorney or law professor. The DOJ statement notably does not say that the shooting was justified. Instead, it stressed that “prosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so ‘willfully.’” It seemed simply to shrug and say that the DOJ did not believe it could prove “a bad purpose to disregard the law” and that “evidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent.”
While the Supreme Court, in cases such as Graham v. Connor, has said that courts must consider “the facts and circumstances of each particular case,” it has emphasized that lethal force must be used only against someone who is “an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and … is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.” Particularly with armed assailants, the standard governing “imminent harm” recognizes that these decisions must often be made in the most chaotic and brief encounters.
Under these standards, police officers should not shoot unarmed suspects or rioters without a clear threat to themselves or fellow officers. That even applies to armed suspects who fail to obey orders. Indeed, Huntsville police officer William “Ben” Darby was convicted of killing a suicidal man holding a gun to his head. Despite being cleared by a police review board, Darby was prosecuted, found guilty, and sentenced to 25 years in prison, even though Darby said he feared for the safety of himself and fellow officers. Yet law professors and experts who have praised such prosecutions in the past have been conspicuously silent over the shooting of an unarmed woman who had officers in front of and behind her on Jan. 6.
Byrd went public soon after the Capitol Police declared that “no further action will be taken” in the case. He then demolished the two official reviews that cleared him.
Byrd described how he was “trapped” with other officers as “the chants got louder” with what “sounded like hundreds of people outside of that door.” He said he yelled for all of the protesters to stop: “I tried to wait as long as I could. I hoped and prayed no one tried to enter through those doors. But their failure to comply required me to take the appropriate action to save the lives of members of Congress and myself and my fellow officers.”
Byrd could just as well have hit the officers behind Babbitt, who was shot while struggling to squeeze through the window.
Of all of the lines from Byrd, this one stands out: “I could not fully see her hands or what was in the backpack or what the intentions are.” So, Byrd admitted he did not see a weapon or an immediate threat from Babbitt beyond her trying to enter through the window. Nevertheless, Byrd boasted, “I know that day I saved countless lives.” He ignored that Babbitt was the one person killed during the riot. (Two protesters died of natural causes and a third from an amphetamine overdose; one police officer died the next day from natural causes, and four officers have committed suicide since then.) No other officers facing similar threats shot anyone in any other part of the Capitol, even those who were attacked by rioters armed with clubs or other objects.
The new report confirms prior accounts that Byrd had prior disciplinary and training issues. According to Just the News, they included “a failed shotgun qualification test, a failed FBI background check for a weapon’s purchase, a 33-day suspension for a lost weapon and referral to Maryland state prosecutors for firing his gun at a stolen car fleeing his neighborhood.”
Given this history and the shooting of Babbitt, Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., the chair of the House Administration Oversight Subcommittee investigation, wrote to express concern over Byrd’s promotion to captain. Those incidents included Byrd firing at a car and allegedly misrepresenting the incident in claiming that “he fired at a vehicle trying to strike him when the evidence fellow officers found at the scene indicated he shot at the vehicle after it had already passed him and no longer posed a threat.” The letter states the Office of Professional Responsibility found that the evidence did not support his claim and “OPR concluded that the evidence suggests Byrd ‘discharged his service weapon at the vans after they passed him by.’”
The concern is that the political environment — and powerful interests in Congress — demanded that Byrd be cleared. As discussed in my new book, “The Indispensable Right,” the Justice Department had publicly pledged to bring “shock and awe” in prosecuting anyone associated with the riot. Finding that the only person killed that day was an unjustified shooting would not exactly fit with the narrative.
The incidents also include allegations of improper handling of his weapon, including reports that Byrd left his service weapon in a public bathroom in the Capitol Visitor Center complex used by tourists and visitors.
The Babbitt family has continued to fight to force the facts into the open and has filed a civil case. A trial is now set for 2026.
Here is his letter detailing the disciplinary problems of Captain Byrd:
11.20.2024 Letter From Rep. Barry Loudermilk to USCP Chief of Police Manger.pdf
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
I don’t like the way people are, so I would like to see them all nuked.
If you can make a fist and punch someone in the face, breaking their nose, then you are not unarmed.
So George Floyd was justified?
“If you can make a fist and punch someone in the face, breaking their nose, then you are not unarmed.”
If you’re in touching distance of Ashley Babbitt when both of her hands are on the sides of the door frame she’s crawling through, you can make a fist and punch her in the face to break her nose to stop her entry, rather than murdering her with your gun to stop the threat.
Here is all I need to know about this case.
Ashli Babbitt was shot while crawling through a window inside the Capitol Building after trump gave a speech calling for his acolytes to “fight like hell”. She was shot while people in the background were chanting “hang mike pence”.
This was an active insurrection. The fact that every single person that broke into the Capitol building wasn’t shot on site is a blessing they should think about the rest of their lives. They took part in an insurrection, failed, and lived to tell about it. That doesn’t happen very often.
Face reality, be thankful you are alive, and don’t do it again.
Yet not one single charge of insurrection.
Enjoy your alternate reality ya spastic moron.
Insurrection – an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.
Why were they protesting? What was their intent on breaking into the Capitol Building? To keep the person that had just lost an election in power. That is the definition of insurrection. You can believe anything you want. The FACTS and yes they are facts, stand for themselves.
Those involved were actively resisting civil authority and undermining an established government. This resistance was manifested through actions aimed at disrupting official proceedings. In addition to these actions, charges of sedition were also applicable to their conduct.
All true.
So what, ya spastic?
Oooooooh resisting civil authority…our longstanding tradition, remember, dipshit?
Shall i paste the link to your comment?
Disrupting proceedings….oooooooh thats never been done before either.
LMAO at your pinheaded twisting and twirling.
It’s nice that you can admit it was an insurrection.
Its sad that you read that. Reading comprehension seems to be an issue for you.
Do better, spastic.
It’s nice that you can admit it was an insurrection.
It’s predictable that every time you post here, you prove that you’re a hypocritical lying Democrat cull.
Those involved were actively resisting civil authority and undermining an established government.
Like the MONTHS of your fellow Democrats rioting and pillaging their way across America, attempting to murder police officers with weapons like Molotov Cocktails. Assaults on government buildings such as police and court buildings, torching some? 540+ organized riots… sounds like insurrection and sedition!
The day long assault on the White House with Trump and his family inside a few months earlier, that the Democrat Memory Hole claims never happened?
Same thing, George, you curious communist monkey? Charges of sedition also apply?
How about the protesters/rioters who forced their way into the Senate to disrupt the Justice Kavanaugh confirmation hearings?
Actively resisting civil authority? Sedition?
How about it George, you cheap fake American communist.
“To keep him in power.”
Do you even listen to yourself??
Shitting on Pelosi’s desk would somehow keep Trump in power??
Stopping the vote count would have somehow kept Trump in power.
Listen to yourself.
You sound like a psychopath.
How many people actually “broke in”?
Beahahahahabaa
Yet NOT ONE SINGLE CHARGE
Then certainly there would be
Why does this read like a 1st grader wrote it?
Oh that’s right, This person is probably a trump supporter and has an IQ sub 70.
Just read how they demean people with those 5 year old taunts, just like the cult master. Such intellegence.
Insurrection – an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government… What was their intent on breaking into the Capitol Building?
And the insurrection that was the day long assault on the White House a few months earlier? What was their intent on getting into the White House where Trump and his family were? To take selfies with Trump? Or to murder the president they hated. You can believe they just wanted a selfie with Trump and his family, of course.
The insurrection of the criminal Democrat rioting for months across the country, burning police stations with police inside, attempting to burn court houses, occupying federal buildings. Not a single one of you filthy Democrats was howling “insurrection” when any of it happened. Then it was “mostly peaceful protests.
Tell us about facts and how they demonstrate how lying Anonymous Democrat cowards decide that when they riot and murder for months across a country it isn’t insurrection – but a three hour riot without weapons like Molotov Cocktails thrown at police is an insurrection.
GFY, statist POS. I hope you die slowly, in writhing agony.
“Here is all I need to know about this case… trump gave a speech calling for his acolytes to “fight like hell”.”
Not much different than what Schumer, Obama, etc have said to their supporters multiple times before Trump said that. Furthermore, this murdering cop didn’t hear a word Trump said at that protest far in the distance. Just as Trump didn’t hear a word said by the rioters in the building. And Trump said much more than that – that you hope nobody here remembers.
Predictable that an Anonymous supporter of the Democrats street thugs in BLM and Antifa didn’t want to mention Trump also said “peacefully protest” at that rally.
You don’t want to believe your lying eyes that Trump said that. And you hope that those reading your post will also not believe their lying eyes telling them that Trump said peacefully protest.
The fact that every single person that broke into the Capitol building wasn’t shot on site is a blessing they should think about the rest of their lives. They took part in an insurrection
Wouldn’t it have been great if every single Democrat street thug in Black Liars & Marxists and Antifa who were attacking police during the Election Season Mostly Peaceful Insurrection Of Rioting, Pillaging, Burning And Murder had been shot dead on the spot – just like Babbitt was?
Or at least, every single criminal Democrat thug shot dead during the act of throwing a Molotov Cocktail or similar object capable of inflicting death or grievous harm.
540+ deadly riots staged by Democrats across the nation during the 2020 election season. 30+ innocent people murdered, some were police officers.
And not a single Molotov Cocktail throwing Democrat criminal rioter shot dead. Police could have been stacking bodies by the hundreds… except the rioting would have quickly stopped after a zero tolerance for attempting lethal violence against police were carried out.
Equal justice for all, or just Democrat justice for Babbitt?
This is why you cowards post Anonymously.
Unfortunately, the statue limitations for murder is quite long. Trump’s AG could prosecute And should prosecute
Why “un”fortunately?
“Trump’s AG could prosecute And should prosecute”
Absolutely. And for this cowardly @-hole Byrd, who had the colossal gall to describe his own slinking out from behind cover to murder an unarmed trespasser who was unaware of his presence, as “courageous”, I would go PPV to see him drawn and quartered in front of the Capital building. Regretfully, I must admit that would probably violate his 8th A rights, so I’d settle to watch him fry.
Having done the job for a while, I can say unequivocally that the use of deadly force in this situation has never been taught or trained in any LE agency. In fact, every LE agency I have ever interfaced with, would tell you that there were at least 10 blatant and obvious “don’t shoot” criteria in this event. The DOJ and Capitol PD cover-up in this shooting is criminal.
You should also know that every police department has their own policy regarding the use of deadly force. Capitol police policy was not violated. I’m sure you are aware that policies are not the same throughout the country or departments.
Cite the capital police policy or admit you are making shit up again, Svelaz
Making what up? Every police department has its own policy regarding deadly force. Are you claiming that is not true?
“Making what up?”
LMAO
“Capitol police policy was not violated”
^^^^This you fvcking moron. Wowsa, are you a 3rd grader?
Every police department has its own policy regarding deadly force. Are you claiming that is not true?
George, you insist we believe your claims that the Capitol Police policy regarding deadly force on J6 was completely different than what it was just months earlier when your fellow Democrat thugs assaulted the White House, attempting to kill Capitol Police and Secret Service with Molotov Cocktails and other deadly weapons?
You’re here to assure us the Capitol Police policy changed, and that’s why those thugs wounded 50+ Capitol Police and Secret Service – and not a single heroic Capitol Police officer like this murderous cop heroically shot a single one of them?
You’re such a cheap fake Marxist Monkey, and you can’t use your poor reading comprehension skills and inability to understand nuance and context as an excuse.
You should break a beer bottle off at the neck, and fornicate your own bunghole with it.
You should also know that every police department has their own policy regarding the use of deadly force.
George wants to tell us that the Capitol Police, who Democrat thugs in Black Liars & Marxists and Antifa attempted to murder with Molotov Cocktails while they were assaulting the White House, had a DIFFERENT policy for use of force than they had a couple of months later on J6 when this coward murdered Babbitt.
George, as always, is a liar.
50+ Capitol Police and Secret Service wounded repelling the day long assault by Democrat rioters taken to hospital – and not a single one of those murderous Democrat thugs was shot by the Capitol Police or Secret Service they were attempting to murder. Because “it was mostly peaceful protest”?
George reeks of the stench of communist hypocrisy, lies and false moral equivalencies as he drops his daily deuces here.
50 Secret Service agents wounded in White House riots as Donald Trump is taken to ‘terror attack’ bunker
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11752998/trump-secure-bunker-friday-george-floyd-protests-white-house/
Capitol police policy was not violated.
This is the updated policy from 2022. Now to prove your statement true, provide the policy at the time of the incident showing Byrd did not violate it. (hint: we know you cannot.) In fact, find the Deadly Force policy for ANY law enforcement entity in this country that would show Byrd’s shooting would have been justified. Instead, you’re going to act as an apologist for law enforcement’s unauthorized use of deadly force. You are a POS.
Ashli Babbitt was attempting to climb through a narrow window of a locked door. She was wearing a backpack, with no visible sign of a weapon. There was law enforcement personnel on her side of the door observing her actions. There were at least two law enforcement officers on the other side of the door trained to deescalate a situation and apprehend unarmed suspects. Not even Barney Fife would have chosen to pull the round out of his pocket to fire on this suspect. And yet Byrd chose to fire his weapon to kill an unarmed woman.
Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
https://www.justice.gov/d9/pages/attachments/2022/05/23/departments_updated_use-of-force_policy.pdf
The spotlight on Ashley Babbit is just a clever diversion from Trump’s disastrous choices for Attorney General and Secretary of Defense! These picks are nothing short of a nightmare for Republicans and raise serious concerns. If Turley’s sharp criticism of Hunter Biden’s shady dealings with sex and drugs serves as any clue, this should be a glaring red flag.
This Babbit distration from Turley allows Trump supporters to deflect attention from his poor choices. House Speaker Johnson broke his promise of accountability and transparency by trying to block the House investigation report on Gaetz, which was set for release just before Gaetz resigned. There is credible evidence that Rep. Gaetz had sex with a minor and paid for it. It’s astonishing that Turley remains silent on this subject, especially when he criticized Biden’s son, a private citizen, in a similar context. Gaetz, as a public official should be getting the same treatment from Turley, what gives?
Maybe Matt Gaetz is the only person capable of exposing this criminal conspiracy to protect Michael Byrd from the facts in this case.
So, in other words, one criminal is qualified to judge another.
I believe the moral is that YOU, devoid of facts, are unfit to judge anyone.
Facts are Gaetz is accused of having sex with a minor which makes it a crime. He’s also accussed of buying drugs, also a crime. Facts point to Gaetz being a criminal. Reports of venmo payments seem to confirm it. So it’s credible to assume Gaetz is indeed a criminal.
The fact is you didnt say he was accused of it. You said he did it, as a statement of fact. Shall i wiote and link to your post from 10 minutes ago?
As I said, you dont know what the facts are. You only know what the allegations are.
Typical libturd Svelaz stating opinion as fact or even just making up “facts” out of thin air like “the capital police policy was bot violated”.
“ The fact is you didnt say he was accused of it.”
“ Facts are Gaetz is accused of having sex with a minor which makes it a crime. He’s also accused of buying drugs, also a crime.”
It is a statement of fact. He is accused of having sex with a minor, buying drugs, and sex trafficking.
I didn’t say he did it. Where did I say he did it? Point out exactly where I said he did it. Where are the words “He did it”?
Reading comprehension problems as usual anonymous?
It is a statement of fact. He is accused of having sex with a minor, buying drugs, and sex trafficking.
Is George referring to First Son Hunter and his Daddy who gave him money to purchase sex with underage Russian hookers, buy and distribute drugs, and sex traffic women across state borders.
No way George would apply the same standards to a Biden!!!!
Venmo payments dont prove a goddam thing, unless Gaetz wrote on it, “for sex with you when you were 17”
Get a grip dude. This is grade school shit.
I have paid for boob jobs, LASIC, rhinoplasty, nail appts, waxing appts, food runs, mifepristone, plan B, a cat, a dog, and MANY other things by venmo and credit card, both for women i was fvcking and those I was not, ya douchebag. Doesnt prove I paid them for sex or that I even had sex with them.
LMAO at your simpleton arguments.
Facts are Gaetz is accused of having sex with a minor which makes it a crime.
Facts are Biden is accused of rape by a woman who had numerous contemporaneous witnesses supporting her sworn statement from that day. Any comment?
Facts are Biden is accused of molesting his teenage daughter in her diary by way of “inappropriate showers”. Crimes of incest or child abuse? Any comment?
Facts are FBI agents who perjured themselves to FISA courts said Obama knew of and directed all aspects of their “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation. Seems criminal! Any comment?
And let’s not get into Biden White House Crime LLC, that began years before Trump came on the scene to use as your excuse.
Is it credible to assume you were happy to support and defend Obama and Biden despite the in your face evidence of their crimes?
A simple “Yes” will suffice, you contemptible commie monkey.
So, in other words, one criminal is qualified to judge another.
There’s George bragging that Obama’s criminal Attorney Generals and FBI Directors that committed serial felonies to get their illegal spy warrants were qualified to investigate every single person they used those illegal spy warrants to violate their civil rights in hopes of finding criminality.
And Obama and Biden as accessories both before and after the fact, who directed them to commit those felonies are qualified to use them as their personal STASI.
People aren’t criminals because you say they are, George. We know that – this is just to remind you of that. Even Biden isn’t a criminal until tried and convicted – even though his own hand picked DoJ Special Counsel said he would not indict his boss, despite decades of serial felonies while in office.
What a spastic communist monkey you are, George.
Did you notice his picks have a long history of sexual abuse? I wonder why trump loves sexual abusers so much?
Sexual abuser ^^^^^
Also having trouble cooing with the election results.
Did you notice his picks have a long history of sexual abuse? I wonder why trump loves sexual abusers so much?
Did you notice cowardly Anonymous Democrats voted twice for Clinton despite the long list of women who accused him of rape and sexual abuse, both as governor and as president?
Did you notice that first the Clintons, and then the Obamas, had an open door policy for eight years for Harvey Weinstein? Despite the fact their Secret Service close protection detail warning them that their best friend Harv was a serial rapist and pedophile that they would be allowing to be around their young daughters?
Did you notice Democrats loved that serial rapist and pedophile Harv so much they begged him to give one of their daughters an internship working… under him”
Did you notice Obama then picked Biden for his vice president, despite his well known history in Washington DC for fondling women and the allegations he raped one of his young aids?
Did you notice Obama didn’t tell Biden to get a grip on his drug addict equally sexually perverted son whose drug use and sex trafficking he was funding?
I wonder why cowardly Anonymous Democrats only get interested in sexual abuse when they can throw an allegation at a Republican. While they vote and support for a long list of Democrat racists and perverts like Clinton, Weiner, Obama, and Biden?
And I wonder why the same cowardly Anonymous Democrats just LOVE voting to put Democrat rapists, pedophiles, and sexual abusers in office?
“Rep. Gaetz had sex with a minor and paid for it.”
So what??
Her age is a technicality. They both got what they wanted in a consensual transaction. Knock it off with the faux outrage.
Naw, its a distraction from Joe Biden raping Tara Reade in the halls of Congress. Makes as much sense as your gibberish. Spastic idiot.
Technicality? So you support congressmen having sex with minors.
LMAO i have the same standards for them as i do my water meter reader. Nice try, idiot.
George: So you support congressmen having sex with minors.
Here’s George confirming he supports Biden raping a young intern. And George doubling down to confirm he also supports Biden then repeatedly committing incest and child abuse of his teenage daughter. Not to be confused with George endorsing first the Clintons and then the Obamas when in the White House allowing a serial rapist and pedophile, Harvey Weinstein having access to their young daughters.
Not to be confused with George confirming that before that, he enthusiastically voted twice for the first president to rape women both outside of the White House, and then in the Oval Office: President Blow Job Bill Clinton.
George is so clever by half! And he can’t use the excuse of his abjectly poor reading comprehension and inability to understand context and nuance as the excuse for his malfeasance.
George comes here to drop his daily deuces. We take the time to mock him and call him out as the lying, dissembling hypocritical miscreant that he is.
Her age is a technicality? So the law is a mere technicality. You’re defending the indefensible.
lOL yea, sux, dont it. Sound familiar?
Apparently anonymous is ok with congressmen who commit statutory rape qualify for Attorney General of the U.S.
Apparently anonymous is ok with congressmen who commit statutory rape qualify for Attorney General of the U.S.
George is so 100% okay with rapist vice presidents/presidents like Biden committing statutory rape/incest/child abuse with his own daughter that he endorsed that by voting for Biden every time he was on the ticket.
Well done George! You sure showed the community here just how concerned you are with sexual deviants, rapists, and pedophiles by voting for and supporting them ever since Clinton became the first president committing rape both before entering the White House, and then continuing to rape while in the White House.
“. . . just a clever diversion . . .”
Nice ad hominem (and smear).
Pick a new trick, one-trick pony.
Babbitt getting shot was four years ago. What’s the point of bringing this back? Gaetz being accused of having sex with a minor, sex trafficking, and drugs, and being considered for the AG position is not important. Turley wants to avoid the scandal, which is weird because he was all about scandals when he was critical of Hunter Biden’s problems.
Babbitt getting shot was four years ago. What’s the point of bringing this back?
And here’s George! The three hour long J6 riot was also four years ago. George NEVER misses an opportunity to bring that up.
While claiming that the day long assault by Democrat thugs on the White House a few months earlier is too long ago to ever mention or bring up! Or the 2020 Election Season Mostly Peaceful Insurrection!
George is such a clever communist Democrat!
The spotlight on Ashley Babbit is just a clever diversion from Trump’s disastrous choices for Attorney General and Secretary of Defense!
And here’s George, attacking our host Professor Turley, accusing him of creating a diversion. George’s day wouldn’t be complete if he didn’t come here specifically to attack the host who doesn’t charge him a penny to post his Bull Schiff every day.
It would seem that when the only other attention George gets in his life is when he gets up and looks in the mirror to coiffe his hair into a man-bun. After that, this is all he has left as an opportunity to get attention.
And now he’s whining that Secretary of Defense Loyd Austin, that magnificent AWOL Secretary of Defense as the mastermind of deserting Afghanistan to the hajjis, will be replaced by a decorated combat officer who dared to write a book focusing on the war the Biden administration has been waging with Austin’s help on the US military.
George is freaked out at a Secretary of Defense who won’t insist on teaching “White Rage” and “Tranny Woke Theory” even if it means people don’t want to enlist in a military like that.
George’s fellow commies, the ChiComs, approve of what George thinks a Secretary of Defense should be.
The War on Warriors: Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free
https://www.amazon.com/War-Warriors-Behind-Betrayal-Keep/dp/0063389428
The “willful” standard applies to a deprivation of rights charge. No statement has been made about whether Biden’s DoJ considered a federal homicide charge with a lower mens rea requirement. Trump’s DoJ should reopen the case and do so.
The suicides of four police officers need greater attention. What is the nature of the pressure put on them that they chose to end their own life? And who supplied the pressure?
” What is the nature of the pressure put on them that they chose to end their own life? ”
Maybe they were the cops who planted the pipe bombs.
Many experienced law enforcement officers have opined that Byrd was wrong to shoot Babbitt. It definitely was not murder one or murder two but reckless endangerment and manslaughter.. The justifications by the Capitol Police, the FBI, Metropolitan Police, and Department of Justice are incorrect and wrong on their face. Byrd’s own statements are harmful to his defense which at best would be panic and fearful response. Those go to the recklessness of a trained police officer who in the midst of battle loses his wits. It does not forgive him or defend him against a manslaughter charge. Hopefully, a new investigation will produce a proper prosecution. Murder has no statute of limitations and so this matter needs to be tried on this “new” evidence in a court of law, free of political entanglements. Babbitt deserves this from the country she served.
“ Byrd’s own statements are harmful to his defense, which at best would be a panicked and fearful response.”
So Philando Castile’s shooter should have been charged because he was “afraid” of losing his life, right? There have been plenty of police officers using the justification for shooting someone for being fearful or panicky. Qualified immunity has saved many cops when they have invoked ‘fear of harm’ or panicked out of fear.
There is no “new” evidence. Byrd has already been cleared of any wrongdoing.
There is no “new” evidence. Byrd has already been cleared of any wrongdoing.
Democrats cleared Byrd of wrongdoing – same ones who for weeks said their officer who died from an aneurism was murdered by being struck in the head with a blunt object. That only changed when the autopsy report was pried from their lying hands by Republicans.
Oh wait! The official Democrat Memory Hole is supposed to erase those facts so they aren’t seen by our lying eyes!
George is such a clever dissembling lying communist cull.
“It definitely was not murder one or murder two but reckless endangerment and manslaughter.”
It appears that Byrd lurked under cover, patiently waiting for an opportunity to shoot an unarmed protestor who was, at the time of the shooting, a demonstrable threat to no one, including himself, for the prospect of basking in glory and praise for “defending the House of Representatives”. Is that not arguably premeditation? What is the logic behind your conclusion that Byrd is not guilty of murder? I can guarantee you that other defendants have been charged, indicted, and convicted of murder on less evidence. Do you deny that claim?
Better watch out….they will start calling you racist!
so when do Republicans BRING Back the Rule of Law
By the way can write about how Hate Crime Laws are completely unconstitutional ….protecting some groups more than others? If I am killed…should my race, religion or sexual preference….really determine how long someone goes to jail?
The House and new Trump DOJ should and most likely will reopen the shooting by Byrd, as they investigate the J6 Kangaroo court. If Byrd is found at fault, careless etc he should face punishment. The J6 Committee, Cheney and her band of puppets should also face a complete review and if they violated laws or found to be a rubber stamp to find Trump and his allies guilty then they should be punished under the law.
Turley seems to overlook a critical element of police conduct in high-stress situations: the unfortunate reality that officers have historically used deadly force against unarmed individuals who did not comply with their commands. This has been a recurring theme where Republicans and conservatives often assert, “If you don’t want to get shot, obey the cop’s commands.” This rhetoric suggests a clear expectation for individuals to comply without question, but it raises significant moral and ethical concerns regarding law enforcement practices.
In his analysis, Turley acknowledges that Ashli Babbitt engaged in criminal activity and was actively participating in a riot. However, he fails to think highly of the complexity of the situation faced by Officer Byrd. Byrd’s responsibility was to safeguard the members of Congress, establishing a protective barrier as a last defense against the rioters who were attempting to breach it. Turley also neglects to emphasize that Babbitt did not heed Byrd’s commands to stop, creating a scenario where Byrd had to make an immediate judgment call. In such high-pressure circumstances, Byrd’s decision to use force was justified, aligning with the rationale provided for any officer required to make split-second decisions in the line of duty and according to department policy.
Furthermore, Turley’s odd trend of questioning the investigation’s findings appears to be driven more by an agenda than a pursuit of truth. His comments seem to cater to an audience craving conspiracy theories, as they distort facts and selectively interpret events to provoke a reaction from his MAGA readership. It raises the suspicion that this renewed focus on the Babbitt case is merely a strategy to divert attention from ongoing controversies surrounding figures like Matt Gaetz and Peter Hegseth—individuals mired in their scandals. Turley’s reluctance to critique these political figures, particularly when one has ties to Fox News and is accused of committing sex assault crimes and the other faces grave allegations of misconduct involving sex with a minor, sex trafficking, and drugs, stands in stark contrast to his previous, vocal scrutiny of issues, such as those involving Hunter Biden.
Interestingly, even among Trump’s evangelical supporters, there is a notable silence regarding these matters, which starkly reveals their hypocrisy. This silence is telling, reflecting a selective outrage that undermines their claimed values and principles. The juxtaposition of their lack of response to serious allegations against prominent Republican figures compared to their vigorous criticism of others in the political landscape raises questions about their integrity and consistency as supporters of moral standards.
George: Please stick to things you know something about. Your sophomoric analysis is meritless on the facts and the laws involved. High on assumptions, misperception, and bogus inferences as to what happened and why. Go back to bed.
JJC,
Thank you.
JJC, in other words, you are saying that you lack an argument. Ironically, this issue has suddenly gained attention, largely when hundreds of police officers are cleared of any wrongdoing each year for actions taken while dealing with unarmed civilians or individuals who fail to follow commands. These situations are often defended by Republicans, who emphasize the risks that police face in their line of work.
Turley isn’t providing a genuine legal analysis of the incident, as even he cannot prove that the shooting was unjustified. He concedes that Babbitt was committing a crime at the time. Many people fail to grasp that, in scenarios like this, the Capitol Police or even the Secret Service are prepared to use deadly force to prevent rioters from breaching secure areas. It’s not their responsibility to weigh the justification; they will act decisively if they believe that someone ignoring orders poses a danger to those they are sworn to protect. That’s simply a part of their duty. Babbitt made a reckless choice by continuing to push her way into a secured area despite repeated commands to stop and she paid dearly for it.
Turley is only bringing this issue up to create a distration.
It was a failed insurrection. They all should have been hung for treason. Including trump.
“It was a failed insurrection. They all should have been hung for treason. Including trump.”
And don’t give me that junk that every one of the Democrat rioters during the failed 2020 election season insurrection across the United States should have been hung. With Senator Harris and former VP Harris hung right beside them for encouraging and supporting their insurrection.
Dear George: You are so misinformed I hestitated a moment thinking that a response would be worthless. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1985 decided that a police officer may not use deadly force unless “the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.” Byrd did not have probable cause to believe that an unarmed woman climbing through a broken window of a door in the Capitol posed sush a danger to him or anyone else. Yes, you and Byrd can fanticize an unlimited number of “what ifs,” but they do not amount to probable cause which is a well developed legal concept requiring officers to have a reasonable belief that the action taken is justified by the facts and behaviors of the person being confronted. Your broadbrush statement that “hundreds of police officers are cleared of any wrongdoing each year for actions taken while dealing with unarmed civilians,” belies your bias and undermines whatever credibility one might attribute to your tainted analysis. This matter is worthy of investigation and resolution in a court of law, not some political backroom. It is not a distraction. Most of us can keep at least two thoughts in our head at once.
jjc,
“ Byrd did not have probable cause to believe that an unarmed woman climbing through a broken window of a door in the Capitol posed sush a danger to him or anyone else.”
He had probable cause. He was in the middle of a riot. Rioters were changing death threats and assaulting police officers, committing violence, and forcing their way into secure areas. Babbitt was shot because she was in the process of breaching a secure location while ignoring commands to stop. There was plenty of probable cause. Whether she was armed or not, Byrd did not have the luxury to wait and find out. He had to make a split-second decision like any other cop who has found themselves in similar situations. They did what they were trained to do and did not violate policy. It was Babbitt’s fault for choosing to do the dumbest thing possible then, breaching a secure perimeter during a riot while a gun was pointed at her.
He had probable cause. He was in the middle of a riot. Rioters were changing death threats and assaulting police officers,
By George’s standard, every police officer that rioting Democrats threw Molotov Cocktails and other deadly weapons at then had probably cause to shoot and kill every single one of them.
Whether during the day long insurrection where Democrat street thugs assaulted the White House a couple of months before J6, wounding 50+ officers to the point they had to be transported to hospital.
Or during the 2020 Election Season Insurrection, 540+ coordinated riots across the USA, with Democrat thugs rioted and threw Molotov Cocktails and used other deadly weapons against police.
Not a single police officer said “Hey! We have probable cause to gun them down!”
Not a single Democrat street thug using deadly weapons in any of those insurrections was shot dead, not even by the Capitol Police when they were assaulting the White House.
George is such a clever communist!
JJC, in other words, you are saying that you lack an argument.
George is assuring us that, just like Professor Turley, JJC is another lawyer who is always wrong. While he, George, is ALWAYS right.
Every. Single. Time. Without. Exception.
And that’s why George is demanding we don’t believe our lying eyes, and instead believe his malevolent lying instead.
correct jjc, george is a windbag masquerading as a windbag.
“George: Please stick to things you know something about”
If “George” took your advice, he would post absolutely nothing here. Which would be fine and dandy. Just sayin’
Now that is funny. Thanks!
It sounds like you agree with the findings of the Capitol Police and the DOJ regarding Mr. Byrd and the death of Ashli Babbit. If so, why not just be up front and say that? I think Mr. Byrd panicked, killed an unarmed intruder and had his actions covered up by the same said Capitol Police and DOJ. There. Two points of view in three sentences. Here is hoping that Mr. Byrd’s actions are re-examined.
It sounds like you haven’t watch the video of her getting shot. This was a reckless discharge of a firearm. There were police standing right next to her on the same side of the door who could have pulled her back. Byrd could have tried to physically restrain her.
I think you know what the reaction would be if this happened with a black woman in a BLM protest.
Turley seems to overlook a critical element of police conduct in high-stress situations:
George hopes we overlook the fact he comes here every single day to say our host Professor Turley is wrong and he, George, is right.
Isn’t it amazingly consistent that this is the theme behind practically all of George’s lead-in daily deuces he drops here while desperately seeking the attention he can’t get elsewhere!
the unfortunate reality that officers have historically used deadly force against unarmed individuals who did not comply with their commands.
The deceptive reality is that race baiting Democrats like George and Obama who hate police and love their identity politics black thugs try to portray every single person shot by police without a weapon in their hand as not being a threat to that officer because they had no weapon.
The black female officer on the ground being kicked to death by a violent felon on parole who shot and killed her assailant while on her back on the ground?
Yep… you got it: “Police kill unarmed black man”. No mention that it was a black female officer and she was being kicked to death; no need to tell readers that.
Michael Brown: shot and killed charging at a police officer who he had just attempted to murder moments before as that officer sat in his car.
“Police kill unarmed man – Democrat claims victim was on his knees with his hands up in surrender, pleading for his life saying “don’t shoot”.
Normally, as in this case where Byrd murdered an unarmed Ashli Babbitt, there are legal and at least career consequences that follow when a person armed or not is killed by police without justification.
What if Ashli Babbitt had been instead one one of the black protesters/rioters that attempted an insurrection by forcing their way in to disrupt the Senate confirming Justice Kavanaugh? And then a white Capitol Police officer had shot that unarmed woman at nearly contact distance, exactly like Byrd murdered Babbitt?
That officer would be serving time beside the police who allegedly killed (instead the lethal levels of drugs and his medical condition) George Floyd.
George is so ridiculously transparent in his dissembling while dropping his daily deuces.
The Restoration will be glorious.
Having lived in two countries when successful coup d’etats occurred I’ve always laughed at the “insurrection” hyperbole. People do get shot in riots, it’s a credit to our law enforcement that we didn’t end up with 50 or 100 dead as often happens elsewhere in riots like these at the seat of government. All that said the rioters also showed restraint once they entered the capital building itself.
So, is there a conclusion on the guilt or innocence of Byrd that would you like to articulate? Or were you just compelled to drop an alleged personal anecdote?
And for our next DEI promotion we’ll go to FEMA or Office of Nuclear Energy Commission or…….
IKR! And Joe Biden with the nuclear football. I’m surprised they didn’t find the launch codes in his garage with everything else.
The D in DEI now stands for “Dementiacrat.” There’s plenty of those at the DNC.
” I’m surprised they didn’t find the launch codes in his garage with everything else.”
Probably there, just buried under as much physical clutter as the dementia debris in Biden’s brain,
I suspect that the nuclear football they let Joe have has pardons for his family instead of codes.
This report strengthens the case for Matt Gaetz to made AG.
Absolutely, we need more men to fill Cabinet positions that have paid minors for sex. And please, only men. This McMahan woman has to go. I know there are allegations of her and sex with minors with is a positive point, but her one disqualifying quality is she is a woman. Can’t have that. We only want our women for sex. Of any age. No positions of power for women please. MAGA, MASA always.
The FBI and department of Justice investigated mad catz and confirmed there was nothing there. Anyone who disagrees without analysis is confirming a complete disregard for the FBI’s investigation. In other words they’re saying that the FBI is corrupt and ineffectual
“Absolutely, we need more men to fill Cabinet positions that have paid minors for sex. And please, only men.”
Like Hunter Biden! President Biden doesn’t qualify: he got sex from his teenage daughter for free in the shower! (unless you consider providing room and board to his daughter monetary compensation).
Vote Democrat! Vote Anthony Weiner! Vote Clinton!
edwardmahl says: “This report strengthens the case for Matt Gaetz to made AG.”
While many other people as well as you would like to see that, whether you’re correct or not with him as a choice, I think Gaetz’s war with Speaker McCarthy as he poisoned the GOP majority in the House killed that nomination while it was still in the crib. We’re just waiting to see at what point that dream dies.
Only a guess, but when push comes to shove there will be sufficient defections in hearings to kill that.
All of the good Gaetz did in dealing with the criminal “Trump-Russia Dossier”, Pelosi’s Soviet style impeachment of Trump, etc was badly damaged by his warfare with McCarthy in the House.
Ultimately, perhaps he will be named to replace one of his state’s senators leaving to join the Trump administration.
That would be quite kick in the balls to the Democrats to have to call him “Senator Gaetz”… for years. Probably lead to a crying session from Republican senators who would never have voted to confirm him ie. Collins, Murkowsi, and McConnell at least. Now they get to sit RIGHT beside him, in their side of the Senate.
As I write that – I think I like that idea even better!
We knew about the misplaced weapon years ago.
January 6th was supposed to be the day that MAGA died. All Democrats in power assumed so and acted out of an assumption that their obfuscations and outright lies would never be exposed. It’s going to be sweet justice when Congress edits the January 6th report to reflect the full truth of the events of that day.
“It’s going to be sweet justice when Congress edits the January 6th report to reflect the full truth of the events of that day.”
Enormous numbers of people hope that will become fact.
Many also believed that Trump would fulfill his promise to appoint a Special Counsel to investigate Clinton/Obama espionage act crimes and their partnership in the illegal ‘Trump-Russia Dossier’
Mostly the same people that believed Special Counsel John Durham would actually bring every single Obama Attorney General, FBI Director, and every agent that repeatedly perjured themselves to FISA courts to justice.
I would like to believe otherwise, but right now I think all we’re going to get regarding Pelosi’s Soviet J6 Commission is going to be nothing but weak tea, and little justice served.
We know exactly why he was put up for promotion, and has never been properly disciplined for any of his noted actions.
Yes, we do.