Secret Service walks back statement that no chemical agents were used on protesters at Lafayette Squ
Source: the hill
Secret Service walks back statement that no chemical agents were used on protesters at Lafayette Square
By J. Edward Moreno - 06/13/20 03:59 PM EDT
..........................
.....................
Both the Secret Service and U.S. Park Police (USPP) initially denied claims of using force on protesters, despite several in-person accounts and footage.
In an amended statement released Saturday afternoon, the Secret Service said after further review, it determined that an agency employee used pepper spray on June 1st during efforts to secure the area near Lafayette Park.
They said the officer used pepper spray in response to an assaultive individual.
Congressional Democrats in the Homeland Security Committee have launched a probe asking why chemical agents were used to clear those peacefully protesting the death of George Floyd, a black man who died in Minneapolis police custody on May 25.
Park Police spokesman last Friday said it was a "mistake" to say no tear gas was used on protesters...........................................................
......................
Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/502611-secret-service-walks-back-statement-that-no-chemical-agents-were-used
Sure took them long enough!
Link to tweet
?s=20
Link to tweet
?s=20
Link to tweet
?s=20
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Did they?
ProfessorGAC
(64,852 posts)Says they shouldn't have said tear gas was not used.
So, he did say it.
But, I don't believe the part about the guy they can sprayed was "assaultive". They made that up.
Igel
(35,274 posts)I want the actual quote with video.
There was a case years ago where a person interviewed said that he didn't use certain words but the reporter put those words in quotation marks.
Court ruled that the actual words didn't need to be used if it's something the interviewee could have said.
Which struck me as insane. Video is nice. Even if it can be edited.
Major Nikon
(36,818 posts)Tear gas is an umbrella term that encapsulates a group of chemical irritants. Although many people associate tear gas exclusively with CS because it was the first one in wide use, it is not the only one.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)And has an 'area of effect' (to use a gaming term) in terms of damage, it being a vaporous substance.
Whereas 'pepper spray' is understood to be something applied to a particular person via a 'spray' in a liquid form.
I'm not suggesting there's nothing wrong with Pepper Spraying protesters, to be clear, and of course it will make somebody tear up.
But 'tear gassing' people, in the common parlance, would be more egregious in the situation because it's indiscriminate.
It's not really incorrect to say 'we didn't tear gas people, we pepper sprayed one person'. People understand them to be different actions.
See what I'm saying?
Major Nikon
(36,818 posts)First of all OC(pepper spray), CS and CN all can and do have the same the form and all can and do have the same delivery methods. Next WUSA9 recovered both CS and OC canisters shot by the Park Police indiscriminately at protesters. So not only is what you are assuming inaccurate, its not what happened.
https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/protests/tear-gas-protesters-lafayette-square-park-police-new-video-evidence/65-c39fb767-b114-41d6-bcbb-530b3823d8e7
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)Regardless of everything you just said ... the chemicals all being in the same class is not especially relevant to my question.
When one hears the term 'teared-gassed the crowd' it is considered by many (including myself) as a more egregious act than 'pepper spraying' a particular individual.
I was wondering if they used the indiscriminate 'area-of-effect' type of 'tear gas' ... any type.
Sounds like you're saying that they did. Which means they're lying when they imply that they only pepper-sprayed one individual.
So, thank you, that's what I wanted to know.
whopis01
(3,491 posts)They said the mistake was using the term tear gas because pepper spray can be considered tear gas.
Major Nikon
(36,818 posts)whopis01
(3,491 posts)I was just clarifying what they said.
Major Nikon
(36,818 posts)Im just pointing out they lied about tear gassing the crowd, which they walked back and they are still lying about using CS.
whopis01
(3,491 posts)Gothmog
(144,919 posts)BComplex
(8,017 posts)Lock him up.
(6,918 posts)Old Crow
(2,212 posts)Lies, lies, and more lies.
Video report showing CS tear gas canister (CS canister shown @ 1:15)
soothsayer
(38,601 posts)...from an officers purse used in self defense, as opposed to jackbooted thugs lobbing tear gas willy nilly at peaceful protesters.
niyad
(113,055 posts)Cha
(296,848 posts)not fooled
(5,801 posts)another part of gov't calling out red don's lies.
First the military, now this.
Good luck with your coup, asshole.
mpcamb
(2,868 posts)trof
(54,256 posts)That's not even a word.
Cop talk is dumb.