I'm going to start a thread for people from the capitol insurrection that I find interesting, but haven't seen anyone poking at.
I'll start with this guy, who was issuing orders to Gieswien's crew at the west Capitol courtyard.
He starts out asking the police "How does it feel... to have your own tactics used against you?"
I originally thought he was the one who shouted "A Team line it up" but that may be incorrect. Regardless, only someone who knows what tactics will be used would issue that taunt.
Another note for @SeditionHunters/ @capitolhunters: using a gate inside a DAW with these settings, give or take, let you hear the nearby audio much more clearly. I'd have to play a bit more with params to understand what Gieswein is saying, but it's def possible to isolate.
Here's the link to the original video, which might be INCREDIBLY important in establishing links between those involved in the conspiracy...
And it seems that our *friend* Brendan Gutenschwager was able to find this guy on the inside of the Capitol building for us.
one more note on this video:
does anyone recognize this guy and woman from anywhere else during the capitol breach? the purple goggles seem fairly distinctive, but I haven't been looking for him yet.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If you want to reduce threats nationwide, why do we need to determine intent?
Why aren't ALL threats simply treated as if they were realistic, and ensure that those making threats are prosecuted?
If a reasonable person thinks that a statement is a threat of physical or psychological harm, made either directly to a potential victim, or regarding a third person/class of individuals, and that potential victim wishes for that individual to be held responsible, they should be.
If we start prosecuting these offenses, the message that online threats are federal crimes in and of themselves - especially threats intended to manipulate the threatened person's behaviour (extortion) - will vastly reduce the chaff analysts need to sift through...
>> It's particularly interesting the Biden admin's announcement was originally scheduled for Friday, but has been delayed until Monday...
during the same weekend CPAC is being held in Orlando.
Think that might be why @tedcruz is so worried about
FREEDOM?
But, to be clear, the number of current US officials on those videos is likely to be non-negligible, with those on all sides of the political spectrum.
Deploying that info could lead to further social destabilization, and there might be a need for time to manage that strategy.
Seriously - if anyone has time/avail. resources, PLEASE - we need a simple universal (rails) app for public health agencies to use for signing people up for notifications, waitlists & appointments?
I get that normally this would be an opportunity for paying customers, but the cost:service to humanity ratio on this one would be out of this world for marketing purposes...
If anyone is willing to provide hosting resources, already I have front/backend wireframes in my head;
I've spent the morning looking at existing sites where I live, and - seriously - only @meijer allows you to sign up for a waitlist. How is that AT ALL rational?
Give people a waitlist to help set expectations, and a LOT of anxiety will be reduced.
I haven't done this yet, but it's tempting: what would happen if I were to run facerec on capitol rioters using photos from convicted sexual predators as my seed faces?
It would be a service if they didn't notify their home state and the DC Sex Offender Registry Unit beforehand
note: only to get counts, any matches would be handed off to law enforcement.
nothing would be posted publicly until they've been officially violated, if at all.
Getting the photos would be a HUGE task, though.
FWIW, probably TOO huge a task. And the risk of doing it without having lawyers clear the ability to use data from each state is WAY out of my reach.
This would def be something @FBI should be able to do, though.
You're seeing those who helped cause the problem lament what they did - but who is extending legitimacy to those who tried to raise red flags ~10 years before it lead to insurrection?
Maybe the people WITH foresight are the ones you should start listening to.
There's a real problem with continually fetishizing those who eventually came to realize their actions cause harm over those who can see and elucidate the risks in advance.
It normalizes - even promotes continuing to participate in ventures that put people at risk.
that _should_ show us that their judgement is flawed, and diminish our willingness to trust their judgement in the future, not to invite them to join the pundit class.
Listening to @RepMcCaul on @CNNSotu, I have to wonder why he's talking about paying people's electric bills off using federal funds, when those "exorbitant" rates are pretty clearly a violation of Texas §17.46(b)(27).
Any bills already issued should be comped, and each instance should be counted as a violation.
If doubling the price of water during an emergency is considered price gouging, increasing costs on something required for survival by an order of magnitude is certainly price gouging.
I don't care if the PUC authorized a rate hike.
An 18,000% increase is not a 'hike.'
A two-fold increase in the order of magnitude in something required for survival is NOT a hike. It's beyond gouging.