Temporarily leaving aside the presence of numerous other weapons: Yes, some people in the Capitol crowd had guns.

Because most of the people present were not arrested that day, we may never know how many guns. But there were some, according to federal prosecutors. Quick thread:
Guy Reffitt has been charged with illegally carrying a gun on Capitol grounds. cnn.com/2021/06/17/pol…
A now-former DEA agent, Mark Ibrahim, is accused of illegally carrying his government-issued gun on Capitol grounds (and showing it off to others there). You can see the gun in photos: cbsnews.com/news/mark-ibra…
Another man, Christopher Alberts, was arrested on January 6 after allegedly carrying a gun on Capitol grounds; an officer alleges they noticed the bulge, spotted the gun, and detained Alberts after he tried to flee. cnn.com/2021/02/25/pol…
In addition to the charges over guns in the Capitol crowd: A fourth man, Lonnie Coffman, has been accused of parking a vehicle that contained guns and Molotov cocktails near the Capitol that day. cnn.com/2021/01/08/pol…
A fifth man, Cleveland Meredith Jr., is accused of possessing unregistered weapons in DC; he allegedly showed up too late for the riot but talked about killing Pelosi and had "a Glock 19, nine millimeter pistol, a Tavor X95 assault rifle" in truck trailer. justice.gov/opa/page/file/…
In summary: We don't yet have a full list of the firearms present at the Capitol on the 6th, and we may never, but there were certainly some. Officers are clearly not lying/fantasizing/being dramatic when they say they were fearful of there being some.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Daniel Dale

Daniel Dale Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ddale8

15 Jul
Elections chiefs in Republican GA counties tell me they too had piles of no-crease "mail" ballots. That's because, for scanning, counties have to *duplicate* military/overseas ballots (printed out on nonofficial paper) + damaged ballots. They store duplicates in a separate box.
The office of Republican Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has been saying this for months, but in light of the "NO CREASES" conspiracy theories popping up again, I thought I'd call some local officials in Trump-dominated places in Georgia. Again, it's nonsense.
Jane Scoggins, elections chief in Coweta County, GA (67% Trump), said sometimes people just don't get how election processes work. On duplicate (UNCREASED!) mail ballots: "I don’t think people understand why you’d put them all in the same box -- which makes perfect sense to me."
Read 4 tweets
8 Jul
New version keeps many of the previously proposed restrictions but gets rid of: provision to ban Sunday morning early voting; at least 2 provisions to make it easier to overturn elections; a provision to make mail voters disclose whether they’re ill, injured, or have a disability
To be extra-extra-clear, the new version of the bill *gets rid of* previously proposed provisions that would've made it easier to overturn elections. Those provisions were in the bill Dems thwarted with their walkout but aren't in this newly filed version.
New bill also abandons GOP's previous attempt to require a disabled person who wants a mail ballot to be "not capable" of voting in person (not just "prevent"ed from voting in person), and abandons previous GOP language about a lack of transportation being insufficient grounds.
Read 4 tweets
6 Jul
This "controversy" about the US Women's National Team was entirely fabricated by right-wing figures. Some of the players turned to face the flag during the anthem (it's located at one end of the stadium), while others looked forward like the veteran who was performing it. (1/3)
After running the baseless claim in a headline, Breitbart News ran an "update" that framed this as a he-said, she-said kind of thing -- "US women's soccer team denies claim" rather than "our story about the US women's soccer team was bad." (2/3)
Fox News also went with this "denies" framing.

To their credit, some on the right -- even some who don't have the best accuracy record, like Ryan Saavedra -- made a genuine attempt to correct the phony narrative.
Read 4 tweets
31 May
The bill does not make it “illegal” to drive more than 2 non-relatives. It says people driving more than 2 disabled or sick non-relatives - people allowed to have a ballot brought to them at the curb to fill out in the car - have to *fill out a form* with their name and address.
There is lots of criticism of the fill-a-form requirement for drivers doing a good deed. But a) it's not a ban of any kind, and b) it doesn't apply to people driving voters going inside to vote; it's limited to people transporting disabled or sick voters who are voting outside.
No, I'm correct. The language in the bill limits the restriction to people driving non-relatives "voting under this section." Legislation is complicated, but "this section" is a *section about people physically incapable of voting inside the building.*
Read 4 tweets
19 May
This is going viral before anyone confirms who it is actually from - and it is signed by anonymous “members” of the Capitol Police, not by the organization itself or its chief. Caution recommended!
Very big difference. This is not a statement from the US Capitol Police as an organization, as the initial viral tweet said/suggested. (I know some people will respond “same thing,” but it’s really not.)
Yes, aware of this from Raskin’s office. I’m noting that, whatever its merits, an unsigned letter from an unknown number of unnamed people at the Capitol Police is substantially different than a statement issued by the Capitol Police.
Read 5 tweets
25 Apr
This stuff is completely imaginary. Biden has not proposed any limit on Americans’ meat consumption.

What happened: 1) The Daily Mail ran an article that dishonestly connected Biden’s climate plan with a not-at-all-about-Biden study. 2) Others on the right just ran with this.
The UMichigan study is not about the Biden plan at all. It looks at what would happen to emissions if US people hypothetically cut their meat consumption by various %. Daily Mail took the biggest hypothetical % reduction studied and falsely made it sound like Biden demands this.
In children’s terms, the study found that if people reduce meat eating by a lot, emissions would fall a lot.

Daily Mail was like...Biden wants to cut emissions by a lot. Therefore, he’ll force people to reduce meat eating by the same amount this random study looked at.

Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!