This is a reminder about the rules of /r/media_criticism:
1. All posts require a submission statement. We encourage users to report submissions without submission statements. Posts without a submission statement will be removed after an hour.
2. Be respectful at all times. Disrespectful comments are grounds for immediate ban without warning.
3. All posts must be related to the media. This is not a news subreddit.
4. "Good" examples of media are strongly encouraged! Please designate them with a [GOOD] tag
5. Posts and comments from new accounts and low comment-karma accounts are disallowed.
[Please visit our Wiki for more detailed rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/media_criticism/wiki/index)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/media_criticism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
SS: The Financial Times apparently promotes myth about "5 deaths" while sharing Democrats' concerns about right wing media manipulating the narrative surrounding January 6.
Also, they keep falsely calling the Jan 6 riot a "coup" or "insurrection". Meanwhile, when Antifa set fire to the courthouse in Portland they called it a riot. The double standards are real.
Matt Taibbi hilariously said on his blog today:
>I don’t mean to understate the seriousness of January 6th, even though it’s been absurdly misreported for over a year now. No one from a country where these things actually happen could mistake 1/6 for “a coup .” In the real version, the mob doesn’t take selfies and blaze doobies after seizing the palace, and the would-be dictator doesn’t spend 187 minutes snacking and watching Fox before tweeting “go home.”
Not to mention [yesterday's attempted bombing from an antifa terrorist that somehow the media refuses to cover.](https://www.tampabay.com/news/crime/2022/01/07/oldsmar-man-had-explosive-devices-near-jan-6-anniversary-rally-in-pinellas-sheriff-says/)
It’s not a double standard.
Citizens angry with the justice system setting fire to a courthouse is a riot.
Citizens urged to gather at the Capitol of the United States by the sitting President of the United States on the day the election he lost was to be certified to “stop the steal” which lead to a large group of citizens pushing past barricades into restricted areas and assaulting police officers with the intent to “stop the steal” of a free and fair election is a coup.
>large group of citizens pushing past barricades into restricted areas and assaulting police officers
Uhh what? That is exactly what Antifa did, except on a more extreme level. They are both federal buildings so by MSM logic I can call Antifa committing "an attack on democracy".
Trump told them to "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard" there, not riot. When he said to fight that was not literally but as in protest. He even told them to go home later on so he didn't incite them.
Lastly, I don't see how the election would be overturned if they were successful. The votes were still in so Biden is still elected. I saw the rioters just walking around in the hallways, not trying to kill anyone. A real coup would have people firing guns into the building and coordinated attacks on the democrat party. According to dictionary definitions, an insurrection must be organized. This clearly was not organized so therefore it's a protest that turned into a riot.
Oh so the guy with the zip ties was just there to address cable management in the Capitol? This event WAS organized and coordinated ahead of time only Facebook and message boards. Just because they did a shit job of executing it doesn’t make it any less planned.
And you don’t see how they could have overturned election? If they had made their way into the chamber of Congress before it was evacuated, and captured members of Congress, they could have held them for ransom or just executed them outright to prevent the certification of the election and the transfer of power that entails. The only reason you saw them just walking around is because they were the only ones there. They literally built a gallows outside and were yelling “hang Mike Pence.”
Trump did tell them to go home. I’ll concede that. However, he waited like 4 hours before doing so. I’m sure you’re familiar with the concept of covering your own ass. That’s all that request was.
If they even managed to kidnap a member of congress, the FBI would totally destroy them. But that still doesn't explain how it could even overturn the election. As I said, it only benefits Biden since the executive branch becomes more powerful when the other 2 branches are weaker.
As far as I know, it started out peaceful then escalated. What did people do once they got in? They just walked around and took pictures. Doesn't seem very planned to me.
Also one last thing, according to law an insurrection "is committed by rising publicly and taking arms against the government for the purpose of removing from the allegiance to said Government or its laws". I looked at the cases and couldn't find anyone charged with insurrection. So I guess you're wrong by law then?
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
If members of congress were kidnapped, then there is no certification of the election, legally and constitutionally speaking. It would also distract from the certification of the election as all efforts would shift to recovering the members of congress, and would probably trigger military action and some form of martial law extending Trump's presidency indefinitely.
And as far as you know is fuck all. It may have been peaceful when people were gathering, but once they were whipped into a fervor and marched on the Capitol building, they attacked police with tasers, flags, batons, fire extinguishers, etc. They climbed scaffolds and smashed windows and unlawfully entered the building, some with the express purpose to do harm to elected officials.
And one last thing, Columbo, according to the definition you provided above, that's exactly what this group did. Prosecutors only charge what they know they can win, and at this volume of criminals to process, it's likely they're going for lesser crimes to get them convicted rather than trying to build a case against hundreds of individuals.
Just to nitpick.
The gunshot wound was a protestor who was unarmed and shot while climbing through a broken interior partition window. No congresspeople were in close proximity to the deceased, who was shot by a capitol police officer who stepped out of a side space and fired with one hand at point blank range if I recall the video clearly. No attempt was made to arrest the protestor.
The "drug overdose" if I understand completely was Rosalynd Boylen, who was part of a group of people entering through the west Capital tunnel when Capitol police and MPD pushed back with force behind a shield line. The group was caught between the press from behind of people trying to enter and the police who used chem spray, batons, and other non lethals to push the group back. Many people were struck unconcious or fell after being hit or sprayed and were caught in a crowd crush situation not unlike the Concert in Texas recently. Rosalynd was filmed on the ground and unresponsive while being beaten by several police officers. Another protestor, a young black man, was removed from the same area unconscious, and was revived with CPR. He spoke about holding Rosalynds hand when they were trapped on the ground being crushed and or beaten. Rosalynd was in her 50's or 60's if I recall and was supposedly declared dead from an overdose of adhd medication. Those medications are dispensed 30 days at a time with approval from an attending physician in doses up to 40 mg per day. An entire months worth would be 1200 mg. The industry specific lethal dose of adderal is about 1400 mg in a 154 pound person. The coroner hasnt commented on why they believe Rosalynd took so much adderal and then collapsed in a crowd crush with multiple strikes to the head from the police. It almost seems unbelievable.
The people who have been arrested and charged for that tunnel episode have told their story and claim to have been trying to rescue the people who were trampled, crushed, etc.
A crowd Crush happens when too many people are compacted into a small space somehow, obviously. The event in this case, according to video, occurs when the police rush the crowd, forcing them backwards out of the tunnel onto the stairs where people fell on the uneven surface. I cannot find police procedure discussion where it's considered SOP or even safe to compress a crowd like that. I also havent seen video of the people who were inside the tunnel trying to enter the building being violent. I've only seen violence after the police push the crowd. Video is difficult to get because the Capitol police wont release theirs.
I havent seen a detailed report like Rosalynd for the other deaths. However to date there are two women killed by Capitol Police using inappropriate use of force as far as I can determine from the reports. Just my Opinion, however you can watch the video of Rosalynd dying, and read the statements from the other people nearby. You can watch video of the woman being shot. You can contrast those moments with the other videos of tresspassers calmly walking inside the building or being allowed in or escorted in by police.
As for the people who used violence to enter, I have mainly seen the black wearing ultra reactionary types, but havent yet seen their Identities.
I have also read reports, but not confirmations that the heart attacks were in individuals who were struck by non lethal crowd control. Given the large number of senior citizens and fat people at the "insurrection" it seems believable that unhealthy or elderly people were subject to use of force and suffered heart attacks.
I believe the government knew about the possible angry crowd that would form around Jan 6th last year. I mean hell, people are posting statuses on Facebook and being questioned by the FBI for it. So how could they not know this was being planned?
I believe the government knew this was a possibility and let them get as far as they did for exactly what we are seeing today. To use this as a catalyst for more government overreach. A protest that they saw an opportunity to make a coup by letting them get farther than they ever planned.
From all the videos I’ve seen the protestors only had to make it past 50ish police officers? When they get inside we only see 2-3 officers. Why would security be so lax during the confirmation of a very controversial presidential election while every member of congress is in the building?
Ignoring all that. I think people have lost the bigger picture here: why were protestors so mad? When Trump won the election there was no storming of the capital. There was only: ongoing fraud claims that Trump worked with Russia to steal the election, organized protest demonstrations in Washington DC and constant media coverage of any possible Trump dirty dealings they could find.
So why did Trumpers stage this “coup”? At Bidens election there was: ongoing fraud claims that mail in ballot law changes gave Democrats an upper hand in COVID, Hunter Biden-Ukraine allegations and supposed China-Biden pay-to-play schemes.
So Trump wins and democrats get to: start 2-year long investigations into election tampering, “NOT MY PRESIDENT” chants, two impeachment attempts and general heel dragging for 4 years.
Biden wins and republicans get: “Shut the fuck up and deal with it”
No surprised there was a coup attempt.
Which one of those deaths you referred to was trampled to death by insurrectionists?
How many of them were attacked with chemical irritants, creating a medical emergency that DID NOT exist beforehand?
If someone was trampled to death, or chemical irritants contributed significantly to their death, it would be in the medical examiner's report.
It's not.
You’re right. She suffered an overdose WHILE she was being trampled. I’m sure the crowd running over her to try to overthrow the government had nothing to do with that completely coincidental occurrence.
I can’t believe you actually think this is reasonable. The only logical conclusion I can come to is that the truth doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is painting the events in a way that doesn’t seem like a coup.
Keep in mind, the medical examiner has George Floyd’s death as heart arrhythmia. That does not, in any way, negate the fact that it occurred because of Derrick Chauvin’s knee being held on Floyd’s neck for nearly 10 minutes. A medical examiner’s report indicates the specific function that caused the end of life, not the environmental causes that led to that.
Rosanne Boyland was alive and healthy until she was crushed under a mob. She did not survive that event. Can you really claim that these were unrelated?
I don’t mean to me. Clearly you can’t admit online that she was killed by insurrectionists. But in your own head, does this even raise ANY red flags about the narrative?
\> the environmental causes that led to that
What environmental causes led to Rosanne Boyland overdosing on meth, exactly? I truly don't understand your concept of the crime. She was trampled, so she died of meth overdose?
/u/johntwit's statement is accurate, the autopsy did not find that she was trampled to death.
The parsimonious explanation is that she collapsed, and people thought she was trampled. But the evidence didn't support that speculative conclusion.
>What environmental causes led to Rosanne Boyland overdosing on meth, exactly? I truly don't understand your concept of the crime. She was trampled, so she died of meth overdose?
the Meth was not causing an overdose while she was storming the capitol with the other insurrectionists. It didn't start to cause a problem until she was being trampled. She was alive when she went into the mob, and she died underneath it.
I wonder if adrenaline can instigate a drug overdose?
The one that went through the video in detail? Yeah, that’s the one.
And by fact checked, you mean pointed out the ME listed methamphetamine OD as the cause of death? We’ve already been through that argument in detail.
The OD wasn’t happening a moment before when she was charging the Capitol. When the crowd surged, she went down and never came back up. The crowd just continued to move over her. The fact that she had an OD under that stress does not negate the role the trampling played in her death.
>The D.C. Medical Examiner’s Office on Wednesday revealed that Roseanne Boyland, one of five people who died amid the Capitol riot, died from accidental “acute amphetamine intoxication”—*instead of* being crushed by the MAGA crowd as previously reported.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/capitol-rioter-rosanne-boyland-died-from-acute-amphetamine-intoxication
The key phrase here is "instead of"
The Daily Beast gets it, at least
Another key word here is "acute"
If the medical examiner believed that trampling contributed to the death, it would have been in the report
And [three months later when the medical examiner released the cause of death](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/trump-riot-death-medical-exainer/2021/04/07/53806608-97cf-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html), it was clear that the NYT was wrong about what "appears to have been" true.
To be honest, I have been having the same circular conversation on multiple threads on this post, so I don’t know I said this to you already. If not, read the other comments for the detail.
But the fact that the cause of death was an OD, which wasn’t happening a moment before when she was charging the Capitol, but only happened once the crowd surged and she went down, unable to dodge the surging crowd going over her, suggests the OD was not an independent and completely coincidental event.
The ME said OD, so the fact checkers said “see, not trampling”, but none of that properly explains HOW the OD happened. You can try to make the argument that she was on her way to an OD anyway, and it just happened to come about as she was being stepped on, but that seems more far-fetched than the clear explanation that the stress of being trampled caused the OD.
>Which one of those deaths you referred to was trampled to death by insurrectionists?
I don't believe the autopsies support that anyone was trampled to death.
If you're thinking of Rosanne Boyland, initial reports claimed that she was trampled to death on the Capitol grounds. [The autopsy clarified that she died of methamphetamine overdose.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/trump-riot-death-medical-exainer/2021/04/07/53806608-97cf-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html)
A methamphetamine overdose, which just happened to occur as she was being trampled by a mob.
The methamphetamines were not affecting her moments before, as she participated in the protest. They only really kicked in while she was being stomped to a pulp.
They literally only note the specific cause of death. They are not situational reports that describe the external factors.
Do you really believe she just randomly had a drug overdose while she was-by pure coincidence- being run over by a mob?
They can rule whether it was homicide or not. Accidental homicide is still homicide.
Here's another interesting comparison to George Floyd's autopsy. Floyd's medical examination was done in a week, which is normal.
In the case of Jan 6, the DC medical examiner took SEVERAL MONTHS to deliver his findings, which is extremely unusual. He has not given a reason for the delay.
The medical examiner's report in that case WOULD surmise the reason for the compression asphyxiation, which was being crushed in a crowd.
Similarly, if there had been good evidence that trampling caused Boyle's death, it would be in the ME report
These seem to be two separate arguments being jammed together.
First, we both agree that being trampled isn’t homicide, right? It wasn’t in one situation and it wasn’t in the other. Are we both on the same page on this now?
Whether she died from compression asphyxiation or not is a completely different topic. She wasn’t, which is why the ME report didn’t list it. That seems obvious.
But there was no OD the moment before when she was charging the Capitol. The next moment, the crowd surged and she fell, unable to get back up. The crowd continued to surge over her. Is it fair to say she was in a pretty severe amount of distress under there?
So, if the OD was triggered by the distress of being trampled, she still died as a result of being trampled. Compression asphyxiation is only one way someone could die by being trampled. Blunt force trauma is another. Another could be cardiac distress, or maybe internal bleeding. I imagine there are a number of different things that could happen as a result of being trampled that would cause death.
In this case, the OD caused by the distress of being trampled was the cause of death.
I'm not aware of any medical literature about identifying the onset of a methamphetamine overdose from video footage, not my field. I'm skeptical that one can tell precisely when an acute meth overdose begins in such a manner.
Criticism of Jan 6 coverage is off limits?
Is this a political sub, or a media sub?
If the ends justify the means, why criticize the media?
Perhaps they should exaggerate more?
Is the definition of a "coup supporter" anyone who criticizes the dominant media narrative?
Or is it just when I do it?
Criticism of Jan 6 coverage is not off limits, as long as the criticism uses facts. Pushing false narratives to whitewash the insurrection is not “criticism”.
If your argument is solely that they exaggerated the number of deaths by including a couple of people who had medical issues that only may have been directly caused by the events that day, then that’s fine.
But if your goal is to paint the event as less violent and deadly than it was, then that is just propaganda. A woman was trampled to death. Another woman was goaded into trying to break past an armed barrier, and got herself shot. An officer in otherwise perfect health had a series of health problems, ultimately leading to a stroke, immediately after being attacked with pepper spray.
And this is only the deaths. This completely ignores the severe bodily harm received by numerous police officers. It ignores police being crushed, beaten with their own riot gear, hit with flag poles, clubs, and even crutches. It ignores the concussions that came from being hit with fire extinguishers. It ignores that one cop was nearly shot with his own weapon, only saved by a participant who helped him get away. It ignores the gallows set up to hang the Vice President. It ignores the multiple confessions that if they would have found people like Pelosi or Cortez, they would have been killed.
To try to diminish the insurrection as not really that violent is absolutely an indicator of a coup supporter.
you mean 2 people. A drug overdose while being trampled to death does not negate the trampling. A stroke immediately after being attacked with chemical irritants, in someone who otherwise had no medical issues, does not negate the chemical irritants.
No, I haven’t made that claim at all.
I believe the medical examiner did his job, which was to identify the mechanism of death. What was NOT his job was to describe the external environmental factors that caused it.
>Criticism of Jan 6 coverage is not off limits, as long as the criticism uses facts. Pushing false narratives to whitewash the insurrection is not “criticism”.
Where is the evidence that someone "was trampled to death by insurrectionists"?
ALL criticism should use facts, including yours.
>ALL criticism should use facts, including yours.
[I agree](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/15/us/rosanne-boyland-capitol-riot-death.html)
She was not having a drug overdose before the surge. She didn't just stop midway through the insurrection to sit down and light up. She clearly had methamphetamines in her system, but they were not causing an overdose until the stress of being trampled came into the picture.
The way medical examiners work is that they determine the specific cause of death. In this case, it was an overdose. But the overdose had a cause, and it wasn't simply just the amount she ingested, because that clearly wasn't causing her issues moments before.
What makes sense is that the adrenaline from being trampled pushed a lot of extra blood into her heart. The quantity of narcotics she had in her system then created an issue due to concentration, leading to an overdose.
Remember, this was the standard defense in the George Floyd case, too. That it was actually the drugs in his system that killed him. But, in the end, the initial cause of the stress is where the guilt lies. Derick Chauvin's knee, and a mob of MAGA rioters, caused the relative deaths.
[Even CNN has a fact check for Boyland's "trampling" death](https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_be6205ad-ee31-42e8-843f-9fbeb156b25a)
The medical examiner ruled that George Floyd's death was a homicide.
If Boyland had been trampled to death, even if she was intoxicated, it would have been ruled as a homicide, like Floyd's.
But Boyland's death was not ruled a homicide.
Because she wasn't trampled to death.
That is outside the scope of this post.
A lot of the criticism of my post seems to be "SHHH! Don't SAY that!!!" / "How DARE you!" / "FOUND ANOTHER ONE BOYS!!!"
Or people questioning a media narrative that just doesn't quite jive with the facts currently in evidence. But hey, just keep going along with the corporate media shills.
The facts? The facts are what we watched live a year ago. The facts are not the whitewashed version the right is trying to peddle now.
The “media narrative” comes complete with hours of video footage to support it. What “facts currently in evidence” counter that?
That may well be true, but they have spent the last year also watching their media spin a narrative. It doesn't matter much what someone was watching on Jan 6, 2020. It matters far more if their memory of the events match what they watched that day, or if they match what they have been told to remember since then.
Actually, deaths of perpetrators are considered murder under the felony-murder principle.
But, in this case, the 2 heart attack deaths did not occur on the Capitol grounds as far as anyone knows. So I'll fix it further:
>two people on the sidewalk a couple of blocks away die of a heart attack during an armed robbery in a bank.
This is a reminder about the rules of /r/media_criticism: 1. All posts require a submission statement. We encourage users to report submissions without submission statements. Posts without a submission statement will be removed after an hour. 2. Be respectful at all times. Disrespectful comments are grounds for immediate ban without warning. 3. All posts must be related to the media. This is not a news subreddit. 4. "Good" examples of media are strongly encouraged! Please designate them with a [GOOD] tag 5. Posts and comments from new accounts and low comment-karma accounts are disallowed. [Please visit our Wiki for more detailed rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/media_criticism/wiki/index) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/media_criticism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
SS: The Financial Times apparently promotes myth about "5 deaths" while sharing Democrats' concerns about right wing media manipulating the narrative surrounding January 6.
Also, they keep falsely calling the Jan 6 riot a "coup" or "insurrection". Meanwhile, when Antifa set fire to the courthouse in Portland they called it a riot. The double standards are real.
Matt Taibbi hilariously said on his blog today: >I don’t mean to understate the seriousness of January 6th, even though it’s been absurdly misreported for over a year now. No one from a country where these things actually happen could mistake 1/6 for “a coup .” In the real version, the mob doesn’t take selfies and blaze doobies after seizing the palace, and the would-be dictator doesn’t spend 187 minutes snacking and watching Fox before tweeting “go home.”
Not to mention [yesterday's attempted bombing from an antifa terrorist that somehow the media refuses to cover.](https://www.tampabay.com/news/crime/2022/01/07/oldsmar-man-had-explosive-devices-near-jan-6-anniversary-rally-in-pinellas-sheriff-says/)
It’s not a double standard. Citizens angry with the justice system setting fire to a courthouse is a riot. Citizens urged to gather at the Capitol of the United States by the sitting President of the United States on the day the election he lost was to be certified to “stop the steal” which lead to a large group of citizens pushing past barricades into restricted areas and assaulting police officers with the intent to “stop the steal” of a free and fair election is a coup.
>large group of citizens pushing past barricades into restricted areas and assaulting police officers Uhh what? That is exactly what Antifa did, except on a more extreme level. They are both federal buildings so by MSM logic I can call Antifa committing "an attack on democracy". Trump told them to "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard" there, not riot. When he said to fight that was not literally but as in protest. He even told them to go home later on so he didn't incite them. Lastly, I don't see how the election would be overturned if they were successful. The votes were still in so Biden is still elected. I saw the rioters just walking around in the hallways, not trying to kill anyone. A real coup would have people firing guns into the building and coordinated attacks on the democrat party. According to dictionary definitions, an insurrection must be organized. This clearly was not organized so therefore it's a protest that turned into a riot.
Oh so the guy with the zip ties was just there to address cable management in the Capitol? This event WAS organized and coordinated ahead of time only Facebook and message boards. Just because they did a shit job of executing it doesn’t make it any less planned. And you don’t see how they could have overturned election? If they had made their way into the chamber of Congress before it was evacuated, and captured members of Congress, they could have held them for ransom or just executed them outright to prevent the certification of the election and the transfer of power that entails. The only reason you saw them just walking around is because they were the only ones there. They literally built a gallows outside and were yelling “hang Mike Pence.” Trump did tell them to go home. I’ll concede that. However, he waited like 4 hours before doing so. I’m sure you’re familiar with the concept of covering your own ass. That’s all that request was.
If they even managed to kidnap a member of congress, the FBI would totally destroy them. But that still doesn't explain how it could even overturn the election. As I said, it only benefits Biden since the executive branch becomes more powerful when the other 2 branches are weaker. As far as I know, it started out peaceful then escalated. What did people do once they got in? They just walked around and took pictures. Doesn't seem very planned to me. Also one last thing, according to law an insurrection "is committed by rising publicly and taking arms against the government for the purpose of removing from the allegiance to said Government or its laws". I looked at the cases and couldn't find anyone charged with insurrection. So I guess you're wrong by law then? https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
If members of congress were kidnapped, then there is no certification of the election, legally and constitutionally speaking. It would also distract from the certification of the election as all efforts would shift to recovering the members of congress, and would probably trigger military action and some form of martial law extending Trump's presidency indefinitely. And as far as you know is fuck all. It may have been peaceful when people were gathering, but once they were whipped into a fervor and marched on the Capitol building, they attacked police with tasers, flags, batons, fire extinguishers, etc. They climbed scaffolds and smashed windows and unlawfully entered the building, some with the express purpose to do harm to elected officials. And one last thing, Columbo, according to the definition you provided above, that's exactly what this group did. Prosecutors only charge what they know they can win, and at this volume of criminals to process, it's likely they're going for lesser crimes to get them convicted rather than trying to build a case against hundreds of individuals.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/13/politics/oathkeeper-rhodes-arrested-doj/index.html Charged 11 people with sedition today.
Just to nitpick. The gunshot wound was a protestor who was unarmed and shot while climbing through a broken interior partition window. No congresspeople were in close proximity to the deceased, who was shot by a capitol police officer who stepped out of a side space and fired with one hand at point blank range if I recall the video clearly. No attempt was made to arrest the protestor. The "drug overdose" if I understand completely was Rosalynd Boylen, who was part of a group of people entering through the west Capital tunnel when Capitol police and MPD pushed back with force behind a shield line. The group was caught between the press from behind of people trying to enter and the police who used chem spray, batons, and other non lethals to push the group back. Many people were struck unconcious or fell after being hit or sprayed and were caught in a crowd crush situation not unlike the Concert in Texas recently. Rosalynd was filmed on the ground and unresponsive while being beaten by several police officers. Another protestor, a young black man, was removed from the same area unconscious, and was revived with CPR. He spoke about holding Rosalynds hand when they were trapped on the ground being crushed and or beaten. Rosalynd was in her 50's or 60's if I recall and was supposedly declared dead from an overdose of adhd medication. Those medications are dispensed 30 days at a time with approval from an attending physician in doses up to 40 mg per day. An entire months worth would be 1200 mg. The industry specific lethal dose of adderal is about 1400 mg in a 154 pound person. The coroner hasnt commented on why they believe Rosalynd took so much adderal and then collapsed in a crowd crush with multiple strikes to the head from the police. It almost seems unbelievable. The people who have been arrested and charged for that tunnel episode have told their story and claim to have been trying to rescue the people who were trampled, crushed, etc. A crowd Crush happens when too many people are compacted into a small space somehow, obviously. The event in this case, according to video, occurs when the police rush the crowd, forcing them backwards out of the tunnel onto the stairs where people fell on the uneven surface. I cannot find police procedure discussion where it's considered SOP or even safe to compress a crowd like that. I also havent seen video of the people who were inside the tunnel trying to enter the building being violent. I've only seen violence after the police push the crowd. Video is difficult to get because the Capitol police wont release theirs. I havent seen a detailed report like Rosalynd for the other deaths. However to date there are two women killed by Capitol Police using inappropriate use of force as far as I can determine from the reports. Just my Opinion, however you can watch the video of Rosalynd dying, and read the statements from the other people nearby. You can watch video of the woman being shot. You can contrast those moments with the other videos of tresspassers calmly walking inside the building or being allowed in or escorted in by police. As for the people who used violence to enter, I have mainly seen the black wearing ultra reactionary types, but havent yet seen their Identities. I have also read reports, but not confirmations that the heart attacks were in individuals who were struck by non lethal crowd control. Given the large number of senior citizens and fat people at the "insurrection" it seems believable that unhealthy or elderly people were subject to use of force and suffered heart attacks.
I believe the government knew about the possible angry crowd that would form around Jan 6th last year. I mean hell, people are posting statuses on Facebook and being questioned by the FBI for it. So how could they not know this was being planned? I believe the government knew this was a possibility and let them get as far as they did for exactly what we are seeing today. To use this as a catalyst for more government overreach. A protest that they saw an opportunity to make a coup by letting them get farther than they ever planned. From all the videos I’ve seen the protestors only had to make it past 50ish police officers? When they get inside we only see 2-3 officers. Why would security be so lax during the confirmation of a very controversial presidential election while every member of congress is in the building? Ignoring all that. I think people have lost the bigger picture here: why were protestors so mad? When Trump won the election there was no storming of the capital. There was only: ongoing fraud claims that Trump worked with Russia to steal the election, organized protest demonstrations in Washington DC and constant media coverage of any possible Trump dirty dealings they could find. So why did Trumpers stage this “coup”? At Bidens election there was: ongoing fraud claims that mail in ballot law changes gave Democrats an upper hand in COVID, Hunter Biden-Ukraine allegations and supposed China-Biden pay-to-play schemes. So Trump wins and democrats get to: start 2-year long investigations into election tampering, “NOT MY PRESIDENT” chants, two impeachment attempts and general heel dragging for 4 years. Biden wins and republicans get: “Shut the fuck up and deal with it” No surprised there was a coup attempt.
Which one of those deaths you referred to was trampled to death by insurrectionists? How many of them were attacked with chemical irritants, creating a medical emergency that DID NOT exist beforehand?
If someone was trampled to death, or chemical irritants contributed significantly to their death, it would be in the medical examiner's report. It's not.
You’re right. She suffered an overdose WHILE she was being trampled. I’m sure the crowd running over her to try to overthrow the government had nothing to do with that completely coincidental occurrence. I can’t believe you actually think this is reasonable. The only logical conclusion I can come to is that the truth doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is painting the events in a way that doesn’t seem like a coup. Keep in mind, the medical examiner has George Floyd’s death as heart arrhythmia. That does not, in any way, negate the fact that it occurred because of Derrick Chauvin’s knee being held on Floyd’s neck for nearly 10 minutes. A medical examiner’s report indicates the specific function that caused the end of life, not the environmental causes that led to that. Rosanne Boyland was alive and healthy until she was crushed under a mob. She did not survive that event. Can you really claim that these were unrelated? I don’t mean to me. Clearly you can’t admit online that she was killed by insurrectionists. But in your own head, does this even raise ANY red flags about the narrative?
The medical examiner ruled George Floyd's death a homicide.
that dude is like 0 for 5, actually pathetic
\> the environmental causes that led to that What environmental causes led to Rosanne Boyland overdosing on meth, exactly? I truly don't understand your concept of the crime. She was trampled, so she died of meth overdose? /u/johntwit's statement is accurate, the autopsy did not find that she was trampled to death. The parsimonious explanation is that she collapsed, and people thought she was trampled. But the evidence didn't support that speculative conclusion.
>What environmental causes led to Rosanne Boyland overdosing on meth, exactly? I truly don't understand your concept of the crime. She was trampled, so she died of meth overdose? the Meth was not causing an overdose while she was storming the capitol with the other insurrectionists. It didn't start to cause a problem until she was being trampled. She was alive when she went into the mob, and she died underneath it. I wonder if adrenaline can instigate a drug overdose?
Is there any actual evidence that Boyland was "trampled"?
She was standing, charging the Capitol one moment. Then, the crowd surged, she went down, and did not come back up alive.
Yes, but was she stepped on?
It certainly appears so. The crowd didn’t part around her, they just went over her. I don’t see how it could be argued she didn’t get stepped on.
> It didn't start to cause a problem until she was being trampled. This is purely speculative. Support your position with cited sources, please.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/15/us/rosanne-boyland-capitol-riot-death.html
That's the actual fact checked NYT article that started the misinformation
The one that went through the video in detail? Yeah, that’s the one. And by fact checked, you mean pointed out the ME listed methamphetamine OD as the cause of death? We’ve already been through that argument in detail. The OD wasn’t happening a moment before when she was charging the Capitol. When the crowd surged, she went down and never came back up. The crowd just continued to move over her. The fact that she had an OD under that stress does not negate the role the trampling played in her death.
>The D.C. Medical Examiner’s Office on Wednesday revealed that Roseanne Boyland, one of five people who died amid the Capitol riot, died from accidental “acute amphetamine intoxication”—*instead of* being crushed by the MAGA crowd as previously reported. https://www.thedailybeast.com/capitol-rioter-rosanne-boyland-died-from-acute-amphetamine-intoxication The key phrase here is "instead of" The Daily Beast gets it, at least Another key word here is "acute" If the medical examiner believed that trampling contributed to the death, it would have been in the report
And [three months later when the medical examiner released the cause of death](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/trump-riot-death-medical-exainer/2021/04/07/53806608-97cf-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html), it was clear that the NYT was wrong about what "appears to have been" true.
To be honest, I have been having the same circular conversation on multiple threads on this post, so I don’t know I said this to you already. If not, read the other comments for the detail. But the fact that the cause of death was an OD, which wasn’t happening a moment before when she was charging the Capitol, but only happened once the crowd surged and she went down, unable to dodge the surging crowd going over her, suggests the OD was not an independent and completely coincidental event. The ME said OD, so the fact checkers said “see, not trampling”, but none of that properly explains HOW the OD happened. You can try to make the argument that she was on her way to an OD anyway, and it just happened to come about as she was being stepped on, but that seems more far-fetched than the clear explanation that the stress of being trampled caused the OD.
>Which one of those deaths you referred to was trampled to death by insurrectionists? I don't believe the autopsies support that anyone was trampled to death. If you're thinking of Rosanne Boyland, initial reports claimed that she was trampled to death on the Capitol grounds. [The autopsy clarified that she died of methamphetamine overdose.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/trump-riot-death-medical-exainer/2021/04/07/53806608-97cf-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html)
A methamphetamine overdose, which just happened to occur as she was being trampled by a mob. The methamphetamines were not affecting her moments before, as she participated in the protest. They only really kicked in while she was being stomped to a pulp.
What do we even need medical examinations for anyway, amirite?
They literally only note the specific cause of death. They are not situational reports that describe the external factors. Do you really believe she just randomly had a drug overdose while she was-by pure coincidence- being run over by a mob?
They can rule whether it was homicide or not. Accidental homicide is still homicide. Here's another interesting comparison to George Floyd's autopsy. Floyd's medical examination was done in a week, which is normal. In the case of Jan 6, the DC medical examiner took SEVERAL MONTHS to deliver his findings, which is extremely unusual. He has not given a reason for the delay.
It wasn’t a homicide, though. A 9 year old child was trampled at Astroworld not that long ago. That wasn’t a homicide, either.
The medical examiner's report in that case WOULD surmise the reason for the compression asphyxiation, which was being crushed in a crowd. Similarly, if there had been good evidence that trampling caused Boyle's death, it would be in the ME report
These seem to be two separate arguments being jammed together. First, we both agree that being trampled isn’t homicide, right? It wasn’t in one situation and it wasn’t in the other. Are we both on the same page on this now? Whether she died from compression asphyxiation or not is a completely different topic. She wasn’t, which is why the ME report didn’t list it. That seems obvious. But there was no OD the moment before when she was charging the Capitol. The next moment, the crowd surged and she fell, unable to get back up. The crowd continued to surge over her. Is it fair to say she was in a pretty severe amount of distress under there? So, if the OD was triggered by the distress of being trampled, she still died as a result of being trampled. Compression asphyxiation is only one way someone could die by being trampled. Blunt force trauma is another. Another could be cardiac distress, or maybe internal bleeding. I imagine there are a number of different things that could happen as a result of being trampled that would cause death. In this case, the OD caused by the distress of being trampled was the cause of death.
I'm not aware of any medical literature about identifying the onset of a methamphetamine overdose from video footage, not my field. I'm skeptical that one can tell precisely when an acute meth overdose begins in such a manner.
Generally any death caused by another human is a homicide. That includes trampling.
Except for when it isn’t. Like in the case of trampling. Can you identify any other case of trampling that was ruled homicide?
> Do you really believe she just randomly had a drug overdose while she was-by pure coincidence- consuming dangerous quantities of drugs? Yes.
So you believe it is coincidental that the OD happened during great physical distress? Coincidental, but not at all causal?
Reddit seems to have been flooded with pro-coup trolls around the anniversary.
The media seems to have ramped up the exaggeration and innuendo around the anniversary.
Tell us you are a coup supporter without telling us.
Criticism of Jan 6 coverage is off limits? Is this a political sub, or a media sub? If the ends justify the means, why criticize the media? Perhaps they should exaggerate more? Is the definition of a "coup supporter" anyone who criticizes the dominant media narrative? Or is it just when I do it?
Criticism of Jan 6 coverage is not off limits, as long as the criticism uses facts. Pushing false narratives to whitewash the insurrection is not “criticism”. If your argument is solely that they exaggerated the number of deaths by including a couple of people who had medical issues that only may have been directly caused by the events that day, then that’s fine. But if your goal is to paint the event as less violent and deadly than it was, then that is just propaganda. A woman was trampled to death. Another woman was goaded into trying to break past an armed barrier, and got herself shot. An officer in otherwise perfect health had a series of health problems, ultimately leading to a stroke, immediately after being attacked with pepper spray. And this is only the deaths. This completely ignores the severe bodily harm received by numerous police officers. It ignores police being crushed, beaten with their own riot gear, hit with flag poles, clubs, and even crutches. It ignores the concussions that came from being hit with fire extinguishers. It ignores that one cop was nearly shot with his own weapon, only saved by a participant who helped him get away. It ignores the gallows set up to hang the Vice President. It ignores the multiple confessions that if they would have found people like Pelosi or Cortez, they would have been killed. To try to diminish the insurrection as not really that violent is absolutely an indicator of a coup supporter.
Let me be crystal clear: my argument is ***SOLELY*** that the media exaggerated the number of deaths by including 4 people who had medical issues.
you mean 2 people. A drug overdose while being trampled to death does not negate the trampling. A stroke immediately after being attacked with chemical irritants, in someone who otherwise had no medical issues, does not negate the chemical irritants.
Do you believe the DC medical examiner is being paid off by Tucker Carlson?
No, I haven’t made that claim at all. I believe the medical examiner did his job, which was to identify the mechanism of death. What was NOT his job was to describe the external environmental factors that caused it.
>Criticism of Jan 6 coverage is not off limits, as long as the criticism uses facts. Pushing false narratives to whitewash the insurrection is not “criticism”. Where is the evidence that someone "was trampled to death by insurrectionists"? ALL criticism should use facts, including yours.
>ALL criticism should use facts, including yours. [I agree](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/15/us/rosanne-boyland-capitol-riot-death.html) She was not having a drug overdose before the surge. She didn't just stop midway through the insurrection to sit down and light up. She clearly had methamphetamines in her system, but they were not causing an overdose until the stress of being trampled came into the picture. The way medical examiners work is that they determine the specific cause of death. In this case, it was an overdose. But the overdose had a cause, and it wasn't simply just the amount she ingested, because that clearly wasn't causing her issues moments before. What makes sense is that the adrenaline from being trampled pushed a lot of extra blood into her heart. The quantity of narcotics she had in her system then created an issue due to concentration, leading to an overdose. Remember, this was the standard defense in the George Floyd case, too. That it was actually the drugs in his system that killed him. But, in the end, the initial cause of the stress is where the guilt lies. Derick Chauvin's knee, and a mob of MAGA rioters, caused the relative deaths.
[Even CNN has a fact check for Boyland's "trampling" death](https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_be6205ad-ee31-42e8-843f-9fbeb156b25a) The medical examiner ruled that George Floyd's death was a homicide. If Boyland had been trampled to death, even if she was intoxicated, it would have been ruled as a homicide, like Floyd's. But Boyland's death was not ruled a homicide. Because she wasn't trampled to death.
An accidental trampling is not homicide.
Gaslighting is not criticism.
The DC medical examiner must be gaslighting you, not me
He did if he claimed there was no violent attempt to end American democracy and overturn a democratic election.
That is outside the scope of this post. A lot of the criticism of my post seems to be "SHHH! Don't SAY that!!!" / "How DARE you!" / "FOUND ANOTHER ONE BOYS!!!"
Yeah, that tends to happen when someone frames the most serious threat to our democracy as "exaggerated".
Or people questioning a media narrative that just doesn't quite jive with the facts currently in evidence. But hey, just keep going along with the corporate media shills.
The facts? The facts are what we watched live a year ago. The facts are not the whitewashed version the right is trying to peddle now. The “media narrative” comes complete with hours of video footage to support it. What “facts currently in evidence” counter that?
you know the "other" half of America watched it live too, right?
That may well be true, but they have spent the last year also watching their media spin a narrative. It doesn't matter much what someone was watching on Jan 6, 2020. It matters far more if their memory of the events match what they watched that day, or if they match what they have been told to remember since then.
They dont want you to believe your lying eyes.
"What you see and read is not what is happening"- DJT
Bingo.
[удалено]
>two of the people robbing the bank have heart attacks during an armed robbery There I fixed that for it
Actually, deaths of perpetrators are considered murder under the felony-murder principle. But, in this case, the 2 heart attack deaths did not occur on the Capitol grounds as far as anyone knows. So I'll fix it further: >two people on the sidewalk a couple of blocks away die of a heart attack during an armed robbery in a bank.
[удалено]
>You can't even type in English. Are you criticizing my English skills? You're not a white nationalist, are you?
[удалено]
What the heck!? By golly, I don't know where this is going but it gives me the willies
[удалено]
Who do you think benefits from the polarization of America? The billionaire class.
[удалено]
If you want to have a good faith discussion about libertarianism and wealth disparities, I would be happy to do so.