Outrage is really a cover
Rep. Jim Banks and Sen. Mike Braun's rhetoric on the Democratic response to protesters is ludicrous.
Peaceful protest is all about free speech; cruel insensitivity and physical force are not. Donald Trump clearing the way for a photo op with a Bible was a joke; he couldn't even check to see whether he was holding the Bible right side up before brandishing it.
Currently, in my opinion, many Republicans are covering their rears, seeking favor through hypocritical umbrage over the storming of the Capitol; demonstrating their cavalier attitudes by laughing while refusing to wear masks while seeking shelter and hiding behind Capitol Police barricading rioters' access to them.
I'm frightened, confused and livid that possibly some police and former military personnel, some elected representatives and Trump encouraged malcontents who use violence and perform seditious acts in the name of free speech to promote freedoms we true Americans hold dearly.
'Victim' was a terrorist
In “A forgotten victim” (Letters, Jan.16), Patrick J. Flood expresses remorse that the news media have not adequately mentioned Ashli Babbit, who died during the insurrection in which she took part. If someone breaks into your home and you protect yourself and your property by shooting them, is that intruder a “victim”?
Are the terrorists who used airplanes (and those who helped carry out the terrorist acts) on Sept. 11, 2001, who killed thousands of Americans, “victims” because they died during the act or were later found and killed? Should we feel sorry for them?
Babbit knowingly illegally stormed the U.S. Capitol with other terrorists who had guns, pipe bombs, zip ties and who knows what else. That mob killed a U.S. Capitol police officer and wounded several others.
Why should the U.S. Capitol police not have the right to protect themselves and our Capitol from these terrorists? Personally, I do not have one ounce of empathy for any terrorist, including Babbit, who dies in the act or who is held accountable for their horrific actions.
Banks insulated from dissent
On Jan. 16, I received Rep. Jim Banks' electronic newsletter and was quickly reminded why representatives (at any level) should not be able to adjust congressional districts.
Because the drawn boundaries of Banks' district only exist to ensure he gets reelected, Banks has effectively been relieved of the responsibility of representing any of his constituents who disagree with him. In the vacuum of difference created by the manufactured district, Banks has chosen the easy way out rather than trying to represent his district, and continues to further untruths void of any factual evidence.
The conscious duplicity he practices of supporting the lies proffered by Donald Trump, that led to the assault on the Capitol on Jan. 6, while simultaneously condemning the assault, is simply unbelievable.