Paul Pelosi, husband of Nancy Pelosi, beaten with hammer at home

[preacherman76]

4 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

I am struggling with this. Why would they think they would need to verify it to anonymous citizens?  That has never been the mode of law enforcement.  They put out their statement, then they ignore us and go on with their business.

Now, the distrust is exactly what black citizens have held as a belief for a long time.  Can we trust the police or not?    Do we back the blue or question the blue?   I really don't know what to think.

We do both. Always. At least we should. In this case I’m not sure it’s the police we shouldn’t be trusting. They might just be puppets to a higher power here. 

[preacherman76]

3 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Who the hell even is "you all"?

You can can choose to whinge, chuck a hissy fit, and project all the  emotion all you want. Neither your opinion, nor mine changes the content detailed in the  copies of the documents filed in court - the affidavit and the Grand Jury indictment.  Demonstrate how the story in those documents has changed, or - as usual, flee from another challenge.

PS.  I'm not the one trying to purport that calling BS has any significance. 

I already did. The officer who took the call said Mr Pelosi said that the man was a friend. Not that he heard someone yell that in the background. Not only have we not seen the footage, we haven’t even heard the 911 call. Why?
 

If it was the man, why would he be allowing Pelosi to be on the phone with police to begin with?

Also I gotta say, I hope you are doing ok. Honestly. You seem to be attacking people personally a lot more lately. 
 

Significance is a factor though. The main stream has for the most part backed off their claims that a main stream political ideology was responsible for this. So how this man ended up in their home  has taken a back seat. Bottom line this guy should have the book thrown at him, and when that’s all over should be deported. 

[Golden Duck]

16 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

I already did. The officer who took the call said Mr Pelosi said that the man was a friend. Not that he heard someone yell that in the background. Not only have we not seen the footage, we haven’t even heard the 911 call. Why?
 

If it was the man, why would he be allowing Pelosi to be on the phone with police to begin with?

Also I gotta say, I hope you are doing ok. Honestly. You seem to be attacking people personally a lot more lately. 
 

Significance is a factor though. The main stream has for the most part backed off their claims that a main stream political ideology was responsible for this. So how this man ended up in their home  has taken a back seat. Bottom line this guy should have the book thrown at him, and when that’s all over should be deported. 

I don't think you know what personal means.

Bringing out the facts is not a personal attack.

I sourced the the court documents.  You've sourced some mixture of your perception and imagination. 

If you take commentary of your actions personally, change your actions.

[preacherman76]

2 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

I don't think you know what personal means.

Bringing out the facts is not a personal attack.

I sourced the the court documents.  You've sourced some mixture of your perception and imagination. 

If you take commentary of your actions personally, change your actions.

Oh wait that’s right, you probably didn’t hear the recording of the 911 operator who relaid the message to the police. I often forget that you folks only get a very narrow flow of information. Anything that doesn’t fit the narrative is usually excluded. That’s why you assumed I imagined it. Of course cause that’s part of the narrative, we are all crazy. 
 

I didn’t state anything that wasn’t a absolute fact. If you want to think that makes me a unhinged lunatic, while at the same time thinking that isn’t personal, whatev. 

[preacherman76]

 

[Doug1066]

13 hours ago, the13bats said:

I thought trumps wall kept out these types.

It's supposed to stop Mexicans, not Canadians.

Doug

[Tatetopa]

11 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Heck I’m sure there is security footage of how the guy got in in the first place.

Yes I believe there is. Consider the meta-information a release would provide.  The public would know where the security cameras are and mighty use that information to circumvent them next time.  Sorta like if you tell everybody where you hide your spare key, it is no longer secure. Just a thought. 

[Tatetopa]

7 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

We do both. Always. At least we should. In this case I’m not sure it’s the police we shouldn’t be trusting. They might just be puppets to a higher power here. 

Well that is a problem isn't it?  They might always be puppets.  Every citizen group can view police actions through a lens of their own circumstances.   Minorities, conservatives, and liberals could all select police actions that would prove their point.

[Likely Guy]

3 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

 

It depends on how you interpret it. I interpret it as:

Police dispatch to Paul Pelosi home: "RP (reporting person) stated there's a male in the home and that he's (the male's) going to wait for his (the RP's) wife. RP stated that he doesn't know who the male is but he (the male) advised that his (the male's) name is David and that he is a friend.”

I agree that the wording is confusing.

[Golden Duck]

4 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Oh wait that’s right, you probably didn’t hear the recording of the 911 operator who relaid the message to the police. I often forget that you folks only get a very narrow flow of information. Anything that doesn’t fit the narrative is usually excluded. That’s why you assumed I imagined it. Of course cause that’s part of the narrative, we are all crazy. 
 

I didn’t state anything that wasn’t a absolute fact. If you want to think that makes me a unhinged lunatic, while at the same time thinking that isn’t personal, whatev. 

Actually you stated nothing other than you call BS and that listened to a recording of what a dispatcher relaid [sic] to officers.

However, in paragraph 5 of the indictment we get a description of the 911 call made by Pelosi.

In summation, you prefer to play Chinese Whispers than the facts presented before the court.

I also gave you sources, for you to choose to ignore.  You didn't back up a thing.

[preacherman76]

10 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Actually you stated nothing other than you call BS and that listened to a recording of what a dispatcher relaid [sic] to officers.

However, in paragraph 5 of the indictment we get a description of the 911 call made by Pelosi.

In summation, you prefer to play Chinese Whispers than the facts presented before the court.

I also gave you sources, for you to choose to ignore.  You didn't back up a thing.

Right a description. Why not just put out the recording then? I think we all know why. 
 

I also gave a description, from the person who took the call. Which you choose to ignore. 
 

So let’s recap shall we? On one hand you have a direct witness of the call by the person who took the call. Moments after they took the call. On the other hand you have a different account written by a person who did not take the call. Written certainly after people began to have questions. 

[Golden Duck]

On 11/12/2022 at 4:19 PM, preacherman76 said:

Right a description. Why not just put out the recording then? I think we all know why. 
 

I also gave a description, from the person who took the call. Which you choose to ignore. 
 

So let’s recap shall we? On one hand you have a direct witness of the call by the person who took the call. Moments after they took the call. On the other hand you have a different account written by a person who did not take the call. Written certainly after people began to have questions. 

You gave nothin other than an unsupported declaration that you call BS.  @Likely Guy went to the trouble of posting a transcript of the recording in question.  Even when someone does the hard yards for you prefer to have your head in the sand simply out of malice and an addiction for scandal-porn.

Edited November 14, 2022 by Golden Duck

[Doug1066]

So now it's all over - almost.  The Dems took the Senate and they still have a chance at the house, albeit, a narrow one.

 

So what went wrong for the Rubs?  Foresight is a little shaky, but backsight is 20/20.  So here goes.

This mess all started with Mitch McConnel wanting to load the justice system with conservative judges.  Trump's 2016 victory gave him a Senate majority and the opportunity to do just that.  So Uncle Mitch ran through conservative justices, including obtaining a majority on the Supreme Court.  That majority includes two justices charged with sexual assaults and one with a glaring conflict of interest, thus damaging the Court's reputation.  That Court then banned abortions, thinking it was returning power to the states, which technically, it was.  But that reckoned without Gen-Xers, who now outnumber Baby Boomers.  At their age, they are particularly interested in sex and its consequences, so they came out in droves to vote against conservatives.  Women had similar opinions and actions.  So McConnell's court-loading came home to roost.

Then there's Biden's student loan program.  Dismissing those loans would make a big difference to Gen-Xers.  So Biden dismissed them.  That was popular, but then the conservatives challenged the program in court and gave Biden someone to blame for the failure.  Biden was in a no-lose situation.  If he won, he took the credit and if he lost, he blamed conservatives.

And then there's Trump's never-ending drama.  The electorate is fed up with it. Stealing govt documents, tax evasion, blaming his 2020 loss on imaginary election rigging, QAnon conspiracies, failure to teach history, science and even math.  Those do not convince people of the candidate's ability to lead and solve problems.

So now the Rubs are playing the blame game.  It's the fault of everybody except the person in the mirror.  Last time the Rubs bought into Trumps' blaming their loss on election rigging, so they never did the soul-searching a losing party needs to do to make itself relevant next time.

And they have already handed Biden a weapon to use against them in 2024:  the word has already gone out to the banks that the Student Loan forebearance period will be extended.  Expect a public announcement about Christmas.  All Biden has to do is keep extending it until the 2024 election is over.  By the time that happens, my service period will be over and, hopefully, my loans forgiven, along with at least thousands of others who do not qualify for forgiveness under current guidelines.  The lawsuits shut down the $10,000 and $20,000 forgiveness programs by shutting down ALL student payments - did conservatives gain anything by doing this?

The Rubs have just suffered their third election defeat since 2018.  Did they learn anything, or do they want another lesson?  The Dems will be glad to teach them.

Doug

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by Doug1066

[el midgetron]

According to NBC, someone who has seen the body cam footage describes Pelosi opening the door with his left hand and then he and Depape speak to the officers for a moment before depape begins hitting Pelosi with the hammer. But then NBC is quick to remind viewers what exactly happened doesn’t really matter and not to believe conspiracy theories.

 

[+Razman]

On 11/11/2022 at 12:51 AM, preacherman76 said:

Accept the question isn’t if he fought hard enough, or if he was asking for it. 
 

They release police body cam footage everyday. Being in this case that a entire political party somehow shares the blame for this according to the media, We don’t even need to see the attack. We just need to see who opened the door for police. 
 

Heck I’m sure there is security footage of how the guy got in in the first place. No need to get graphic. They could easily prove this story true or not. Yet they refuse. 

You might have to see Pelosi in underwear , it could be graphic and cause permanent damage.

[jmccr8]

On 11/11/2022 at 11:11 AM, Doug1066 said:

It's supposed to stop Mexicans, not Canadians.

Doug

Hi Doug

Have been called a northern Mexican a couple of times in Montana and N Dakota.

[preacherman76]

On 11/14/2022 at 1:27 AM, Golden Duck said:

You gave nothin other than an unsupported declaration that you call BS.  @Likely Guy went to the trouble of posting a transcript of the recording in question.  Even when someone does the hard yards for you prefer to have your head in the sand simply out of malice and an addiction for scandal-porn.

I posted the actual recording. It’s like you just talk to hear yourself. And is smug about it lol. 

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

I posted the actual recording. It’s like you just talk to hear yourself. And is smug about it lol. 

You still haven't demonstrated you calling BS is reasonable.

You'd rather the talk about me, why wouldn't I feel smug.

@Likely Guy has shown you what's happening in the recording.  It affirms what is stated in the indictment. 

[preacherman76]

40 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

You still haven't demonstrated you calling BS is reasonable.

You'd rather the talk about me, why wouldn't I feel smug.

@Likely Guy has shown you what's happening in the recording.  It affirms what is stated in the indictment. 

Accept you don’t have to be shown what’s happening in the recording when you have actually heard it for yourself. And when you hear it for yourself,  you can clearly see the indictment is BS. The recording clearly says that the RP knew the man’s name and called him a friend. 
 

Much of this can be made clear to all, just release the 911 recording like they always do. But no. 

[Silver Surfer]

They were playing hide the sausage. "Friend" gimme a break..

[Golden Duck]

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Accept you don’t have to be shown what’s happening in the recording when you have actually heard it for yourself. And when you hear it for yourself,  you can clearly see the indictment is BS. The recording clearly says that the RP knew the man’s name and called him a friend. 
 

Much of this can be made clear to all, just release the 911 recording like they always do. But no. 

It makes no difference whether you listen to the recording or read the transcript.  The semantic logic remains.

The dispatcher uses RP when referring to Pelosi; and, he when referring to DePape.

That's what is stated in the indictment.

How many indictments have you written?

Why should any evidence be made public before the trial?

[preacherman76]

1 minute ago, Golden Duck said:

It makes no difference whether you listen to the recording or read the transcript.  The semantic logic remains.

The dispatcher uses RP when referring to Pelosi; and, he when referring to DePape.

That's what is stated in the indictment.

How many indictments have you written?

Why should any evidence be made public before the trial?

Ahh no, the indictment says someone in the background yelled he was a friend. However in the recording the person reporting says the RP seemed confused, calling the attacker his friend, and also saying he didn’t know him. 
 

Those are two very different stories. Being the person in the recording just got off the phone with RP, I’m inclined to believe them over who told a different version of events. 

[Doug1066]

16 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Doug

Have been called a northern Mexican a couple of times in Montana and N Dakota.

Around here we say that Texans are just Mexicans on their way north.

Doug

[Golden Duck]

7 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Ahh no, the indictment says someone in the background yelled he was a friend. However in the recording the person reporting says the RP seemed confused, calling the attacker his friend, and also saying he didn’t know him. 
 

Those are two very different stories. Being the person in the recording just got off the phone with RP, I’m inclined to believe them over who told a different version of events. 

Ahh no - as @Likely Guy has pointed out - The dispatcher uses "RP" when referring to Pelosi; and, "he" when referring to DePape.

How many indictments have you written?

Actually how many statements to be presented in court have you written?

Edited November 15, 2022 by Golden Duck

[Likely Guy]

3 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Ahh no - as @Likely Guy has pointed out - The dispatcher uses "RP" when referring to Pelosi; and, "he" when referring to DePape.

Pronouns are hard. Thanks for your persistence.