Dakota Beacon

It has been more than three weeks since the fateful January 6 rally and subsequent attack on the U.S. Capitol.  Much has happened since, a good deal of it precipitated by that event combined with a seething hatred for then President Donald Trump.  First of all the “frightened” members of Congress abruptly ceased to consider the motion before them that an investigation be conducted into the very serious question of the apparent subversion of our entire electoral system by nefarious actors, both foreign and domestic.  There was no rhyme nor reason for this hasty abandonment of purpose.  Instead of making a decision to weigh the evidence being presented, the members were basically answering a poll on whether they approved of a violent break-in at the nation’s Capitol.  Consequence Number One.

Immediately, Nancy Pelosi re-lit the fire under her pet impeachment cauldron.  Never mind that the first effort on her part consumed about four years of the first Trump administration and resulted in absolutely nothing . . . except the revelation of some of Hunter and Joe Biden’s most corrupt dealings in Ukraine.  And yet nothing would satisfy her but another dive into the mud. ( What may come up in this second "trial" of Donald Trump might prove even more interesting - perhaps we shall finally get that investigation of the election fraud after all!)  Consequence Number Two.

Meanwhile, someone - and we don’t know for sure who - summoned about 30,000 National Guard troops from every corner of the U.S. There wasn’t even enough room for these guardsmen to lie down or an outlet for them to charge their phones.  There was one restroom in the parking garage a number of them were thrown into as a “barracks” (meaning an unheated ramp with a concrete floor).  Supposedly they were brought in to protect the inauguration of Biden and have been retained there, along with the barricades and barbed-wire fencing, in anticipation of another event.  Consequence Number Three.

The events of the day left several people dead - one, Rosanne Boyland, was crushed in the crowd.  Kevin Greeson died of an apparent heart attack, Benjamin Phillips of a stroke.  A police officer was said to have died of injuries sustained - he was allegedly beaten with a fire extinguisher.  Strangely, since that day, two other police officers have committed suicide.  There was another.  Her name was Ashli Babbitt.  She was a former Army officer.  Some accounts say she was Military Police, others that she was an intelligence officer.  

Her grieving family describe her as passionate and patriotic.  Some posts of hers indicate this as well.  But what was she really doing inside the Capitol Building?  Was she swept along inside with the Antifa and BLM activists who had infiltrated the rally, posing as Trump supporters?  Was she there for some other purpose?  All we have, really, are questions, no answers.

One of the first accounts given out was by none other than John Sullivan, an admitted Antifa activist and organizer from Colorado, a veteran of other riots.  He was posing as a “journalist” covering the event when he told NBC the story.  He also goes by the alias, “JaydenX”.  He claimed he urged her to get out of the way. (Sullivan himself has since been arrested and charged with breaking into the Capitol )  The video we have seen shows a violent group of young men pounding on the doors of the office suite, shattering the glass and splintering the wood as some police officers stood by - more or less passively - and watched.  One was right in front of the people pounding on the doors.  From the crowd a girl - Babbitt - emerged, wearing a flag and a MAGA hat.  Someone screamed, “There’s a gun!”  The camera shows the shooter.  He appeared to be male, a high forehead, dressed in a dark suit or overcoat, a shirt with white french cuffs (you can see the shadow on the cuff), a metal-looking chain type bracelet, perhaps a leather-looking glove and the ubiquitous face mask.  He fired one shot which hit Babbitt in the neck and she went down.  A few people gathered around but someone shooed away a man claiming to be a medic of some sort, saying it was “too late” and no one could help her.  Meanwhile we see a policeman in uniform and riot gear, with a face shield and a drawn weapon, on the stairs.  He seems to look at the shooter, it would seem he recognizes him and perhaps says something or gives him some sign of recognition.  We see no more of the shooter.  

No one said, “Put down the gun”, “hands on your head”, “lie on the ground”, “up against the wall” or any of the usual things we hear in the movies or tv.  No one gives chase.  No one takes anyone into custody.  Someone present says he can help with first aid but help is rejected - a police officer screams, “Get back!  We can’t help her!”  At some point the ambulance and medics come to take Babbitt to the hospital, where she either dies or arrives dead.  

What do we know about the shooter?  Although the Capitol Police refused to identify him, violating a formal policy that police involved in incidents involving use of force against citizens be publicly identified.  We have been told that the officer who fired the gun has been placed on "administrative leave".   It has been alleged that the man who shot Babbitt is David Bailey.  So far, no one has denied this claim.  Bailey, who is black, is said to be a native of Brazil, with a very negative attitude toward Trump - he supposedly posted threats against Trump on his Facebook page.  He was said to have been involved with Black Lives Matter but this remains to be verified.  An interesting note is that Bailey was the officer who was to guard Congressman Steve Scalise at the congressional ball game where Scalise was nearly killed by a gunman.  Bailey received minor injuries and a couple of medals and high praise from Congressman Paul Ryan for his trouble.   

Was Bailey the real shooter?  The shooter, whoever he was, did not appear to be wearing any kind of uniform or “street”/”demonstrator” attire.  

Today we have learned that the Capitol Police, after an investigation of the “unnamed officer” (still “unnamed, despite a Washington, D.C., ordinance requiring that officers be “swiftly” identified to the public when they use deadly force) “should not be charged”.  It is not clear why they feel he should not be charged.  If, indeed, Bailey is the officer in question (and this has not been denied as far as we can determine), he has been walking between the raindrops.  Although we have seen the graphic videos from various angles by different cameramen, it remains difficult to determine what, exactly, the shooter saw which motivated him to shoot without any warning, killing the woman.  

Many will be quite certain, however, that had this woman been black or possibly Hispanic and this shooter had been a white officer, Capitol Police would not have dared to recommend that he not be charged.  When Breonna Taylor was shot from behind a closed door during a drug raid last summer, it was understandable that an officer might have felt he needed to fire because there was a gunshot.  Taylor was not visible through the door and was not the target.  It was unfortunate, tragic.  And it fueled more rioting and more destruction across the nation.  In the Capitol case, the shooter - whoever he was - acted without warning and shot an unarmed woman.  He had to have seen her from where he shot her and had to know she was not armed.   Many were there armed with baseball bats or other kinds of clubs and weapons.  She was not equipped to have done any of the damage.  Why did he aim at her?  There are only more questions today, no answers.  Thus far the Justice Department has not announced a decision as to whether they will charge him.  

The apparent inconsistency here will do nothing to assuage tensions or help to bring about any resolution.  In the case of Taylor, three officers lost their jobs and one, Brett Hankison,  has been charged with first degree wanton endangerment (which carries a penalty of possibly a $10,000 fine and 5 years in prison), indicted by a grand jury.  We not only know his name, we have all seen his photograph (with a police lineup wall behind him, in fact).  It should be remembered that, although this ended badly, these officers were sent to execute a no-knock warrant (the kind of warrant which Senator Rand Paul has introduced legislation to outlaw, by the way).  The officers involved in this case were all named.  It might have been reckless to fire where one could not see, even to return fire.  But in the case of Ashli Babbitt, the shooter had a view of the person he aimed at and should have been able to tell that she was not armed and posed no threat.  These are at least questions that should be answered to bring some kind of closure to this tragic episode.

None of this is to say that the officer who has been charged in the Taylor shooting or the officially “unidentified” officer who shot Babbitt is either guilty or innocent.  It is merely interesting and somewhat disturbing to note that the media’s and the official response has been so strikingly different.  We should thoroughly investigate every claim of wrongdoing whether by police or civilians regardless of the race or other identity of the person who is killed or injured and regardless of the ethnicity or race of the shooter.  Until we bring a consistency to our response to these terrible incidents and until the public believes that our justice system is truly colorblind we can only make matters worse. 

Comments:  (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)