That's a lot of terrorism without being shot and killed by police. Wow.
this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2024
293 points (98.0% liked)
politics
19143 readers
2982 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sounds about white.
Yeah, the fuck. Genuinely don’t see how this isn’t a shoot to kill moment unless he voluntarily surrendered
It would have been a team-kill, that's why it didn't happen.
I shouldn't have laughed as hard at this as I did. I feel dirty 😅
The article mentions he called 911 to surrender about an hour or two after it started.
This is what I get for reading headlines lmao. Thanks, that makes sense. Reality set in quick for this guy
He started at 3am too, no danger to anyone but himself + property.
Better to embarrass the man in court than to make him a martyr.
Yeah, either way I’m just happy this jackass can’t legally vote anymore
You don't lose your right to vote just for being arrested. In Colorado, the person would need to be a convicted, currently-incarcerated felon to lose their right to vote. Felons who have completed their sentences (even if they're out on parole) regain their voting rights.
Oh for sure but they have got to have this one locked down tight. I’m no lawyer and even I think I could get a conviction
I'll be shocked if its classified as terrorism.
There's currently nothing to suggest a link with the ruling about the ruling on the office of president. The timeline makes it sound like the nutjob pulled a gun in a roadrage incident then tried to hide out in the courthouse.
Thanks for pointing this out. Of course the article leaves that this incident is believed to be unconnected to the ruling to the last line. Not that it would be entirely unexpected if it did happen considering the amount of threats they've been getting and the terroristic rhetoric of republicans.
This is accurate, BUT
I wouldn’t expect police to look into a link, nor would I expect the most conservative of the mainstream networks to report on it if there was.
There’s currently nothing to suggest a link with the ruling about the ruling on the office of president.
Doesn't matter. The optics will be that the CSC was attacked because of the ruling removing Trump from the ballot. That is how it is going to be portrayed by the people, and the media is almost guaranteed to fuel the flames by adding "Shortly after the ruling, the CSC was involved in an act of domestic terrorism" without adding the proper context.
And I expect it to have a chilling effect on future rulings. Judges and jurors are still human beings, and we've already seen plenty of evidence of multiple government officials up and down the political ladder who refuse to rule against Trump due to fears of physical violence.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
An intruder shot out a window of the Ralph L. Carr Colorado Judicial Center, entered the building, and held an unarmed security guard at gunpoint early Tuesday morning.
Colorado State Patrol said in a press release this all started with a two-vehicle crash at 13th and Lincoln Streets where one individual reportedly pointed a handgun at another driver around 1:15 a.m. Tuesday.
A short time later, the suspect, whom Denver police identified as an adult male, shot out a window on the east side of the building and climbed in.
He held the guard at gunpoint, took their keys, and proceeded to access other parts of the building, eventually making his way to the 7th floor, where he fired additional shots.
Law enforcement set up a perimeter around the building, and at around 3 a.m. the suspect called 911 to surrender.
The Colorado Supreme Court made headlines late last year when it ruled that former President Donald Trump is disqualified from holding the presidency under the Constitution's so-called insurrection clause and ordered the secretary of state to exclude his name from the state's Republican presidential primary ballot.
The original article contains 381 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 51%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Both sides, right guys? Because the left does this shit too 🙄
Another fucking moron Trump cultist.