“It was business as usual” — DCUM had better information than the Capitol Police about 1/6

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People were posting on the Capitol Hill NextDoor page with information about detailed plans they found online to take over the Capitol. My freakin' cousin in Nashville was posting things he found on Parler about people coming to storm the Capitol on Facebook. This information was EVERYWHERE. The only reason it was not taken seriously was a) if someone didn't want to take it seriously or b) if someone simply didn't believe white people pose a threat.

I saw it on facebook too. Don't know how they could have -not- seen it.

Assume they thought white people wouldn't do this?
Or, that white right wingers would behave as well as the left wing protestors and just allow themselves to be arrested?

Giving them some benefit of the doubt, maybe they did assume it would be like the (completely peaceful) women’s march, or the well-mannered left winf civil disobedience where people announce their intent to sit in and be arrested peacefully. but time and time again, the far right has shown they will go much further than the left.

Then they are idiots. People were posting, publicly, about their intention to bring weapons; they were calling for "civil war," they were using all kinds of violent and extremist language. If you thought they were announcing an intent to sit in and be arrested peacefully, you were high or delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People were posting on the Capitol Hill NextDoor page with information about detailed plans they found online to take over the Capitol. My freakin' cousin in Nashville was posting things he found on Parler about people coming to storm the Capitol on Facebook. This information was EVERYWHERE. The only reason it was not taken seriously was a) if someone didn't want to take it seriously or b) if someone simply didn't believe white people pose a threat.

I saw it on facebook too. Don't know how they could have -not- seen it.

Assume they thought white people wouldn't do this?
Or, that white right wingers would behave as well as the left wing protestors and just allow themselves to be arrested?

Giving them some benefit of the doubt, maybe they did assume it would be like the (completely peaceful) women’s march, or the well-mannered left winf civil disobedience where people announce their intent to sit in and be arrested peacefully. but time and time again, the far right has shown they will go much further than the left.

Then they are idiots. People were posting, publicly, about their intention to bring weapons; they were calling for "civil war," they were using all kinds of violent and extremist language. If you thought they were announcing an intent to sit in and be arrested peacefully, you were high or delusional.

+1. What "benefit of the doubt?" The women's march was a bunch of girls running around with pink hats on their heads. It was nothing like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People were posting on the Capitol Hill NextDoor page with information about detailed plans they found online to take over the Capitol. My freakin' cousin in Nashville was posting things he found on Parler about people coming to storm the Capitol on Facebook. This information was EVERYWHERE. The only reason it was not taken seriously was a) if someone didn't want to take it seriously or b) if someone simply didn't believe white people pose a threat.

I saw it on facebook too. Don't know how they could have -not- seen it.

Assume they thought white people wouldn't do this?
Or, that white right wingers would behave as well as the left wing protestors and just allow themselves to be arrested?

Giving them some benefit of the doubt, maybe they did assume it would be like the (completely peaceful) women’s march, or the well-mannered left winf civil disobedience where people announce their intent to sit in and be arrested peacefully. but time and time again, the far right has shown they will go much further than the left.

Then they are idiots. People were posting, publicly, about their intention to bring weapons; they were calling for "civil war," they were using all kinds of violent and extremist language. If you thought they were announcing an intent to sit in and be arrested peacefully, you were high or delusional.

+1. What "benefit of the doubt?" The women's march was a bunch of girls running around with pink hats on their heads. It was nothing like this.

+1 and the social media chatter before hand was about how to knit a pink hat and NOT to bring a sign on a stick, just the sign. Unlike the chatter before the insurrection, which was about how to smuggle guns into DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People were posting on the Capitol Hill NextDoor page with information about detailed plans they found online to take over the Capitol. My freakin' cousin in Nashville was posting things he found on Parler about people coming to storm the Capitol on Facebook. This information was EVERYWHERE. The only reason it was not taken seriously was a) if someone didn't want to take it seriously or b) if someone simply didn't believe white people pose a threat.

I saw it on facebook too. Don't know how they could have -not- seen it.

Assume they thought white people wouldn't do this?
Or, that white right wingers would behave as well as the left wing protestors and just allow themselves to be arrested?

Giving them some benefit of the doubt, maybe they did assume it would be like the (completely peaceful) women’s march, or the well-mannered left winf civil disobedience where people announce their intent to sit in and be arrested peacefully. but time and time again, the far right has shown they will go much further than the left.

Then they are idiots. People were posting, publicly, about their intention to bring weapons; they were calling for "civil war," they were using all kinds of violent and extremist language. If you thought they were announcing an intent to sit in and be arrested peacefully, you were high or delusional.

+1. What "benefit of the doubt?" The women's march was a bunch of girls running around with pink hats on their heads. It was nothing like this.

+1 and the social media chatter before hand was about how to knit a pink hat and NOT to bring a sign on a stick, just the sign. Unlike the chatter before the insurrection, which was about how to smuggle guns into DC.

Yeah, no benefit of the doubt to be given. If they thought this would be like the women's march, they were deliberately closing their eyes to the evidence. And then the question is, why? And the answers aren't pretty.

[Anonymous]

Anecdotal, but I was prepared to hear about race-based skirmishes downtown and more banner-burnings. Stupid me.

[Anonymous]

I have to say, DCUM is amazing when it comes to getting political news fast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The rank and file may not have been aware but their leadership did. Although it seems that even their leadership didn’t take the threats seriously since they only requested backup from the Pentagon a few days before.

It was an inside job. Let the hearings and investigations continue. But it is patently obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really think it came down to a blindspot based on the race and the political ideology of those who attended the January 6 rally.

White cops with conservative beliefs didn't believe a crowd of white conservatives who supposedly "back the Blue" would do this. They didn't prepare because they mistakenly thought the crowd was an ally to police.

Look at the backlash by the white-dominated police union against the acting Capitol police chief - a black woman. She is also in charge of cleaning house and figuring out if anyone on the inside was coordinating with the insurrectionists.

In short, the police command at the time of the insurrection didn't want to believe the crowd was capable of this BECAUSE they identified with the crowd. It was a huge blindspot.

This. I think some people thought "Blue Lives Matter" meant that the protestors sided with the cops, rather than that the protestors thought the cops sided with them. They were supporting the right of the police to suppress BLM and brutalize black people; they supported the cops when they were engaged in defending existing racial hierarchies. Some people did take the slogan at face value (probably as a result of their own racial blind spots), while others were sympathetic shared the white supremacy of the protestors. I think they were basically high on their own supply; having been told, and telling themselves, that black people/BLM and their allies were the real threat, they were unable to see the threat right in front of them. I mean, a QAnon guy was responsible for the attack on Comet Pizza -- anyone who thinks that people that deep into racist, anti-Semitic conspiracy theories aren't dangerous is fooling themselves.

I think your analysis is sophomoric.

Oh how self indulging those little boxes you seem to like to put people into.

Grow UP. Challenge yourself on your own pre-conceived ideas

Facts: significant portion of " BLM" protesters were/are " white" - whatever that means.... DC and cities across America where people working from home during Covid filled the streets to demand end of police brutality against AA's... those protests were like HALF white people

The " mom's of Portland " in their bike helmets- white suburban women, mostly

So much for your premise

The DC Capital police are largely AA- because they are a federal/ city agency and have hiring requirements

Did Trump act to have security not beefed up- that's where you should look, but there is no " secret handshake " here on the police lines or the BLM protest lines and BOTH groups are diverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The rank and file may not have been aware but their leadership did. Although it seems that even their leadership didn’t take the threats seriously since they only requested backup from the Pentagon a few days before.

It was an inside job. Let the hearings and investigations continue. But it is patently obvious.

By some members, absolutely. But the entirety of the Capitol Police was not behind the insurrection.