Anonymous wrote:The LEO is responding to a dispatch for a wellness check. From what we know this wasn’t reported as a burglary, barricading situation or hostage scenario due to the nature of the 9-1-1 interaction. Someone opens the front door and the officer encounters two people grasping a hammer which suddenly transforms into a violent assault.

But their alarm would be going off, so I'm not understanding. Windows were broken. Maybe different in San Francisco, but in our very middle class suburb of Atlanta, almost everyone has an alarm that we can hear for a block or two.

The LEO is responding to a dispatch for a wellness check. From what we know this wasn’t reported as a burglary, barricading situation or hostage scenario due to the nature of the 9-1-1 interaction. Someone opens the front door and the officer encounters two people grasping a hammer which suddenly transforms into a violent assault.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tell us again, Republican voters, how your party is treating this attempted assassination with the gravity it deserves.

Sounds Christian. WWJD?

He was a carpenter. He probably would've been passing out hammers. Don't you remember the golden rule? Do unto others blah blah blah then kneecap them with a hammer. So sayeth the Lord. Remember when dude was selling stuff in the temple? Jesus tossed his table and broke his kneecaps with a hammer then dragged him up to Rome to make an example of him. Remember when he had beef with Caesar? Broke into their house and brained Mrs. Caesar with a hammer when the guards busted in after she called IXII, but then he laid down a sermon about how he had been planning to kneecap Caesar with a hammer because of taxes. It's like some of you never read the bible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How on earth did he strike Pelosi with a hammer at least two times after police had seen him? Door opens (not sure who opened it), they see both of them with a hand in the hammer, and DePape was able to then fracture Pelosi’s skull? Something isn’t right about that . . .

It can take one strike with a hammer to fracture a skull.

What is confusing to you?

If we are to take Depape's statement at face-value, he states flat out that when the police knocked on the door, Pelosi ran to open it. Once you open the door and are THISCLOSE to two police officers inside an open door frame, you keep on going. You don't have a hammer grab fight.

So either Depape is telling what he believes happened (and he's mentally ill and prone to delusions, according to those that know him) or there's another version of what happened. The police have that version on their body-cam (if they were wearing it).

A statement by a mentally ill man was released as truth. Let that sink in. Yes, he needs to be charged and I'm glad he was. But if you believe that his version was not a combination of what actually happened and what happened in his mind, you've being doing the same hard drugs.

Can you please tell us your narrative as to what really happened and what it's all about as your posts are so convoluted, don't actually know ehat you're saying is the story nor can I make any logical sense of it other than you question everything and when someone points something out a to why something logically makes sense, you move the goal post.

Can you please summarize the supposed real story? What really happened? How many are involved in the cover-up? Why are so many people who know what happened staying quiet? Are they all in on it? Being threatened?

And lastly, what evidence would allow you to believe there isn't a giant sceme kf some sort and a coverup if that's what you're implying? Anything? Nothing?

I wasn't there and I don't speculate. I'm simply asking if it is wise to take the ramblings of a man who has a long history of mental illness as gospel. That's it. That's all.

You're asking us not to take what a man who appeared to have broken into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm as gospel, after the man who appeared to have broken into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm admits to breaking into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm. Do I have that right?

DP. Pretty much. We shouldn’t assume that the man who claims he was there to break Pelosi’s knees and take her to DC was serious about breaking her knees and taking her to DC just because he had a hammer and zip ties and struck Mr. Pelosi with the hammer. Why would you assume that the crazed Republican’s plan was exactly what it appears to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How on earth did he strike Pelosi with a hammer at least two times after police had seen him? Door opens (not sure who opened it), they see both of them with a hand in the hammer, and DePape was able to then fracture Pelosi’s skull? Something isn’t right about that . . .

It can take one strike with a hammer to fracture a skull.

What is confusing to you?

If we are to take Depape's statement at face-value, he states flat out that when the police knocked on the door, Pelosi ran to open it. Once you open the door and are THISCLOSE to two police officers inside an open door frame, you keep on going. You don't have a hammer grab fight.

So either Depape is telling what he believes happened (and he's mentally ill and prone to delusions, according to those that know him) or there's another version of what happened. The police have that version on their body-cam (if they were wearing it).

A statement by a mentally ill man was released as truth. Let that sink in. Yes, he needs to be charged and I'm glad he was. But if you believe that his version was not a combination of what actually happened and what happened in his mind, you've being doing the same hard drugs.

Can you please tell us your narrative as to what really happened and what it's all about as your posts are so convoluted, don't actually know ehat you're saying is the story nor can I make any logical sense of it other than you question everything and when someone points something out a to why something logically makes sense, you move the goal post.

Can you please summarize the supposed real story? What really happened? How many are involved in the cover-up? Why are so many people who know what happened staying quiet? Are they all in on it? Being threatened?

And lastly, what evidence would allow you to believe there isn't a giant sceme kf some sort and a coverup if that's what you're implying? Anything? Nothing?

I wasn't there and I don't speculate. I'm simply asking if it is wise to take the ramblings of a man who has a long history of mental illness as gospel. That's it. That's all.

You're asking us not to take what a man who appeared to have broken into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm as gospel, after the man who appeared to have broken into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm admits to breaking into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm. Do I have that right?

DP. Pretty much. We shouldn’t assume that the man who claims he was there to break Pelosi’s knees and take her to DC was serious about breaking her knees and taking her to DC just because he had a hammer and zip ties and struck Mr. Pelosi with the hammer. Why would you assume that the crazed Republican’s plan was exactly what it appears to be.

I reject responding to political hate speech with violence.

If only we could do something about political hate speech. But I don't think we can.

There is such a thing as inciting a riot; can there be such a thing as inciting a murder attempt? I don't know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How on earth did he strike Pelosi with a hammer at least two times after police had seen him? Door opens (not sure who opened it), they see both of them with a hand in the hammer, and DePape was able to then fracture Pelosi’s skull? Something isn’t right about that . . .

It can take one strike with a hammer to fracture a skull.

What is confusing to you?

If we are to take Depape's statement at face-value, he states flat out that when the police knocked on the door, Pelosi ran to open it. Once you open the door and are THISCLOSE to two police officers inside an open door frame, you keep on going. You don't have a hammer grab fight.

So either Depape is telling what he believes happened (and he's mentally ill and prone to delusions, according to those that know him) or there's another version of what happened. The police have that version on their body-cam (if they were wearing it).

A statement by a mentally ill man was released as truth. Let that sink in. Yes, he needs to be charged and I'm glad he was. But if you believe that his version was not a combination of what actually happened and what happened in his mind, you've being doing the same hard drugs.

Can you please tell us your narrative as to what really happened and what it's all about as your posts are so convoluted, don't actually know ehat you're saying is the story nor can I make any logical sense of it other than you question everything and when someone points something out a to why something logically makes sense, you move the goal post.

Can you please summarize the supposed real story? What really happened? How many are involved in the cover-up? Why are so many people who know what happened staying quiet? Are they all in on it? Being threatened?

And lastly, what evidence would allow you to believe there isn't a giant sceme kf some sort and a coverup if that's what you're implying? Anything? Nothing?

I wasn't there and I don't speculate. I'm simply asking if it is wise to take the ramblings of a man who has a long history of mental illness as gospel. That's it. That's all.

You're asking us not to take what a man who appeared to have broken into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm as gospel, after the man who appeared to have broken into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm admits to breaking into Nancy Pelosi's home to do her harm. Do I have that right?

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.

Oh please name some tense and scary situations where the various accounts from multiple witnesses had no discrepancies whatsoever. I would be more suspicious of a situation where everyone involved gave the exact same account of what happened, no details conflicting whatsoever, and the journalists who reported it did not vary in how they reported it, either. That to me would signal that people were coached into giving a certain account.

And what you'd have preferred to do, from the safety of your desk looking back and having time to consider how such a situation should unfold, is completely irrelevant to what happened in the heat of a split-second moment, unless you are part of a team looking to improve your reactions.

Events never unfold just the way they "should have." That's just the nature of life. All humans make good and bad decisions, especially when it's a split-second decisions. It's weird that you can't accept that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans have the problem and need to address it. Democrats don’t have a problem. They didn’t make jokes about Steve Scalise getting shot.

This is why the Democrats are a failed party. Failed. Denial and finger pointing won't solve the problem with the GOP that's been brewing for years and has now erupted thanks to Trump.

And you think the GOP thinks it has a problem it's going to address? Ha. Gotta bridge to sell ya.

The Democrats do not have a problem with violent rhetoric leading to record threats and attacks on politicians. They just don't. This is a one-sided problem. Period.

Anonymous wrote:Republicans have the problem and need to address it. Democrats don’t have a problem. They didn’t make jokes about Steve Scalise getting shot.

This is why the Democrats are a failed party. Failed. Denial and finger pointing won't solve the problem with the GOP that's been brewing for years and has now erupted thanks to Trump.

And you think the GOP thinks it has a problem it's going to address? Ha. Gotta bridge to sell ya.

Anonymous wrote:Republicans have the problem and need to address it. Democrats don’t have a problem. They didn’t make jokes about Steve Scalise getting shot.

And also stop with the conspiracy BS over every. single. thing. Call it out within your party. So sick of this being put out even from the top of the GOP. They know it keeps their followers sticking to them and it's not unlike the way a cult leader would try to keep their followers devout.

It's sickening. I'm a middle of the road person who can see the POV on some basic republican stances on issues. However, the GOP is eating itself alive by indulging in the allusions to deep state conspiracies. It's incredibly frustrating and sad.

Republicans have the problem and need to address it. Democrats don’t have a problem. They didn’t make jokes about Steve Scalise getting shot.

Anonymous wrote:I fail to understand why the GOP are so violent.

Why the Democrats are so passive?

Shouldn't the Democrats be responding to all the GOP threats of violence in kind?

Taking the high road isn't working.

Trump is pugnacious, a bully, who uses violent imagery, and threats of violence over and over, yet he's protected by armed guards.

The Democrats just ignore all this, as if it's the yowling of a silly bully.

Democrat leaders - all of whom are pretty old - are still holding out hope that the law and law enforcement will curtail the Republicans. They are operating on values from decades ago - "if only we could convince the GOP to meet us in the middle...."

It won't. The courts and law enforcement are providing cover to Republicans who tried to stage a coup.

This country is done. It really is.

Anonymous wrote:I fail to understand why the GOP are so violent.

Why the Democrats are so passive?

Shouldn't the Democrats be responding to all the GOP threats of violence in kind?

Taking the high road isn't working.

Trump is pugnacious, a bully, who uses violent imagery, and threats of violence over and over, yet he's protected by armed guards.

The Democrats just ignore all this, as if it's the yowling of a silly bully.

Absolutely not. What is the matter with you?

I fail to understand why the GOP are so violent.

Why the Democrats are so passive?

Shouldn't the Democrats be responding to all the GOP threats of violence in kind?

Taking the high road isn't working.

Trump is pugnacious, a bully, who uses violent imagery, and threats of violence over and over, yet he's protected by armed guards.

The Democrats just ignore all this, as if it's the yowling of a silly bully.