Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:57
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Justice Fepartment https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
If at 2:23 am a resident calls 911 about an unknown male in a residence why call it a wellness check? Police got there at 2:31 and the front door was opened to 2 police officers. Officers see both holding one hammer and don't immediately enter and get the potential weapon...
Homeowner called for an emergency intruder and the protocol is first a chat? What did police think it was at that time? A carpenter?
Just to be clear about this for you. Pelosi was woken up while in his bed. The intruder asked where Nancy was. Pelosi said she was not home and wouldn't be home for several days. The intruder said he would wait. Pelosi went to the bathroom where his phone was charging. He dialed 911, but I don't believe spoke directly to the operator. Instead, the operator could hear the discussion between the two men and pieced together that something untoward was going on. The operator then alerted police who conducted a high priority wellness check.
The sources for this are the SFPD press conference which you can watch on Youtube and the DOJ press release and statement which are linked earlier in this thread. During the press conference, the police chief praised Heather Grives, the 911 operator for using her intuition in guessing that this was an emergency.
Yes I understand the chain of events. Dispatcher Grimes escalated the call to what might be a priority A in SF from a B or C. Unless they got there faster on a B [priority wellness check] given the call and owners of residence. What I don't get is the request to drop the hammer given the reason the police were at the house. Immediate hammer removal then questions would have meant no skull fracture.
Spoken like someone who has never been in a tense, scary, uncertain situation.
It's really easy to come up with the best path forward when you're sitting there comfortable in front of your computer thinking about solutions. Tell us, are you a fireman? A first responder? An EMT? Are you regularly put in situations where you have to make fast, potentially life-saving decisions?
How do people not understand that in real time chaos, unclarity, and the need to act fast will lead to outcomes that might have been different if you were able to have time to ponder the best way forward while looking at the situation from the outside?
I've been in tense and scary situations but on DOJ "When the door was
opened, Pelosi and DEPAPE were both holding a hammer with one hand and DEPAPE had his
other hand holding onto Pelosi’s forearm. Pelosi greeted the officers. The officers asked them
what was going on. DEPAPE responded that everything was good. Officers then asked Pelosi
and DEPAPE to drop the hammer."
1 officer is named and some news articles use plural-officers. 2? So I'd prefer the 1st thing to be drop the hammer and get in position while saying it. A hammer at 2:30 am in the hands of 2 is not something to ponder.
The conspiracy theory assigns portentous, sinister meanings to what are most likely innocuous, insignificant events
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:56
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Justice Fepartment https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
If at 2:23 am a resident calls 911 about an unknown male in a residence why call it a wellness check? Police got there at 2:31 and the front door was opened to 2 police officers. Officers see both holding one hammer and don't immediately enter and get the potential weapon...
Homeowner called for an emergency intruder and the protocol is first a chat? What did police think it was at that time? A carpenter?
Just to be clear about this for you. Pelosi was woken up while in his bed. The intruder asked where Nancy was. Pelosi said she was not home and wouldn't be home for several days. The intruder said he would wait. Pelosi went to the bathroom where his phone was charging. He dialed 911, but I don't believe spoke directly to the operator. Instead, the operator could hear the discussion between the two men and pieced together that something untoward was going on. The operator then alerted police who conducted a high priority wellness check.
The sources for this are the SFPD press conference which you can watch on Youtube and the DOJ press release and statement which are linked earlier in this thread. During the press conference, the police chief praised Heather Grives, the 911 operator for using her intuition in guessing that this was an emergency.
Yes I understand the chain of events. Dispatcher Grimes escalated the call to what might be a priority A in SF from a B or C. Unless they got there faster on a B [priority wellness check] given the call and owners of residence. What I don't get is the request to drop the hammer given the reason the police were at the house. Immediate hammer removal then questions would have meant no skull fracture.
Spoken like someone who has never been in a tense, scary, uncertain situation.
It's really easy to come up with the best path forward when you're sitting there comfortable in front of your computer thinking about solutions. Tell us, are you a fireman? A first responder? An EMT? Are you regularly put in situations where you have to make fast, potentially life-saving decisions?
How do people not understand that in real time chaos, unclarity, and the need to act fast will lead to outcomes that might have been different if you were able to have time to ponder the best way forward while looking at the situation from the outside?
I've been in tense and scary situations but on DOJ "When the door was
opened, Pelosi and DEPAPE were both holding a hammer with one hand and DEPAPE had his
other hand holding onto Pelosi’s forearm. Pelosi greeted the officers. The officers asked them
what was going on. DEPAPE responded that everything was good. Officers then asked Pelosi
and DEPAPE to drop the hammer."
1 officer is named and some news articles use plural-officers. 2? So I'd prefer the 1st thing to be drop the hammer and get in position while saying it. A hammer at 2:30 am in the hands of 2 is not something to ponder.
OK so do you think the answer is probably something innocuous or are you disputing the account because you think there's a giant involved coverup with bribes to keep people quiet? Nothing you say actually makes sense to my brain, it just makes you sound crazy because you are implying that there's a coverup for.... what? You never say. You sound like a conspiracy theorist 100% based on all the traits and qualitie previously listed.
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:55
Subject: Re:Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:1. Proof of the conspiracy supposedly emerges from a pattern of “connecting the dots” between events that need not be causally connected. When no evidence supports these connections except the allegation of the conspiracy or when the evidence fits equally well to other causal connections—or to randomness—the conspiracy theory is likely to be false.
2. The agents behind the pattern of the conspiracy would need nearly superhuman power to pull it off. People are usually not nearly so powerful as we think they are.
3. The conspiracy is complex, and its successful completion demands a large number of elements.
4. Similarly, the conspiracy involves large numbers of people who would all need to keep silent about their secrets. The more people involved, the less realistic it becomes.
5. The conspiracy encompasses a grand ambition for control over a nation, economy or political system. If it suggests world domination, the theory is even less likely to be true.
6. The conspiracy theory ratchets up from small events that might be true to much larger, much less probable events.
[/b]7. The conspiracy theory assigns portentous, sinister meanings to what are most likely innocuous, insignificant events.[b]
8. The theory tends to commingle facts and speculations without distinguishing between the two and without assigning degrees of probability or of factuality.
9. The theorist is indiscriminately suspicious of all government agencies or private groups, which suggests an inability to nuance differences between true and false conspiracies.
10. The conspiracy theorist refuses to consider alternative explanations, rejecting all disconfirming evidence and blatantly seeking only confirmatory evidence to support what he or she has a priori determined to be the truth.
11. The fact that politicians sometimes lie or that corporations occasionally cheat does not mean that every event is the result of a tortuous conspiracy. Most of the time stuff just happens, and our brains connect the dots into meaningful patterns
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-conspiracy-theory-director/
It’s going to sail right over the one conspiracy theorist’s head.
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:50
Subject: Re:Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:50
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Justice Fepartment https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
If at 2:23 am a resident calls 911 about an unknown male in a residence why call it a wellness check? Police got there at 2:31 and the front door was opened to 2 police officers. Officers see both holding one hammer and don't immediately enter and get the potential weapon...
Homeowner called for an emergency intruder and the protocol is first a chat? What did police think it was at that time? A carpenter?
Just to be clear about this for you. Pelosi was woken up while in his bed. The intruder asked where Nancy was. Pelosi said she was not home and wouldn't be home for several days. The intruder said he would wait. Pelosi went to the bathroom where his phone was charging. He dialed 911, but I don't believe spoke directly to the operator. Instead, the operator could hear the discussion between the two men and pieced together that something untoward was going on. The operator then alerted police who conducted a high priority wellness check.
The sources for this are the SFPD press conference which you can watch on Youtube and the DOJ press release and statement which are linked earlier in this thread. During the press conference, the police chief praised Heather Grives, the 911 operator for using her intuition in guessing that this was an emergency.
Yes I understand the chain of events. Dispatcher Grimes escalated the call to what might be a priority A in SF from a B or C. Unless they got there faster on a B [priority wellness check] given the call and owners of residence. What I don't get is the request to drop the hammer given the reason the police were at the house. Immediate hammer removal then questions would have meant no skull fracture.
Spoken like someone who has never been in a tense, scary, uncertain situation.
It's really easy to come up with the best path forward when you're sitting there comfortable in front of your computer thinking about solutions. Tell us, are you a fireman? A first responder? An EMT? Are you regularly put in situations where you have to make fast, potentially life-saving decisions?
How do people not understand that in real time chaos, unclarity, and the need to act fast will lead to outcomes that might have been different if you were able to have time to ponder the best way forward while looking at the situation from the outside?
I've been in tense and scary situations but on DOJ "When the door was
opened, Pelosi and DEPAPE were both holding a hammer with one hand and DEPAPE had his
other hand holding onto Pelosi’s forearm. Pelosi greeted the officers. The officers asked them
what was going on. DEPAPE responded that everything was good. Officers then asked Pelosi
and DEPAPE to drop the hammer."
1 officer is named and some news articles use plural-officers. 2? So I'd prefer the 1st thing to be drop the hammer and get in position while saying it. A hammer at 2:30 am in the hands of 2 is not something to ponder.
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:48
Subject: Re:Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
1. Proof of the conspiracy supposedly emerges from a pattern of “connecting the dots” between events that need not be causally connected. When no evidence supports these connections except the allegation of the conspiracy or when the evidence fits equally well to other causal connections—or to randomness—the conspiracy theory is likely to be false.
2. The agents behind the pattern of the conspiracy would need nearly superhuman power to pull it off. People are usually not nearly so powerful as we think they are.
3. The conspiracy is complex, and its successful completion demands a large number of elements.
4. Similarly, the conspiracy involves large numbers of people who would all need to keep silent about their secrets. The more people involved, the less realistic it becomes.
5. The conspiracy encompasses a grand ambition for control over a nation, economy or political system. If it suggests world domination, the theory is even less likely to be true.
6. The conspiracy theory ratchets up from small events that might be true to much larger, much less probable events.
[/b]7. The conspiracy theory assigns portentous, sinister meanings to what are most likely innocuous, insignificant events.[b]
8. The theory tends to commingle facts and speculations without distinguishing between the two and without assigning degrees of probability or of factuality.
9. The theorist is indiscriminately suspicious of all government agencies or private groups, which suggests an inability to nuance differences between true and false conspiracies.
10. The conspiracy theorist refuses to consider alternative explanations, rejecting all disconfirming evidence and blatantly seeking only confirmatory evidence to support what he or she has a priori determined to be the truth.
11. The fact that politicians sometimes lie or that corporations occasionally cheat does not mean that every event is the result of a tortuous conspiracy. Most of the time stuff just happens, and our brains connect the dots into meaningful patterns
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-conspiracy-theory-director/
2. The agents behind the pattern of the conspiracy would need nearly superhuman power to pull it off. People are usually not nearly so powerful as we think they are.
3. The conspiracy is complex, and its successful completion demands a large number of elements.
4. Similarly, the conspiracy involves large numbers of people who would all need to keep silent about their secrets. The more people involved, the less realistic it becomes.
5. The conspiracy encompasses a grand ambition for control over a nation, economy or political system. If it suggests world domination, the theory is even less likely to be true.
6. The conspiracy theory ratchets up from small events that might be true to much larger, much less probable events.
[/b]7. The conspiracy theory assigns portentous, sinister meanings to what are most likely innocuous, insignificant events.[b]
8. The theory tends to commingle facts and speculations without distinguishing between the two and without assigning degrees of probability or of factuality.
9. The theorist is indiscriminately suspicious of all government agencies or private groups, which suggests an inability to nuance differences between true and false conspiracies.
10. The conspiracy theorist refuses to consider alternative explanations, rejecting all disconfirming evidence and blatantly seeking only confirmatory evidence to support what he or she has a priori determined to be the truth.
11. The fact that politicians sometimes lie or that corporations occasionally cheat does not mean that every event is the result of a tortuous conspiracy. Most of the time stuff just happens, and our brains connect the dots into meaningful patterns
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-conspiracy-theory-director/
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:38
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:Why is the right joking about and normalizing an assassination attempt?
They are hoping that some of their craziest followers assassinate Democrats whom the GOP leadership finds problematic. They cannot openly ask for their followers to assassinate these people and so they resort to joking about it.
I hope anyone who considers themselves “moderate” or has every claimed that “both sides” are similar in their extremism will confront this aspect of the GOP. They’re actively trying to get Democrats killed.
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:21
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Justice Fepartment https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
If at 2:23 am a resident calls 911 about an unknown male in a residence why call it a wellness check? Police got there at 2:31 and the front door was opened to 2 police officers. Officers see both holding one hammer and don't immediately enter and get the potential weapon...
Homeowner called for an emergency intruder and the protocol is first a chat? What did police think it was at that time? A carpenter?
Just to be clear about this for you. Pelosi was woken up while in his bed. The intruder asked where Nancy was. Pelosi said she was not home and wouldn't be home for several days. The intruder said he would wait. Pelosi went to the bathroom where his phone was charging. He dialed 911, but I don't believe spoke directly to the operator. Instead, the operator could hear the discussion between the two men and pieced together that something untoward was going on. The operator then alerted police who conducted a high priority wellness check.
The sources for this are the SFPD press conference which you can watch on Youtube and the DOJ press release and statement which are linked earlier in this thread. During the press conference, the police chief praised Heather Grives, the 911 operator for using her intuition in guessing that this was an emergency.
Yes I understand the chain of events. Dispatcher Grimes escalated the call to what might be a priority A in SF from a B or C. Unless they got there faster on a B [priority wellness check] given the call and owners of residence. What I don't get is the request to drop the hammer given the reason the police were at the house. Immediate hammer removal then questions would have meant no skull fracture.
Should I just keep posting this for you? It's ok to seek help for your tendency to want to believe in some sort of conspiracy, cover up, etc.
"When a person experiences distress over uncertainty or witnesses a large-scale event, the mind will start to look for explanations that connect the dots. Those with lower analytical abilities and less tolerance for uncertainty are more likely to believe a conspiracy theory. This is because conspiracy theories can often provide explanations for events that seem confusing or frightening, and believers can assume that they are being intentionally deceived."
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:21
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Justice Fepartment https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
If at 2:23 am a resident calls 911 about an unknown male in a residence why call it a wellness check? Police got there at 2:31 and the front door was opened to 2 police officers. Officers see both holding one hammer and don't immediately enter and get the potential weapon...
Homeowner called for an emergency intruder and the protocol is first a chat? What did police think it was at that time? A carpenter?
Just to be clear about this for you. Pelosi was woken up while in his bed. The intruder asked where Nancy was. Pelosi said she was not home and wouldn't be home for several days. The intruder said he would wait. Pelosi went to the bathroom where his phone was charging. He dialed 911, but I don't believe spoke directly to the operator. Instead, the operator could hear the discussion between the two men and pieced together that something untoward was going on. The operator then alerted police who conducted a high priority wellness check.
The sources for this are the SFPD press conference which you can watch on Youtube and the DOJ press release and statement which are linked earlier in this thread. During the press conference, the police chief praised Heather Grives, the 911 operator for using her intuition in guessing that this was an emergency.
Yes I understand the chain of events. Dispatcher Grimes escalated the call to what might be a priority A in SF from a B or C. Unless they got there faster on a B [priority wellness check] given the call and owners of residence. What I don't get is the request to drop the hammer given the reason the police were at the house. Immediate hammer removal then questions would have meant no skull fracture.
Spoken like someone who has never been in a tense, scary, uncertain situation.
It's really easy to come up with the best path forward when you're sitting there comfortable in front of your computer thinking about solutions. Tell us, are you a fireman? A first responder? An EMT? Are you regularly put in situations where you have to make fast, potentially life-saving decisions?
How do people not understand that in real time chaos, unclarity, and the need to act fast will lead to outcomes that might have been different if you were able to have time to ponder the best way forward while looking at the situation from the outside?
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:20
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Justice Fepartment https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
If at 2:23 am a resident calls 911 about an unknown male in a residence why call it a wellness check? Police got there at 2:31 and the front door was opened to 2 police officers. Officers see both holding one hammer and don't immediately enter and get the potential weapon...
Homeowner called for an emergency intruder and the protocol is first a chat? What did police think it was at that time? A carpenter?
Just to be clear about this for you. Pelosi was woken up while in his bed. The intruder asked where Nancy was. Pelosi said she was not home and wouldn't be home for several days. The intruder said he would wait. Pelosi went to the bathroom where his phone was charging. He dialed 911, but I don't believe spoke directly to the operator. Instead, the operator could hear the discussion between the two men and pieced together that something untoward was going on. The operator then alerted police who conducted a high priority wellness check.
The sources for this are the SFPD press conference which you can watch on Youtube and the DOJ press release and statement which are linked earlier in this thread. During the press conference, the police chief praised Heather Grives, the 911 operator for using her intuition in guessing that this was an emergency.
Yes I understand the chain of events. Dispatcher Grimes escalated the call to what might be a priority A in SF from a B or C. Unless they got there faster on a B [priority wellness check] given the call and owners of residence. What I don't get is the request to drop the hammer given the reason the police were at the house. Immediate hammer removal then questions would have meant no skull fracture.
Obviously explanation - it happened too quickly for the police to stop the swing of the hammer.
Remember, the average police officer usually doesn't go charging in to dark houses. They are also worried for their own safety, in case someone has a firearm.
+1, why is it so hard to believe that police might not have stopped the guy in time? Have seen plenty of videos of fights where sh*t happens fast. Seems perfectly reasonable to me, or about 10000000000000 times more reasonable than what (I'm guessing because they never explain) alternative explanation may exist, which only seems to be "there's a coverup for no good reason." Sure, buddy, sounds convincing.
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:12
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Justice Fepartment https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
If at 2:23 am a resident calls 911 about an unknown male in a residence why call it a wellness check? Police got there at 2:31 and the front door was opened to 2 police officers. Officers see both holding one hammer and don't immediately enter and get the potential weapon...
Homeowner called for an emergency intruder and the protocol is first a chat? What did police think it was at that time? A carpenter?
Just to be clear about this for you. Pelosi was woken up while in his bed. The intruder asked where Nancy was. Pelosi said she was not home and wouldn't be home for several days. The intruder said he would wait. Pelosi went to the bathroom where his phone was charging. He dialed 911, but I don't believe spoke directly to the operator. Instead, the operator could hear the discussion between the two men and pieced together that something untoward was going on. The operator then alerted police who conducted a high priority wellness check.
The sources for this are the SFPD press conference which you can watch on Youtube and the DOJ press release and statement which are linked earlier in this thread. During the press conference, the police chief praised Heather Grives, the 911 operator for using her intuition in guessing that this was an emergency.
Yes I understand the chain of events. Dispatcher Grimes escalated the call to what might be a priority A in SF from a B or C. Unless they got there faster on a B [priority wellness check] given the call and owners of residence. What I don't get is the request to drop the hammer given the reason the police were at the house. Immediate hammer removal then questions would have meant no skull fracture.
Obviously explanation - it happened too quickly for the police to stop the swing of the hammer.
Remember, the average police officer usually doesn't go charging in to dark houses. They are also worried for their own safety, in case someone has a firearm.
Anonymous
11/01/2022 11:06
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Justice Fepartment https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1548106/download
If at 2:23 am a resident calls 911 about an unknown male in a residence why call it a wellness check? Police got there at 2:31 and the front door was opened to 2 police officers. Officers see both holding one hammer and don't immediately enter and get the potential weapon...
Homeowner called for an emergency intruder and the protocol is first a chat? What did police think it was at that time? A carpenter?
Just to be clear about this for you. Pelosi was woken up while in his bed. The intruder asked where Nancy was. Pelosi said she was not home and wouldn't be home for several days. The intruder said he would wait. Pelosi went to the bathroom where his phone was charging. He dialed 911, but I don't believe spoke directly to the operator. Instead, the operator could hear the discussion between the two men and pieced together that something untoward was going on. The operator then alerted police who conducted a high priority wellness check.
The sources for this are the SFPD press conference which you can watch on Youtube and the DOJ press release and statement which are linked earlier in this thread. During the press conference, the police chief praised Heather Grives, the 911 operator for using her intuition in guessing that this was an emergency.
Yes I understand the chain of events. Dispatcher Grimes escalated the call to what might be a priority A in SF from a B or C. Unless they got there faster on a B [priority wellness check] given the call and owners of residence. What I don't get is the request to drop the hammer given the reason the police were at the house. Immediate hammer removal then questions would have meant no skull fracture.
Anonymous
Anonymous
11/01/2022 10:57
Subject: Pelosi’s husband assaulted during breakin
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.addictioncenter.com/drugs/conspiracy-theory-addiction/
"Need For Understanding
When a person experiences distress over uncertainty or witnesses a large-scale event, the mind will start to look for explanations that connect the dots. Those with lower analytical abilities and less tolerance for uncertainty are more likely to believe a conspiracy theory. This is because conspiracy theories can often provide explanations for events that seem confusing or frightening, and believers can assume that they are being intentionally deceived. People are also naturally inclined to search for information that confirms their existing beliefs; this is known as confirmation bias.
The ability to easily share and spread information over the internet has increased belief in certain conspiracy theories. Someone with a conspiracy theory addiction may seek out information to support something they already think is true, rather than seek out new information or challenge their beliefs. A need for understanding and consistency can lead to addictive behaviors such as spending excessive time on the internet and ignoring relationships and responsibilities."
Low key burn for some of the PPs here.
Once again for the “I’m smarter than everyone else in the room and I think SoMeThInG dOeSn’T aDd Up” crowd: a MAGA crazy attempted to assassinate the 3rd in line of presidential succession. This is happened because the GOP has been stoking violence among their followers, and they are taking zero credit for it.
Since I am a nit-picker for accuracy, he didn't actually plan to assassinate her. Just break her kneecaps.
Fair point. But do we really think that having taking her to the Capitol with broken kneecaps his next step would have been to carefully deliver her to the ED of GW, or would she, in his plan, have been killed? And has anyone figured out for whom she was the lure?
I was wondering about that. Perhaps Harris because of the San Francisco connection? But more likely AOC since these people obsess about her so much.
Anonymous