out there, and the officer found herself in a tough situation and had tragic results. you know, in minnesota they re doing the investigation, it s an active investigation, and the district attorney is going to follow through with it. but, you know, it really falls back on training. we have to make sure officers continually train with their service weapon, with their taser, and sometimes bewe try t put them in high intensity situations, but when you re out there in the street, it takes a different turn because it s for real out there and the officers want to be safe. yeah. so i want to ask you, chief scott, what do you think is going to help this? what s going to help? don, first of all, we have to really appreciate and move forward with what history has taught us. you know, a lot of the discussion is around policy and accountability and rightfully so, because those things have to happen and they have to be done corr correctly, use of force policies and things like that.
you re believing is bs. for some reason i had an image walking with caw boy boots talking about i m the law in these parts. that was my immediate image. you know what? think about it. the problem is it was never about what common sense and logical. that s the frustrating part. it was never about that. because you know it was going to be spun. now suddenly it s going to be a criticism of this doj being political, and that wasn t the case before for the prior doj and attorney general. it s sometimes i think the point is to frustrate, and so the arguments come out, don, they re like, well here s the explanation for why this is. i might think, you know, the point is to frustrate because logic has shown its face since january 7th. yes. but today with the charges from these are the proud boys or the oath keepers, right? the oath keepers. these are the oath keepers. i don t think there are oath keepers blm and antifa and so on and so forth. they actually criticized them as
and so forth. i think they called them marxist. the person who is the leader has been outspoken on that very issue, which you know is not the case. but he doesn t even have lawyers. i was talking to his committee lawyer, but not the actual criminal lawyer. he does not yet have one. i m wondering if he ll get the rittenhouse treatment in terms of funding to see who really does have his back. we shall see. i ve got images of annie oakley. laura oakley. that s it. thank you, laura. i ll see you tomorrow. oh, god. goodbye. have a good one. so everyone, thank you for joining us. this is don lemon tonight. so what we have been talking about just now is called seditious conspiracy. seditious conspiracy. sedition. you guys know what that is. it s a chilling charge. the u.s. code charges sedition as two or more people who conspired to overthrow the u.s. government or, quote, prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of u.s. law by force. two or more people who conspire to over
television which is what you re watching. if you ve never watched the podcast and you watch the show this is a taste. we re going to share two conversations i ve had with two people who have been on if the forefront of what i think in some ways the most important story of 2021 which is american democracy on the knife s edge. of course the year 2021 begins with the first ever insurrection. the second time in american history we had sustained violence around the transfer of power, the first being fort sumpter, the second being january 6th. the aftermath of the insurrection, the attempts by the republican party to put into place means of stopping future peaceful transfers of power and democratic accountability and the onrush towards a future and one of the parties has become essentially anti-democratic in a profound way. that s the big story of 2021. so in this episode tonight two people who have been really at the forefront of identifying, warning and then fighting against thes
columnist for the hill. kirk making the bomb shell claim in her new member, saying that she made the edits because she wanted to protect the liberal justice from public back lash. explaining that ginsberg was, quote, elderly and probably didn t understand the question about the take a knee protest in the sports world. here is some of that interview that aired initially. when it comes to these football players, you may find their actions offensive but what you re saying is it s within their right to exercise those actions. if they want to be stupid, there s no law that should be prevent it. if they want to be arrogant, there s no law that prevents them from that. get this, couric now admits she left out the part where ginsberg said that those who kneel during the national anthem show, quote, contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life which they probably could not have lived in the places they came from. as