Anons, the Dems and the MSM have attached 7 deaths to violence at the Capitol Building on 6 JAN 2021. All but one of these deaths appear to be indirectly attributable to the broadly used notion of an 'insurrection' which itself is engineered-backward from the violence at the entrances of the building and from the violence inside the building.

The first measure is of the violence inside the building, which from all accounts so far, seem to be on a very small scale. Inside, there was some low-level vandalism but no statues tumbled, no fires set, no graffitte sprayed on walls and floors, no Senate widespread looting, and so forth. But there was some vandalism and some alleged thefts of bits and pieces. If this was a riotous crowd, it was tame by comparison with actual riots - and lootings, and arsons, and vandalism - witnessed and recorded in very recent times. The comparison is on the measure of violence.

The differentiator is the location, apparently, as the CAPITOL building has lately become a temple of democracy or somesuch. This alone, supposedly, changes the violence, even low-level, into something far more grand and dangerous. That can be argued all over the map, naturally.

But by that same token, the context was political protest which, by definition, is meant to bring about changes of, or to provide support for, political policies. The ingredient of violence is relevant but so is its measure of severity. If the violence was of the type we might call, venting, then, it would be quite different than the type that would initiate and sustain an attempted 'insurrection'. So I think we have a huge example of gutting key words of their meaning and filling them with some other rather irrational meaning. But it can be argued all over the map, as I said earlier.

continued …

>>12947492

…continued

The related violence at the entrances can also be examined in the same way. Considering that there were about 700,000 protestors, the relatively few who participated in the conflicts with the police near or at the entrances might account for a tiny fraction of one percent, if that. Most who witnessed those encounters did not participate; and most who attended the protest did not even know those things were going on, much less that some protestors had entered the building. So a distinction needs to be made between the participants in the protest overall and those who participated in confrontations with police or who had entered the building one way or another.

And that is another key point of review of the supposedly violent protest claimed by the Dems and MSM. Most of the 100 or so who entered the building did so, apaprently, through doors held open by welcoming police officers. And most of those who got involved in the violence at entrances did so after the easily moved barriers where set aside, and the police there stepped aside. Yes in part there was some instances of the police retreating to the actual entrances and trying to hold back the small crowds of people pushing to enter the building. So close examination of those hotspots needs to be undertaken with an eye to how the police conducted its effort to secure the building versus efforts made during other protests in recent times.

Deaths are not to be discounted in their own right. But the political use of the 7 deaths needs to be tested.

There were two deaths by suicide, after 6 JAN 2021, and how those could be grouped with the 'insurrection' is a mystery - except in the coarseness of the officers attendance that day at the Capitol. This co-relation can be compared with other police suicides, if any, in the wake of other protests of recent times - particularly where there had been deaths in the protests - or riots/lootings/arsons - at which police were active.

An officer died of a stroke the next day but had, reportedly, been ok the day of and the night after his participation at the Capitol on 6 JAN 2021. There might have been a cause-effect based on something that could have set off his stroke, but this has yet to be fully investigated. His body has been cremated so no autopsy can now be done, but was one done already is a question.

continued …

>>12947502

… continued

So this so far would account for 3 of the deaths, and all of the police deaths, that the Dems and MSM have attached to the 'insurrection' claim. Does not appear to be plausible to directly attribute those deaths to violence that day. Very tenuous, at best.

The other 4 were among protestors. One was caused by the shooting. The protestor was unarmed. The protestor stepped beyond the doors that barred the way to the hallway outside the legislative chambers. If that was a shoot-to-kill zone, then, questions have to be asked of the police who stepped aside at those doors, and who stepped aside at entrances to the bulding, and who stepped aside at weakly barricaded locations on the grounds. The various recordings of the shooting do not evidence the shooter yelling out, stop or I will shoot. The police at the doors who moved aside did not communicate a shoot-to-kill order beyond the doors. There was no such communication in the hallways. A tactical group of officers arrived just as the shooting had occured but they also did not communicate through words nor through actions that there was a shoot-to-kill order active at that place. At this time the investigation is still underway. But this violence can be directly attributed to violence inside the Capitol building - and the death of an unarmed protestor, in a small throng of unarmed protestors, was the direct consequence.

Two other deaths were outside the building - one that has been attributed, in reports, to a crush at an entrance; and another due to a heart attack on the grounds outside the building. Both were protestors. A third death has been attributed to a fall from scaffolding outside the building, also a protestor.

It would be a stretch, I think, to call this 'caranage' as the Dems have and as MSM commenters have. These deaths in themselves are not to be discounted, but the political use to which they have been put must be questioned, naturally.

KEY TAKEAWAY

How would the portrayal of an 'insurrection' look if there was only one death directly attributable to violence inside the Capitol building and that death became the focus of a shoot-to-kill order? Or if another death, by being crushed, was directly attributable to violence at an entrance where 'crowd control measures' were poorly resourced and poorly improvised?

Quite different, of course. So if this is really about the incompetent supervision of Capitol building security, then, those other deaths - the suicides and stroke and heart attack - take on a very different meaning in fact and in political terms. As does the very wierd 'insurrection' noise made by Dems and the MSM.

Call this stating the obvious, I guess.

>>12947503

>>12947492

>>12947502

Repubs, including those who have steadfastly argued against impeachment charges and who have questioned Pelosi's lack of accountablity for her part in securing the Capitol on 6 JAN 2021, have repeated the death count and bought into the rhetoric, if not the notion/charge, of insurrection. This is conceding too much, I think. Far too much. But I suppose they can always say later that they stand corrected when the investigations are done and reported. Might be too risky, politically, to question the attribution of the deaths to an 'insurrection', for now, but it sure is grating when they go along with it.