Anonymous #6 14w

Senator (D-CA) Alex Padilla

12

Anonymous #9 14w

Assuming Padilla caused a disruption, this falls within the regulations which bound the federal building that the conference was held in, 11000 Wilshire Federal Building. If you go here you can see some of the regulations that are followed for federal buildings that fall under them https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-41/subtitle-C/chapter-102/subchapter-C/part-102-74/subpart-C

-11

Anonymous #8 14w

What’d he do?

1

Anonymous #12 14w

He went into Kristi Noem’s press briefing and tried to ask her a question, so she sent FBI thugs to remove him and handcuff him, and then lied about it by saying he didn’t identify himself, despite the fact that we have a video of it and he clearly states “I’m Senator Alex Padilla”

28

Anonymous blue_skull 14w

Not to mention “states’ rights.”

20

Anonymous #7 14w

This literally doesn’t apply to what he did at all

19

Anonymous #16 14w

Did he not cause a nuisance? That building was covered under that regulation

-8

Anonymous #7 14w

No more of a nuisance than any of the reporters asking questions. The regulation that you are citing says this about nuisances: No person shall willfully disrupt the conduct of official business on the site, or engage in disorderly conduct; nor shall any person unreasonably obstruct the usual use of entrances, foyers, lobbies, corridors, offices, elevators, stairways, parking lots, sidewalks, or roads.

12

Anonymous #16 14w

Yes did he not barge in during the usual conduct and disrupt the event taking place?

-7

Anonymous #7 14w

I would say that not entering aggressively, identifying yourself, and wanting to ask a question or make a statement isn’t considered disruptive. Assaulting him by throwing him in the ground, shoving him, and handcuffing him is quite disruptive, however.

11

Anonymous #16 14w

A reaction to a disruption cannot be in the sense a disruption if the disruption has already occurred. There’s nothing wrong with making a statement. I was assuming his previous action was disruptive in order to garner the act of taking him away. All we see in the video is the response, not how he entered nor what he did before.

-6

Anonymous #7 14w

There’s a lot of mental gymnastics going on with that first sentence. Shoving a congressman to the ground in response to him wanting to make a statement is absolutely a disruption. According to people that were there, he wasn’t aggressive. In the video, we can also hear that he identifies himself almost immediately. His actions were not disruptive, however the response was.

10

Anonymous #7 14w

“Assuming” My sibling in <insert religious figure of your choosing>, it was on video!

5

Anonymous #7 14w

When Marjorie Taylor Greene heckled democrats during every single speech was that not a disruption?!!?!! Should she have been forced to the ground and cuffed? Why the fuck do republicans insist that this is normal, we are quickly moving to a dictatorial regime not one and republican has the balls to stand up to it it’s fucking shameful

11

“Refuses to leave” you mean when the cops interpreted his standing up as a lunge and claim they couldn’t tell who he was while he was already in a restricted area that would have identified him and vetted him and he identified himself to the cops, only for them to yell at him to back down and then eventually dragged him out? Ya ok fabricate what you need to fit your stupid agenda… 🤡

5

Anonymous #7 14w

That the thing, he never caused a disruption to begin with so your logic is invalid, the disruption was the cops causing a scene while he was perfectly within his rights and expectations to conduct himself in that way. This is all semantics anyways so

4