Muriel Bowser

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ia this groundhog day? This point has been covered. Read back through the thread. Or read the recent Vantiy Fair article about her reluctance to request Guard. Someone posted it in "Politics"

You are the last one to talk about Groundhog Day. You simply ignore everything that contradicts your opinion that Bowser is to blame for things that are outside her control and repeatedly post the same thing over and over.

Bowser was reluctant to have Federal forces come into the city without her request or coordination with the MPD and basically take over as happened the past summer. If you remember, there were federal officers without identification blocking off streets. Nobody knew who they were or what they were doing. This climaxed in an attack on peaceful protesters that included the use of tear gas to clear the way for Trump's photo op. Can you blame the Mayor for not wanting that to happen again?

Bowser's plan was to have MPD take responsibility with the National Guard backstopping them. This plan proved successful.

The lack of National Guard at the Capitol had nothing to do with Bowser. There is nothing that she could have done to change the lack of troops there. She has neither authority nor responsibility.

Of course, in true Groundhog Day fashion, you will now reply with some convoluted response explaining how Bowser either should have done something that she didn't have authority to do or she should have done something that would have made no difference to the outcome. As you have made clear by now, your conclusion is that Bowser is to blame. You have no logical way of arriving at that conclusion, yet that is your conclusion and nothing is going to change your mind.

Yes, we finally agree. And so she did not, in fact, request them as needed.

Not true. Bowser requested National Guard forces for the area over which she had authority. The number requested proved to be sufficient.

Again, I understand that you are wedded to your conclusion and nothing will change your mind about it. I have accepted that you cannot factually support your conclusion. You should accept this as well.

I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/ryan-mccarthy-no-national-guard-delay

"McCarthy said the Army does not have an intelligence or advisory role in deploying the D.C. National Guard, but he instead responded to requests from Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser to provide 340 crowd- and traffic-control Guard members from Tuesday to Thursday.

Asked by the Washington Examiner if he pushed back on the limited scope of advance preparation, McCarthy said it would have been unlawful for the Pentagon to take on such a role.

"We can't do domestic intelligence. We don't know. So, for us to look at the groups that participated in that we don't have, we can't do that," he said. "It's against the law."

McCarthy returned again to the pithy intelligence that was provided to the Army in the planning process and denied that the Army pushed back on Bowser's written request that explicitly called for an unarmed National Guard presence in the capital.

"They had no reason for us to do that. We were running a traffic control with the Metropolitan Police," he told the Washington Examiner. "We ask questions, but the DOD is a support function in civil unrest, and it's incredibly important that people understand that law enforcement is the lead."

Bowser’s request letter specifically called for no weapons, and full riot gear was left at the National Guard Armory. As of Sunday, the Capitol Police told the Army they did not need additional support either. The Capitol Police did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

By early afternoon, rioters breached the Capitol grounds and overran the police, disrupting Congress’s electoral vote count."

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

Oh, so you have just revealed that you are actually Kellyanne Conway spouting alternative facts. Which of these facts do you interpret differently?

1) Mayor Bowser had no authority over or responsibility for Capital grounds or other areas under Federal control;
2) There were no major public safety problems during the insurrection in the areas under Mayor Bowser's control;
3) The MPD was sufficiently prepared as to be able to support the Capitol Police and led the effort to expel the insurrectionists from the Capitol;
4) Had Mayor Bowser done as you have previously proposed and stationed a reserve force of National Guard somewhere in DC, there is no evidence that force would have responded quicker or more proficiently than the MPD; and
5) Responsibility for arranging National Guard forces to protect Federal grounds and the Capitol lies with Federal officials, not the Mayor of DC.

As to why Mayor Bowser made a different request for the inauguration, that is really quite obvious. Inauguration events were scheduled in many parts of DC including many areas under the Mayor's authority. For instance, the entire Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to the White House had to be protected. It is not at all unusual or surprising that a task with different requirements requires different resources.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

Oh, so you have just revealed that you are actually Kellyanne Conway spouting alternative facts. Which of these facts do you interpret differently?

1) Mayor Bowser had no authority over or responsibility for Capital grounds or other areas under Federal control;
2) There were no major public safety problems during the insurrection in the areas under Mayor Bowser's control;
3) The MPD was sufficiently prepared as to be able to support the Capitol Police and led the effort to expel the insurrectionists from the Capitol;
4) Had Mayor Bowser done as you have previously proposed and stationed a reserve force of National Guard somewhere in DC, there is no evidence that force would have responded quicker or more proficiently than the MPD; and
5) Responsibility for arranging National Guard forces to protect Federal grounds and the Capitol lies with Federal officials, not the Mayor of DC.

As to why Mayor Bowser made a different request for the inauguration, that is really quite obvious. Inauguration events were scheduled in many parts of DC including many areas under the Mayor's authority. For instance, the entire Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to the White House had to be protected. It is not at all unusual or surprising that a task with different requirements requires different resources.

it's obvious that on 1/6 we needed more of everyone in our city, prepared to respond. And yes, Bowser has authority to request Guard. Which she did in small numbers, without gear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

Oh, so you have just revealed that you are actually Kellyanne Conway spouting alternative facts. Which of these facts do you interpret differently?

1) Mayor Bowser had no authority over or responsibility for Capital grounds or other areas under Federal control;
2) There were no major public safety problems during the insurrection in the areas under Mayor Bowser's control;
3) The MPD was sufficiently prepared as to be able to support the Capitol Police and led the effort to expel the insurrectionists from the Capitol;
4) Had Mayor Bowser done as you have previously proposed and stationed a reserve force of National Guard somewhere in DC, there is no evidence that force would have responded quicker or more proficiently than the MPD; and
5) Responsibility for arranging National Guard forces to protect Federal grounds and the Capitol lies with Federal officials, not the Mayor of DC.

As to why Mayor Bowser made a different request for the inauguration, that is really quite obvious. Inauguration events were scheduled in many parts of DC including many areas under the Mayor's authority. For instance, the entire Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to the White House had to be protected. It is not at all unusual or surprising that a task with different requirements requires different resources.

it's obvious that on 1/6 we needed more of everyone in our city, prepared to respond. And yes, Bowser has authority to request Guard. Which she did in small numbers, without gear.

And FWIW, my daughter and I get along great

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

Oh, so you have just revealed that you are actually Kellyanne Conway spouting alternative facts. Which of these facts do you interpret differently?

1) Mayor Bowser had no authority over or responsibility for Capital grounds or other areas under Federal control;
2) There were no major public safety problems during the insurrection in the areas under Mayor Bowser's control;
3) The MPD was sufficiently prepared as to be able to support the Capitol Police and led the effort to expel the insurrectionists from the Capitol;
4) Had Mayor Bowser done as you have previously proposed and stationed a reserve force of National Guard somewhere in DC, there is no evidence that force would have responded quicker or more proficiently than the MPD; and
5) Responsibility for arranging National Guard forces to protect Federal grounds and the Capitol lies with Federal officials, not the Mayor of DC.

As to why Mayor Bowser made a different request for the inauguration, that is really quite obvious. Inauguration events were scheduled in many parts of DC including many areas under the Mayor's authority. For instance, the entire Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to the White House had to be protected. It is not at all unusual or surprising that a task with different requirements requires different resources.

it's obvious that on 1/6 we needed more of everyone in our city, prepared to respond. And yes, Bowser has authority to request Guard. Which she did in small numbers, without gear.

Thanks for confirming that you do not disagree with any of the facts listed. As I have previously noted, you have decided to blame Bowser, regardless of the facts, and nothing will pursued you otherwise.

[Anonymous]

What I’d like to see Bowser do is enforce any of her own rules. None of the Covid rules are enforced at all. Just come to 14&U — there are regular concerts in the civic building. While you’re there you can witness regular drag racing right on U by souped up motorbikes and cars without mufflers. The police is doing nothing and I understand that’s on the Mayor.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

Oh, so you have just revealed that you are actually Kellyanne Conway spouting alternative facts. Which of these facts do you interpret differently?

1) Mayor Bowser had no authority over or responsibility for Capital grounds or other areas under Federal control;
2) There were no major public safety problems during the insurrection in the areas under Mayor Bowser's control;
3) The MPD was sufficiently prepared as to be able to support the Capitol Police and led the effort to expel the insurrectionists from the Capitol;
4) Had Mayor Bowser done as you have previously proposed and stationed a reserve force of National Guard somewhere in DC, there is no evidence that force would have responded quicker or more proficiently than the MPD; and
5) Responsibility for arranging National Guard forces to protect Federal grounds and the Capitol lies with Federal officials, not the Mayor of DC.

As to why Mayor Bowser made a different request for the inauguration, that is really quite obvious. Inauguration events were scheduled in many parts of DC including many areas under the Mayor's authority. For instance, the entire Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to the White House had to be protected. It is not at all unusual or surprising that a task with different requirements requires different resources.

it's obvious that on 1/6 we needed more of everyone in our city, prepared to respond. And yes, Bowser has authority to request Guard. Which she did in small numbers, without gear.

Thanks for confirming that you do not disagree with any of the facts listed. As I have previously noted, you have decided to blame Bowser, regardless of the facts, and nothing will pursued you otherwise.

We learned in 9/11 that DC city leaders should work closely with the Feds on matters of security. I am glad that the rules for DC requesting National Guard are being looked at. Bowser can put in a request, but it is a cumbersome process and it sounds like army leaders agree it should be clarified and streamlined. So at least " some good" will come of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What I’d like to see Bowser do is enforce any of her own rules. None of the Covid rules are enforced at all. Just come to 14&U — there are regular concerts in the civic building. While you’re there you can witness regular drag racing right on U by souped up motorbikes and cars without mufflers. The police is doing nothing and I understand that’s on the Mayor.

I am the PP, and I agree that local DC security has slipped this year. Our city council needs to look, with Bowser, at whether their decriminalization policies have contributed--and if they want to decriminalize, where they can shore up prevention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ia this groundhog day? This point has been covered. Read back through the thread. Or read the recent Vantiy Fair article about her reluctance to request Guard. Someone posted it in "Politics"

You are the last one to talk about Groundhog Day. You simply ignore everything that contradicts your opinion that Bowser is to blame for things that are outside her control and repeatedly post the same thing over and over.

Bowser was reluctant to have Federal forces come into the city without her request or coordination with the MPD and basically take over as happened the past summer. If you remember, there were federal officers without identification blocking off streets. Nobody knew who they were or what they were doing. This climaxed in an attack on peaceful protesters that included the use of tear gas to clear the way for Trump's photo op. Can you blame the Mayor for not wanting that to happen again?

Bowser's plan was to have MPD take responsibility with the National Guard backstopping them. This plan proved successful.

The lack of National Guard at the Capitol had nothing to do with Bowser. There is nothing that she could have done to change the lack of troops there. She has neither authority nor responsibility.

Of course, in true Groundhog Day fashion, you will now reply with some convoluted response explaining how Bowser either should have done something that she didn't have authority to do or she should have done something that would have made no difference to the outcome. As you have made clear by now, your conclusion is that Bowser is to blame. You have no logical way of arriving at that conclusion, yet that is your conclusion and nothing is going to change your mind.

Yes, we finally agree. And so she did not, in fact, request them as needed.

Not true. Bowser requested National Guard forces for the area over which she had authority. The number requested proved to be sufficient.

Again, I understand that you are wedded to your conclusion and nothing will change your mind about it. I have accepted that you cannot factually support your conclusion. You should accept this as well.

I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/ryan-mccarthy-no-national-guard-delay

"McCarthy said the Army does not have an intelligence or advisory role in deploying the D.C. National Guard, but he instead responded to requests from Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser to provide 340 crowd- and traffic-control Guard members from Tuesday to Thursday.

Asked by the Washington Examiner if he pushed back on the limited scope of advance preparation, McCarthy said it would have been unlawful for the Pentagon to take on such a role.

"We can't do domestic intelligence. We don't know. So, for us to look at the groups that participated in that we don't have, we can't do that," he said. "It's against the law."

McCarthy returned again to the pithy intelligence that was provided to the Army in the planning process and denied that the Army pushed back on Bowser's written request that explicitly called for an unarmed National Guard presence in the capital.

"They had no reason for us to do that. We were running a traffic control with the Metropolitan Police," he told the Washington Examiner. "We ask questions, but the DOD is a support function in civil unrest, and it's incredibly important that people understand that law enforcement is the lead."

Bowser’s request letter specifically called for no weapons, and full riot gear was left at the National Guard Armory. As of Sunday, the Capitol Police told the Army they did not need additional support either. The Capitol Police did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

By early afternoon, rioters breached the Capitol grounds and overran the police, disrupting Congress’s electoral vote count."

For purposes of this discussion, "Washington DC" does not equal "US Capitol," so you are still wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

Oh, so you have just revealed that you are actually Kellyanne Conway spouting alternative facts. Which of these facts do you interpret differently?

1) Mayor Bowser had no authority over or responsibility for Capital grounds or other areas under Federal control;
2) There were no major public safety problems during the insurrection in the areas under Mayor Bowser's control;
3) The MPD was sufficiently prepared as to be able to support the Capitol Police and led the effort to expel the insurrectionists from the Capitol;
4) Had Mayor Bowser done as you have previously proposed and stationed a reserve force of National Guard somewhere in DC, there is no evidence that force would have responded quicker or more proficiently than the MPD; and
5) Responsibility for arranging National Guard forces to protect Federal grounds and the Capitol lies with Federal officials, not the Mayor of DC.

As to why Mayor Bowser made a different request for the inauguration, that is really quite obvious. Inauguration events were scheduled in many parts of DC including many areas under the Mayor's authority. For instance, the entire Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to the White House had to be protected. It is not at all unusual or surprising that a task with different requirements requires different resources.

it's obvious that on 1/6 we needed more of everyone in our city, prepared to respond. And yes, Bowser has authority to request Guard. Which she did in small numbers, without gear.

She requested what was necessary of the National Guard for the areas under her purview. As she has NO jurisdiction over the US Capitol, that responsibility lay elsewhere, specifically the Architect of the Capitol's office who oversees the Sargeant at Arms and the US Capitol Police forces. Again, trying to blame Bowser for this simply shows ignorance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

Oh, so you have just revealed that you are actually Kellyanne Conway spouting alternative facts. Which of these facts do you interpret differently?

1) Mayor Bowser had no authority over or responsibility for Capital grounds or other areas under Federal control;
2) There were no major public safety problems during the insurrection in the areas under Mayor Bowser's control;
3) The MPD was sufficiently prepared as to be able to support the Capitol Police and led the effort to expel the insurrectionists from the Capitol;
4) Had Mayor Bowser done as you have previously proposed and stationed a reserve force of National Guard somewhere in DC, there is no evidence that force would have responded quicker or more proficiently than the MPD; and
5) Responsibility for arranging National Guard forces to protect Federal grounds and the Capitol lies with Federal officials, not the Mayor of DC.

As to why Mayor Bowser made a different request for the inauguration, that is really quite obvious. Inauguration events were scheduled in many parts of DC including many areas under the Mayor's authority. For instance, the entire Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to the White House had to be protected. It is not at all unusual or surprising that a task with different requirements requires different resources.

it's obvious that on 1/6 we needed more of everyone in our city, prepared to respond. And yes, Bowser has authority to request Guard. Which she did in small numbers, without gear.

She requested what was necessary of the National Guard for the areas under her purview. As she has NO jurisdiction over the US Capitol, that responsibility lay elsewhere, specifically the Architect of the Capitol's office who oversees the Sargeant at Arms and the US Capitol Police forces. Again, trying to blame Bowser for this simply shows ignorance.

Head of DC National Guard, William Walker. Today's Post. Youre welcome!:

Walker said one takeaway from the Jan. 6 riot should be that when in doubt, city and federal authorities should always err on the side of requesting a contingency of National Guard troops to be at the ready in advance, even if they don’t end up being used.

Ahead of the event, Bowser made a narrow request for a D.C. Guard presence, resulting in about 340 personnel to help with traffic and crowd management and another 40 in the quick reaction force. In a letter, she cited the administration’s problematic deployment of federal agents without insignia on the streets last year and said the District wasn’t requesting any additional support."


"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree to disagree. I am not going to accuse you of lacking facts. We interpret the same facts differently. I would change the above to "The number requested proved to be in-sufficient": As well as the gear provided. If there is no role for DC National Guard in assisting with federal property, they why were they requested WITH riot gear by Mayor Bowser in coordination with other federal entities for the inauguration? 50/50 hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I'm very glad lessons were learned from an otherwise horrible event.

Oh, so you have just revealed that you are actually Kellyanne Conway spouting alternative facts. Which of these facts do you interpret differently?

1) Mayor Bowser had no authority over or responsibility for Capital grounds or other areas under Federal control;
2) There were no major public safety problems during the insurrection in the areas under Mayor Bowser's control;
3) The MPD was sufficiently prepared as to be able to support the Capitol Police and led the effort to expel the insurrectionists from the Capitol;
4) Had Mayor Bowser done as you have previously proposed and stationed a reserve force of National Guard somewhere in DC, there is no evidence that force would have responded quicker or more proficiently than the MPD; and
5) Responsibility for arranging National Guard forces to protect Federal grounds and the Capitol lies with Federal officials, not the Mayor of DC.

As to why Mayor Bowser made a different request for the inauguration, that is really quite obvious. Inauguration events were scheduled in many parts of DC including many areas under the Mayor's authority. For instance, the entire Pennsylvania Ave from the Capitol to the White House had to be protected. It is not at all unusual or surprising that a task with different requirements requires different resources.

it's obvious that on 1/6 we needed more of everyone in our city, prepared to respond. And yes, Bowser has authority to request Guard. Which she did in small numbers, without gear.

She requested what was necessary of the National Guard for the areas under her purview. As she has NO jurisdiction over the US Capitol, that responsibility lay elsewhere, specifically the Architect of the Capitol's office who oversees the Sargeant at Arms and the US Capitol Police forces. Again, trying to blame Bowser for this simply shows ignorance.

Head of DC National Guard, William Walker. Today's Post. Youre welcome!:

Walker said one takeaway from the Jan. 6 riot should be that when in doubt, city and federal authorities should always err on the side of requesting a contingency of National Guard troops to be at the ready in advance, even if they don’t end up being used.

Ahead of the event, Bowser made a narrow request for a D.C. Guard presence, resulting in about 340 personnel to help with traffic and crowd management and another 40 in the quick reaction force. In a letter, she cited the administration’s problematic deployment of federal agents without insignia on the streets last year and said the District wasn’t requesting any additional support."

"

I guess given our elevated risk of right-wing terror, it makes sense to have more troops standing by when they rally. I doubt we will see the events of Jan 6 again.

But this is hardly a resounding condemnation of Mayor Bowser's security planning.

[Anonymous]

Head of DC National Guard, William Walker. Today's Post. Youre welcome!:

Walker said one takeaway from the Jan. 6 riot should be that when in doubt, city and federal authorities should always err on the side of requesting a contingency of National Guard troops to be at the ready in advance, even if they don’t end up being used.
"

I just thought I'd highlight the rest of it for you -- the "and federal authorities" part. As you said to a PP: You're welcome.

Curious, why did you highlight "city" while completely ignoring "federal authorities"? Is it something personal with Mayor Bowser that stops you from fully reading, or perhaps fully understanding even the quotes that you post yourself?

Also curious: Are you actively advocating for DC statehood? So that the Mayor can become a Governor and actually have some of the authority and powers that you clearly believe someone in her position should have?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


Head of DC National Guard, William Walker. Today's Post. Youre welcome!:

Walker said one takeaway from the Jan. 6 riot should be that when in doubt, city and federal authorities should always err on the side of requesting a contingency of National Guard troops to be at the ready in advance, even if they don’t end up being used.
"

I just thought I'd highlight the rest of it for you -- the "and federal authorities" part. As you said to a PP: You're welcome.

Curious, why did you highlight "city" while completely ignoring "federal authorities"? Is it something personal with Mayor Bowser that stops you from fully reading, or perhaps fully understanding even the quotes that you post yourself?

Also curious: Are you actively advocating for DC statehood? So that the Mayor can become a Governor and actually have some of the authority and powers that you clearly believe someone in her position should have?

Because this thread is in DC Metro Politics and titled "Bowser". OF COURSE the Feds share culpability, as has been mentioned MANY times in this thread and in threads in National Politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Head of DC National Guard, William Walker. Today's Post. Youre welcome!:

Walker said one takeaway from the Jan. 6 riot should be that when in doubt, city and federal authorities should always err on the side of requesting a contingency of National Guard troops to be at the ready in advance, even if they don’t end up being used.
"

I just thought I'd highlight the rest of it for you -- the "and federal authorities" part. As you said to a PP: You're welcome.

Curious, why did you highlight "city" while completely ignoring "federal authorities"? Is it something personal with Mayor Bowser that stops you from fully reading, or perhaps fully understanding even the quotes that you post yourself?

Also curious: Are you actively advocating for DC statehood? So that the Mayor can become a Governor and actually have some of the authority and powers that you clearly believe someone in her position should have?

Because this thread is in DC Metro Politics and titled "Bowser". OF COURSE the Feds share culpability, as has been mentioned MANY times in this thread and in threads in National Politics.

Well, at least you're consistent in your over-focusing. I hope you can appreciate that others often prefer stuff like contexts and actual facts.