BREAKING: Official spokesperson from D.C. MPD confirmed in writing that MPD officers deployed tear gas on June 1, 2021. In court proceedings, MPD's brief accepted as true the Plaintiffs' allegation. 1/ thefederalist.com/2021/06/01/bow…
2/ Had the MPD succeeded on its Motion to Dismiss, it never would have been forced to reveal whether it used tear gas. Last week, @NathanBacaTV reported that MPD's attorney admitted in oral argument that MPD had used tear gas, but given stage of procedure,
3/ And fact that MPD did not admit that in its brief OR previously, that seemed unlikely.
5/ Since then I've been seeking clarification from transcript, @NathanBacaTV, 3 lawyers for MPD, and colleague obtained from MPD itself. Received today. What I want to know is WHY did it take 1 year district to give an answer?(NOTE: District never said they didn't use tear gas.)
TYPO HERE: June 1, 2020.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Another point re @NathanBacaTV article: wusa9.com/article/news/i… The distinction b/w clearing Lafayette Park and other areas is blurred. And from his article D.C. officials still haven't said whether tear gas used outside of Lafayette Park. Why not?
The more I think about this, the more this seems an important question: D.C. Police continue to say they did not participate in clearing of Lafayette Park, but from article D.C. officials have yet to say whether they used tear gas to clear areas outside Park. Instead, D.C. cops
2/ are trying to get the case dismissed WITHOUT that fact being disclosed, but arguing no violation of constitutional rights EVEN IF THEY used tear gas. Why is that? Why won't D.C. officials say whether tear gas used outside Lafayette Park by D.C. Police???
THREAD-HUGELY IMPORTANT: While without seeing the transcript, I can only be 99% sure, but I am 99% sure this is 100% FALSE. SO, journalists, and "jouralists" before retweeting or writing an article parroting this claim, READ. THIS. THREAD.
2/ Here's the lede. BUT what exactly did the attoney say? First, the reporters paraphrase and then the actual words:
3/ What the attorney said IS NOT--REPEAT--is NOT an admission that the DC Police used tear gas. And here it's important to understand both the law and court procedures: The DC Police Officers were sued and the Plaintiffs ALLEGED tear gas was used:
THREAD: My 92-year-old mom was talking in her sleep last night: "Charles, where's Rose?" she asked. Charles was her brother who, after Pearl Harbor, claimed he was 18 so he could enlist--as his mom, my grandmother refused to agree. He trained in Washington state. 1/
2/ My grandmother hitchhiked there from Michigan for Christmas b/c "my boy's not going to spend Christmas alone." He was Army, infintry, originally, but after discovering his superior swimming skills he became a Ranger.
3/ He earned a Silver Star for volunteering to swim ashore ahead of the landing at Anzio to mark the landing site. He succeeded and survived, only months later to be killed by shrapnel while eating with his unit outside. My grandmother refused to believe he died for years,