The Jan. 6 Investigation

[Stacyhs]

But what if she's white and Zig really really doesn't want to believe she meant it? It's okay then, right?

More likely it's "But she's not a commiesocialistlibtard".

 

[Ziggurat]

But what if she's white and Zig really really doesn't want to believe she meant it? It's okay then, right?

Nice attempt to paint this all as me being racist. But it wouldn't have mattered if she was black. Black middle aged women don't fit the profile of political assassins either.

 

[Stacyhs]

Nice attempt to paint this all as me being racist. But it wouldn't have mattered if she was black. Black middle aged women don't fit the profile of political assassins either.

I don't know if you're racist or not but I do know that, if that riot/insurrection had been a BLM event, you wouldn't be minimizing it.

 

[Ziggurat]

I don't know if you're racist or not but I do know that, if that riot/insurrection had been a BLM event, you wouldn't be minimizing it.

Because you can read minds. Of course.

 

[Stacyhs]

Because you can read minds. Of course.

No, because I can read your posts.

 

[Ziggurat]

No, because I can read your posts.

Find a post where I accuse a BLM protester of doing more than they actually did.

Go on, I'll wait.

 

[Ziggurat]

More likely it's "But she's not a commiesocialistlibtard".

Oh, she's a 'tard alright. She's just not an attempted murderer.

 

[Stacyhs]

Find a post where I accuse a BLM protester of doing more than they actually did. Go on, I'll wait.

That wasn't the point: it was your minimizing of what Bancroft did.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I don't know if you're racist or not but I do know that, if that riot/insurrection had been a BLM event, you wouldn't be minimizing it.

 

[Stacyhs]

Oh, she's a 'tard alright. She's just not an attempted murderer.

Thank you for proving my point. I notice you didn't include the "commiesocialist" part.

 

[Ziggurat]

Thank you for proving my point. I notice you didn't include the "commiesocialist" part.

Well, yeah. She's not a commie socialist, so I'm not going to call her one. But it isn't actually relevant to anyone but you. I'm not going to call an actual commie socialist an attempted murderer if they aren't, either.

 

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Zig, you are tying yourself into knots trying to minimize what Bancroft said and did.

Bancroft said “We were looking for Nancy to shoot her in the friggin’ brain, but we didn’t find her.”

The judge who sentenced her asked prosecutors why she was not being charged with a felony for threatening a public official. But as she was leaving the building when she made the video comment, it would have been difficult to prove it was a serious threat.

Yes, it would be difficult to prove that. That's often the case with things that aren't true.

You have decided it's not true; that doesn't make it so. The FBI gave their reason for not charging her which was more along the lines of not being able to meet BARD, not that she wasn't serious.

Quote:
Come on, Zig. Maybe she was just blustering...but maybe she wasn't.

Had she been armed, I wouldn't take it as bluster.

She wasn't.

Had she even spent any real time looking for Pelosi, I would consider it more seriously.

She didn't.

You're making the assumption she wasn't armed. We don't know that. There were people whom videos did not show were armed but they later bragged about having had a gun on social media.

You're making another assumption that, if she had been armed, it would have been 'just bluster". Again, you can't know that.

We also don't know she didn't look for Pelosi as we don't know how long she was in the Capitol

Remember that she is a proven liar about her activities that day and she took steps to hide them by admitting she had deleted videos she took inside the Capitol.

Quote:
When Bancroft says "WE were looking for Pelosi to shoot her in the friggin’ brain," she includes herself with those we know were actively looking for Pelosi as part of an angry and violent mob.

Uh, no. "We" almost certainly referred to Bancroft herself and one other woman, Santos-Smith.

You're making yet another unfounded assumption. We do know that a group of the rioters were looking for Pelosi and broke into her office. Why you think that the "we" included only Bancroft and Santos-Smith?

Quote:
As for her owning a gun or not, you keep claiming she likely didn't own one. Come on! This woman is a right wing Trumper who lives in Pennsylvania. Chances are just as likely as not that she owns one and the FBI not saying if she owns one means nothing if they weren't charging her with using it or carrying it on Jan. 6.

Robert Morss wasn't charged with using or carrying a Lego set, yet the FBI felt it important enough to mention in his charging documents.

That is a uniquely silly statement for so many reasons including that carrying a Lego set onto Capitol grounds isn't a crime. The felt it was important to mention in the charges against Morse because it was supporting evidence.

Morse has three robbers, two assaults, resistances, and obstructions to certain officers or employees, one obstruction of public affairs, one civil turmoil, and one chaotic act. Was charged with violating. One breach of violence on the premises of the Capitol.

According to court documents, police officers seized a fully constructed US Capitol lego set and notes from his car, along with items seen by Morse men during the riots. The notebook contained a “step-by-step to create a hometown militia” and a complete list of equipment needed.

https://pennsylvanianewstoday.com/l...f-parliament-notebook-seized-from-man/184888/

Quote:
Bancroft also lied to the FBI during her initial interview when she claimed she had not entered the Capitol and initially pleaded not guilty. But when confronted with video showing her inside the building, she changed her plea to guilty.

Yes. She is guilty of trespass. That isn't in dispute.

Agreed, it's not in dispute but it never was so I don't know why you brought it up. But, maybe that's to deflect from the actual point I was making: she lied to the FBI and only admitted being in the Capitol upon being shown video of that fact.

Stop minimizing what happened.

Stop overstating what happened. Bancroft isn't your poster child.

Projecting much there? Exactly what have I overstated?

 

[Stacyhs]

Well, yeah. She's not a commie socialist, so I'm not going to call her one. But it isn't actually relevant to anyone but you. I'm not going to call an actual commie socialist an attempted murderer if they aren't, either.

Try reading this again and see if you can figure out where you go wrong in your post:

Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
But what if she's white and Zig really really doesn't want to believe she meant it? It's okay then, right?

More likely it's "But she's not a commiesocialistlibtard".

 

[carlitos]

The wonderful thing about inventing counterfactual claims about your opponents is that it's impossible to disprove them. But by the same token, because they are unfalsifiable, they are also trivially dismissed. Your accusation means nothing.

Body of Work. Go defend some poor and / or black people on the board for a minute, and then get back to me.

 

[Ziggurat]

You're making another assumption that, if she had been armed, it would have been 'just bluster". Again, you can't know that.

Uh, no. I said the exact opposite.

Had she been armed, I wouldn't take it as bluster.

Jeeze, how bad are you at reading comprehension?

You're making yet another unfounded assumption. We do know that a group of the rioters were looking for Pelosi and broke into her office. Why you think that the "we" included only Bancroft and Santos-Smith?

Because the two of them went to this together and posed for their photos and videos together. They were not part of any larger group.

That is a uniquely silly statement for so many reasons including that carrying a Lego set onto Capitol grounds isn't a crime. The felt it was important to mention in the charges against Morse because it was supporting evidence.

And owning a gun would be supporting evidence of the seriousness of her threat, far more so than owning a Lego set.

 

[mgidm86]

She was with people who were looking to kill Pelosi and stated her goal was to do just that. Their other goal was to stop the exchange of power. She's culpable as an accessory, at minimum.

When someone drives a car to a robbery (or meets others at the scene), they are culpable for any crimes committed by the people they drove to said crime, including murder, even if the driver himself sat in the car the whole time.

If you are part of the team you go down with them.

She broke into the Capitol with a group of people that set out to kill government officials and overthrow an election. Yes, she was part of this larger group.

Did she just show up randomly that day or was it part of a larger plan? She was there that day to meet with others to kill people, as she stated herself, therefore she is part of that group.

And who says she must own a gun to be carrying one? How many crimes are committed with registered legally owned guns?

The fact that people are defending the insurrectionists in any way at all tells me we really do need to prosecute these people with full force. The example is not being set.

 

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
You're making another assumption that, if she had been armed, it would have been 'just bluster". Again, you can't know that.

Uh, no. I said the exact opposite.
Jeeze, how bad are you at reading comprehension?

How bad are you at recognizing an obvious typo as in "would" instead of "wouldn't"? But you caught a typo! Good for you.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post

You're making yet another unfounded assumption. We do know that a group of the rioters were looking for Pelosi and broke into her office. Why you think that the "we" included only Bancroft and Santos-Smith?

Because the two of them went to this together and posed for their photos and videos together. They were not part of any larger group.

That does not exclude the possibility that they joined other people if only for a short time. Or do you think all the people who were looking for Pelosi all came together? Or those chanting "Kill Mike Pence" were all from one group?

Quote:
That is a uniquely silly statement for so many reasons including that carrying a Lego set onto Capitol grounds isn't a crime. The felt it was important to mention in the charges against Morse because it was supporting evidence.

And owning a gun would be supporting evidence of the seriousness of her threat, far more so than owning a Lego set.

He didn't just 'own a Lego set": it was used to construct a model of the Capitol building. That's a good example of you minimizing. Since they weren't charging Bancroft with threatening to shoot Pelosi or even having a gun at the time, her owning a gun was immaterial.

We can't know everything the pair did or did not do as they deleted the pics and videos they admitted to taking. I don't know if she was serious or not about killing Pelosi, or how long they were in the building or what they did while there. We do know they attempted to hide their activities by deleting the physical evidence and that they lied to the FBI. But you are making determinations of what they did or didn't do based on your own bias.

 

[Upchurch]

Nice attempt to paint this all as me being racist.

I mean, golly, Zig. It's just that you fit the profile.

 

[Stacyhs]

>snip<
The fact that people are defending the insurrectionists in any way at all tells me we really do need to prosecute these people with full force. The example is not being set.

Some judges are questioning why these people aren't being given stronger sentences:

D.C. judges express frustration about possible leniency in Capitol riot cases

Judges are asking prosecutors why defendants aren’t paying more to cover the cost of damage to the Capitol, why the court can’t order additional supervision of many defendants beyond a brief prison term and why more do not face heftier charges.

Judges have also pressured defendants to explain why they were in the building that day and express contrition, even if their plea agreements do not require such admissions.

Chief U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell has suggested more people should face the felony charge of obstructing the official certification of Joe Biden’s electoral victory.

“Does the government . . . have any concern about deterrence?” Howell asked in one hearing after questioning whether prosecutors were truly unable to prove that a man who entered a broken window and bragged that he “stormed the Capitol” committed a more serious crime than what the government charged.

 

[Ziggurat]

He didn't just 'own a Lego set": it was used to construct a model of the Capitol building.

Bwahahahaha!

It was a Lego Architecture set, of the capitol. And it wasn’t even out of the box!

Ooooooo, scary stuff!

 

[Ziggurat]

How bad are you at recognizing an obvious typo as in "would" instead of "wouldn't"? But you caught a typo! Good for you.

Still wrong. I didn’t say it wouldn’t be bluster, I said I wouldn’t take it as bluster. Do you understand the distinction?