It's in his released file. I don't have the link anymore but you can Google it. Not sure which issue it was.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
More J6 need to know info
- Thread starter Wingman68
- Start date
- Status
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
No. He requested medical attention a couple of times. Each time he changed his mind. From the dates I read (can't recall the exact dates) I think it was either preexisting issues (he has issues related to hormones or steroids) or the incident soon after he was arrested when he said he was beat up (and then that they dropped him carrying him in). It was fairly early in his arrest.
I don't think he requested a vaccine.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Ok, even if true, if the prison doctor stated he had blood clots that needed immediate attention elsewhere…. They should have sent him elsewhere.
Not sure why my position appears to be difficult to understand.
peace to you
I don't know why you think it is hard to understand.
I stated with George Floyd that once in control of law enforcement there is an inherit responsibility.
My position has not changed.
This is true with any prisoner as well.
If a prisoner asks for medical attention he or she should get medical attention.
Did you think I objected to requiring law enforcement to provide medical attention???
But this was over a year ago.
According to medical records, Samsel suffers from a a lot of medical problems, including blood clots and gynecomastia.
He was evaluated by a prison doctor who stated he did not need treatment, that it was not urgent.
Still....if he complains get him treatment.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
From what source did you find “he was evaluated by a prison doctor who stated he did not need treatment…..”
The accusation is just the opposite. Did the correctional institution send him to a second doctor that overruled the first?
Again, if that is what happened it strikes me as problematic.
peace to you
From the same prison physician.
Dr. Andrew Edinger is the clinical director of the penitentiary.
He said when he initially examined Samsel the prisoner had stayed that his symptoms had occurred since his arrest (after Jan 6).
Because of the sudden onset the physician determined he needed immediate medical attention that could not be sufficiently provided at the location.
However, after the examination and conclusion Edinger received and read Samsel's medical records.
He testified that Samsel had lied to him and that this had been an ongoing medical issue that did not need urgent care. His initial concern was the unexplained symptoms and that they had appeared so quickly and after Samsel's arrest.
This proved false. Samsel had been diagnosed years prior and his condition was not a medical emergency. Samsel's condition was well documented in his medical records and did not need urgent treatment.
This is what I mean by fake news, false propaganda.
The information you read only addressed the prison from the doctors initial conclusions. It ignored the rest.
The information excluded the same doctors conclusion after reading Samsel's medical records and realizing Samsel had lied to him to be removed from the prison.
BUT this information was readily available as it was in the physician's testimony when considering whether to move Samsel.
Why did you not include that information (that the prison doctor stated his initial conclusion was based on Samsel lying to him and prior to having an opportunity to review Samsel's medical records)?
@canadyjd ,
This issue I am having:
The "news" source:
The sources for the issues being discussed have repeatedly provided incomplete or false information to arrive at a conclusion that supports an agenda.
Here only a part of the prison doctors findings were revealed. That the doctor reviewed Samsel's medical records, discovered Samsel had lied to be transferred from prison, and that his condition was not urgent but instead an ongoing issue was completely ignored.
The sources also provided a false narrative to a video of an officer waving, stating he was waving the mob to the U.S. Capitol. It ignored another video of the same thing from a different angle showing the officer was motioning to a few other officers who responded to him.
The sources stated that Babbitt remained outside the Senate Lobby and was not trying to enter when a video from another protestor showed that she was not only attempting to enter but had already partially entered though the window when she was shot.
Those are three instances where sources provided false information.
I am not saying that this means everything they say is false, just as everything CNN reports is not false.
But why should I trust a source that has an agenda and that has lied several times in support of that agenda?
Samsel
Samsel tells us he was abused and denied medical treatment after the doctor found he needed urgent care that could not be provided at the location.
Samsel is a bad person. He has 9 previous convictions involving assault. He beat his pregnant girlfriend and threw her in a canal.
Samsel lied to the prison physician, telling him that his symptoms just appeared after his arrest. Samsel's medical records prove not only that the condition is not urgent, not only that it was a long existing condition, but also that Samsel knew of his condition long before his arrest.
Why should I believe Samsel?
Misinformation and Christians
Political agendas and false propaganda has made Christians not only believe but also repeat lies (as with the Samsel medical condition issue).
I do not believe most who do so (most Christians) do so intentionally. But they are fooled into believing propaganda.
That said, I believe we are also responsible for what we repeat and the responsibility falls on us individually.
How, in your opinion, should I think of Christians who repeat false propaganda (whether from the political left or political right)?
This issue I am having:
The "news" source:
The sources for the issues being discussed have repeatedly provided incomplete or false information to arrive at a conclusion that supports an agenda.
Here only a part of the prison doctors findings were revealed. That the doctor reviewed Samsel's medical records, discovered Samsel had lied to be transferred from prison, and that his condition was not urgent but instead an ongoing issue was completely ignored.
The sources also provided a false narrative to a video of an officer waving, stating he was waving the mob to the U.S. Capitol. It ignored another video of the same thing from a different angle showing the officer was motioning to a few other officers who responded to him.
The sources stated that Babbitt remained outside the Senate Lobby and was not trying to enter when a video from another protestor showed that she was not only attempting to enter but had already partially entered though the window when she was shot.
Those are three instances where sources provided false information.
I am not saying that this means everything they say is false, just as everything CNN reports is not false.
But why should I trust a source that has an agenda and that has lied several times in support of that agenda?
Samsel
Samsel tells us he was abused and denied medical treatment after the doctor found he needed urgent care that could not be provided at the location.
Samsel is a bad person. He has 9 previous convictions involving assault. He beat his pregnant girlfriend and threw her in a canal.
Samsel lied to the prison physician, telling him that his symptoms just appeared after his arrest. Samsel's medical records prove not only that the condition is not urgent, not only that it was a long existing condition, but also that Samsel knew of his condition long before his arrest.
Why should I believe Samsel?
Misinformation and Christians
Political agendas and false propaganda has made Christians not only believe but also repeat lies (as with the Samsel medical condition issue).
I do not believe most who do so (most Christians) do so intentionally. But they are fooled into believing propaganda.
That said, I believe we are also responsible for what we repeat and the responsibility falls on us individually.
How, in your opinion, should I think of Christians who repeat false propaganda (whether from the political left or political right)?
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
I don’t see the link to find that information. Where did you get the info that Samsel lied to the prison doctor? That the doctor changed his mind about the need for off site treatment? How does having a medical history of blood clots negate the treatment for blood clots?
“Oh, he has a history of blood clots so we don’t need to treat these blood clots”? Really? Does that make sense to you? Do you really think a doctor said that?
Again, I haven’t commented about the reason he is in prison, only that the accusation of refusal of medical treatment is serious.
You seem to be personally invested in discrediting this man.
peace to you
The court records.
Samsel's lawyers made an emergency motion for medical treatment in an attempt to have him transferred out of the prison and the doctor was required to testify on his findings and reason his recommendation changed.
It is attached to United States v. SAMSEL (1:21-cr-00537).
A history of blood clots is not a medical emergency. The issue is he presented his symptoms as occuring since his arrest and that he had a history of blood clots, which was a concern.
The truth, however, is that the symptoms had nothing to do with blood clots and was not a recent development. They were an ongoing condition due to past steroid use but posed no significant concern.
He was lying to get transferred out of prison.
The doctor stated that he changed his conclusion when he read Samsel's medical records and realized Samsel was lying about his condition. Samsel had the issue for years and was using it, saying it just appeared and he had a history of blood clots, to be transferred out of the prison.
The bottom line is that the physician did not deem his condition urgent. The article misrepresented the findings to support an agenda.
I ask again, what should I think of Christians who repeat propaganda, even if they believe it to be true? How is their character affected when what they repeat is proven false or misleading?
That is my concern here. Why would one believe sources that have repeatedly lied to them (whether CNN or The Gateway Pundit)?
Not at all. In fact, I would question exactly why you would infer that based on my insisting that we go to sources rather than accept what we are told.
I don't care anything about Samsel. If he really had an urgent medical condition then I care that the prison system provide urgent care.
My argument is that you seem personally invested in Samsel's case, to the point that you have been deceived by misinformation.
I am against that deception because I care about you as a brother in Christ and I link the deception of sources like The Gateway Pundit and CNN to satanic influences. Although I believe you to be an honest man such issues can destroy your credibility and call into question your discernment when it really matters.
They could set Samsel free tomorrow.... Or sentence him to 50 years in prison. I don't care either way.
(I guess they can't release him because he was on parole when arrested and had a warrant for assault....but in terms of Jan 6, I couldn't care less if they charge him or release him).
I do care that he get treatment when necessary, but also that the system does not transfer prisoners when unnecessary.
My concern is the deception of the church by political forces - regardless of whether from the political right or left. I have seen so much false information based on political agendas being spread by Christians that I am concerned that this is a major issue. To make matters worse, we have now gotten to the point that many Christians do not even care as long as the propaganda is in the interest of their political agendas being advanced.
Judicial Watch
2h ·
BREAKING: Judicial Watch filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the U.S. Government on behalf of the family of Ashli Babbitt, the U.S. Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021.
“The only homicide on January 6 was the unlawful shooting death of Ashli Babbitt. Her homicide by Lt. Byrd is a scandal beyond belief. This historic lawsuit seeks a measure of justice and government accountability for Ashli’s wrongful death,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch and our supporters are honored to represent Ashli’s steadfast widower Aaron Babbitt and her estate in this legal action. Ashli was shot in cold blood and the rule of law requires justice for her.”
READ: hhttp://jwatch.us/5q7auc
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
This case should be dismissed immediately. The officer was justified in using lethal force to stop her from claiming through the broken window and into the chamber where Congress was being protected from the rioters.
Judicial Watch
2h ·
BREAKING: Judicial Watch filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the U.S. Government on behalf of the family of Ashli Babbitt, the U.S. Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021.
“The only homicide on January 6 was the unlawful shooting death of Ashli Babbitt. Her homicide by Lt. Byrd is a scandal beyond belief. This historic lawsuit seeks a measure of justice and government accountability for Ashli’s wrongful death,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch and our supporters are honored to represent Ashli’s steadfast widower Aaron Babbitt and her estate in this legal action. Ashli was shot in cold blood and the rule of law requires justice for her.”
READ: hhttp://jwatch.us/5q7auc
It will go no where.
peace to you
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
There is a lot of truth to what you are saying. Christians are deeply involved in politics, and have been since the founding of the country. Some have embraced partisan talking points without really seeing how misleading it sometimes is.
The US is unique in world history where Christians can actually organize for political purposes, to protect themselves and their children from the ungodly.
It is an effort worthy of careful consideration, which I believe the overwhelming majority of Christians give to these issues.
The biggest issue today, I believe, is there are people in the government that are the chief perpetrators of misinformation. Our LE institutions are not trusted to tell the truth on these issues. The way they went after DT demonstrated LE at the highest levels have compromised their integrity in favor of partisan politics.
It will take a generation, at least, to regain that lost trust.
peace to you
The Epoch Times
·
Within a minute after firing the fatal bullet that struck Ashli Babbitt on Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd broadcast a radio report claiming shots were being fired at him in the Speaker’s Lobby and he was “prepared to fire back,” a federal lawsuit alleges.
The previously undisclosed radio dispatch is also contained on an audio recording obtained exclusively by The Epoch Times of the “OPS2” dispatch channel used by Capitol Police on Jan. 6.
·
Within a minute after firing the fatal bullet that struck Ashli Babbitt on Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd broadcast a radio report claiming shots were being fired at him in the Speaker’s Lobby and he was “prepared to fire back,” a federal lawsuit alleges.
The previously undisclosed radio dispatch is also contained on an audio recording obtained exclusively by The Epoch Times of the “OPS2” dispatch channel used by Capitol Police on Jan. 6.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
That is the officer. But take the report with a grain of salt (the source also reported that Babbitt was not entering through the window, which was obviously false).
This is the problem when "news" organizations make repeated false reports (Epoch Times also reported that the officer was directing the crowd to the Capitol).
But yes, Lt Byrd was the officer.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the info. I didn’t know he was a Lt.
It’s a court filing with unproven allegations. Obviously, there is the possibility of a recording of radio traffic. We will see when it hits the courts.
peace to you
In today's world of misinformation, I doubt anything will come out that'll change people's minds.
It was 3 years ago. One side lies and wants us to believe the riot was an FBI conspiracy to frame Trump supporters. The other side lies and calls it an "insurrection".
I doubt most people care as it was a riot just like the riots in Seattle over Floyd. A bunch of thugs with self-righteous complexes beating police officers and damaging buildings.
The real story is that the Floyd thugs got a get out of jail free card while the Jan 6 thugs are hunted down by the FBI even for misdemeanor offences. The real story is the politicalization of the justice system.
I don't think a radio transmission AFTER Babbitt was shot provides much information even if it exists. The officer was cleared because of what occurred before she was shot (and the fact she was stepping through that window).
But....some folk are still consumed by COVID vaccination conspiracies. Gone are the days of current events.
- Status