reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Chemical munitions were deployed, and flashbangs were used against the speakers. There was a request for assistance near an ice cream tower. The speaker, who has custody of 44,000 hours of videos, witnessed acts of violence against police officers that were brutal and ugly. The officers did what they had to do. However, another speaker claims that if the police hadn't used concussion grenades and pepper spray, the incident wouldn't have occurred. They argue that it was a peaceful protest and deny any aggression towards the officers. The situation escalated when the police started firing without provocation.

I have given warnings about chemical munitions. I need the left and lethal team positioned above me to start deploying. Launch. Launch. Launch. They're deploying flashbangs on us. As one who was here and who has custody of these forty four thousand hours of videos, I can attest there were acts of violence. There were acts of terrible violence that day. It was brutal, and it was ugly. If they'd never thrown the concussion grenades, if they'd never used the pepper spray, this wouldn't have happened. It was a peaceful protest. I was standing within 15 feet of the line of officers. They started firing at us before anybody did anything to them. There was no advance on them. They just started throwing concussion grenades and pepper spray. They've been tear gassing us.

The final group is regrouping as they prepare to confront the remaining protesters. There is a shift change among the officers on the ground. Both sides have used non-lethal tactics like rubber bullets and pepper spray pellets. The police fired flash bangs to disorient the protesters during the initial exchange.

Speaker 0 warns about chemical munitions and instructs the team to deploy. Speaker 1 welcomes viewers to the front line. Speaker 2 requests more munitions and urges shooting. Speaker 0 confirms the deployment of flashbangs. Speaker 3 expresses disappointment in the actions of their own side. Speaker 2 emphasizes staying on the point. Speaker 4 provides location updates. Speaker 5, having custody of videos, acknowledges witnessing acts of violence against police officers. Speaker 1 argues that the protest was peaceful and officers initiated aggression. Speaker 0 mentions tear gas being used.

Speaker 0 warns about chemical munitions and instructs the deployment. Speaker 1 welcomes someone to the front line and urges them to get more munitions. Speaker 2 reacts in shock. Speaker 1 continues to give orders to shoot. Speaker 0 mentions flashbangs being deployed on them. Speaker 1 expresses frustration about the actions of their own side. Speaker 2 calls for assistance due to a large crowd. Speaker 1 acknowledges and encourages them to keep going. Speaker 3 describes witnessing acts of violence during the event. Speaker 1 blames the use of grenades and pepper spray for the escalation. Speaker 0 mentions tear gas being used on them.

I witnessed unprecedented violence against police officers through the media. It was brutal and ugly, but our officers responded as necessary. However, a protester claims that the violence could have been avoided if the police hadn't used concussion grenades and pepper spray. According to the protester, the protest was peaceful, and the officers started firing without any provocation. Tear gas was also used, causing distress and difficulty breathing for the protester.

The speakers express shock and confusion over an incident where someone was shot by the police. They discuss the lack of news coverage and express frustration with the situation. They question why lethal force was used instead of non-lethal options like tasers or handcuffs. They mention seeing a woman being taken away in an ambulance and discuss the use of rubber bullets. They also talk about the need for nonviolent solutions and the importance of reclaiming their rights. The speakers mention tear gas being used and express relief that they were not affected. They plan to go around and continue documenting the events.

The LAPD is moving on horseback, firing rubber bullets at protesters in the heart of LA. One person is heard saying, "Are you okay? No. Fuck it." Another person asks, "Are you okay?"

There were warnings about chemical munitions and a call to start deploying. Flashbangs were deployed and there were reports of violence against police officers. One person claims it was a peaceful protest and that the officers started firing without provocation. The phrase "I can't breathe" was repeated multiple times.

The speaker gives warnings about chemical munition and instructs the deployment. They express frustration and urge others to shoot. They mention being shot at and claim that the police are shooting into their own people. They mention a large crowd and give their location. Another speaker acknowledges acts of violence and defends the actions of the officers. A third speaker claims that the police started firing without provocation during a peaceful protest. Tear gas and other tactics are mentioned. The transcript ends abruptly.

Our government is tear-gassing its own people. We were peacefully protesting, but the situation escalated. There were reports of injuries; we saw a man with blood on his head and a woman limping, also covered in blood. It’s important not to believe the fake news about what happened here.

Many of the people at the Capitol on January 6th had no criminal records or history of violence. However, they were charged with violent acts because the police used force against them, including mace, bear spray, tear gas, and rubber bullets. The protesters grew angry and confronted the police, asserting their right to be there. The police remained aggressive, leading to a conflict. The speaker believes that if the police hadn't used concussion grenades and pepper spray, the situation wouldn't have escalated. They describe the protest as peaceful and express disappointment in the police's actions.

Police officers on the west side were arguing near a fountain, with one officer admitting that they were hurting innocent people and making 10 others angry for every one they removed. This suggests that both the officers and the protesters were set up for failure. There is a video of officers saying they were set up, and they repeat this multiple times. The response from the authorities came two hours later.

Speaker 0 describes a crowd-disruption scene at a gate. "Hello. The officials have cleared out the front of the gate, which is over there, and they've pushed everybody down the road for good ways." "Multiple different kinds of munitions were used, especially the tear gas." The account notes that officials cleared the front of the gate and pushed people down the road, and that various munitions were deployed, with tear gas singled out. The summary centers on displacement of people and the use of munition types, particularly tear gas.

Speaker 0 warns about chemical munitions and instructs the team to deploy. Speaker 1 welcomes viewers to the front line. Speaker 2 calls for more munitions and urges shooting. Speaker 3 expresses disappointment as their own team shoots at them. Speaker 4 provides location updates. Speaker 5, who has custody of videos, acknowledges acts of violence during the protest. Speaker 1 blames the officers for initiating violence, stating it was a peaceful protest. Speaker 0 mentions tear gas being used.

Speaker 0 warns about chemical munitions and instructs the deployment. Speaker 1 welcomes someone to the front line and urges them to get more munitions. Speaker 2 reacts in shock. Speaker 1 continues to give commands to shoot. Speaker 0 mentions flashbangs being deployed on them. Speaker 1 expresses frustration about the actions of their own side. Speaker 2 calls for assistance due to a large crowd. Speaker 3 acknowledges acts of violence witnessed during the event. Speaker 1 blames the use of concussion grenades and pepper spray for the escalation. Speaker 0 mentions tear gas being used on them.

The speaker claims that the incident could have been avoided if the officers had not used concussion grenades and pepper spray during a peaceful protest. According to the speaker, there was no provocation or rush towards the officers before they started firing these projectiles. The speaker emphasizes that they were standing within 15 feet of the officers when the grenades and pepper spray were deployed.

The speaker claims that the incident could have been avoided if the officers had not used concussion grenades and pepper spray during a peaceful protest. According to the speaker, there was no provocation or aggression towards the officers before they started firing these weapons. The speaker emphasizes that they were standing close to the officers but denies any rush or advance towards them. Instead, the officers allegedly initiated the use of concussion grenades and pepper spray without any apparent reason.

During a protest, there were acts of violence against police officers. The speaker, who has custody of thousands of hours of videos, witnessed these acts. The officers responded with necessary force. However, another speaker claims that if the police hadn't used concussion grenades and pepper spray, the situation wouldn't have escalated. They argue that it was a peaceful protest and that the officers initiated the violence without provocation.

Two speakers recount a violent incident at a protest. The first speaker notes that they did not see the assault themselves, but mentions that “somebody has no video,” implying there was a lack of footage of the assault. Protesters then insisted that the individual who assaulted someone could not leave, and they began calling law enforcement to report the assault. According to the account, the situation escalated when a vehicle drove through the crowd. A Jeep Gladiator sped into the protesters, knocking one man quite violently onto the hood of the car. The vehicle then accelerated away, and the man on the hood was hurled into a snowbank. The incident continued as the car subsequently hit another person after the initial impact. The first speaker confirms that the driver sped off and notes that the person on the hood of the car went flying into the snowbank, describing the sequence as the vehicle “went flying into the snowbank.” They add that, after the initial contact, the car hit somebody, compounding the harm. The second speaker, identified as Speaker 1, reacts with shock: “Woah. I’m not in shock right now, so I might feel it later. I might feel it later. I don’t know.” This statement conveys an immediate emotional response to witnessing the violence, with an acknowledgment that distress may intensify as time passes. Overall, the account highlights an assault that occurred off-camera, followed by a deliberate act of driving a vehicle into a crowd, which resulted in a person being knocked onto the hood of the car, the vehicle continuing to speed away, and subsequent impacts that caused injuries. The protesters reacted by attempting to report the assault to law enforcement, and the witnesses express immediate concern and potential delayed shock regarding the violence they observed.

Chemical munitions were deployed, including flashbangs. There was a request for assistance near the ice cream shop. The speaker, who has custody of thousands of hours of videos, witnessed acts of violence against police officers. The officers responded accordingly. However, another speaker argues that the protest was peaceful and the officers initiated the use of force with concussion grenades and pepper spray.

The police are throwing stones and using rubber bullets to suppress the protesters. It is unclear where they are from or why they are here, but they continue to advance and repress. The situation is dangerous, and the protesters are being chased away.

Many people, including myself, got sunburned over the weekend. Some of us experienced adverse reactions to sunscreen, causing our lips to break out. Different individuals react differently to these products. At the protest, there were first aid tents and friendly police officers in blue shirts, but there were also aggressive officers in black. The treatment of a peaceful protester, who was on her knees, was appalling. She was yelled at and a dog was used to intimidate her. It was overwhelming to witness such brutality. We are all exhausted and I never thought I would appear on camera looking like this. Some elderly people suggested taking photos as evidence of the unnatural situation. It feels like our own government is using weapons against us. We, the protesters, bring love while they respond with hatred and violence. But we will continue to spread love.

In a brief, on-the-scene exchange, Speaker 0 asks a woman what happened to her. Speaker 1 responds that she was maced. The conversation reveals that she was attempting to go inside a cafe when the incident occurred: she had made it “like a foot inside,” then was pushed out, and they maced her. Speaker 0 continues by asking for her name and where she is from. In reply, Speaker 1 identifies herself as Elizabeth and states that she is from Knoxville, Tennessee. When asked why she wanted to go inside, Speaker 0 frames the moment by noting the surrounding activity, “We’re storming the Capitol. It’s a revolution. Thank you.” Elizabeth’s answer to the question about her motive is explicit: she says that she and others are involved in actions described as storming the Capitol, and she characterizes the situation as part of a revolution.

I warned about chemical munitions and called for deployment. There's chaos as flashbangs are being used against us, and officers are shooting into their own crowd. We’re here to support Blue Lives Matter, but this is how we’re treated. A large crowd is approaching on High Street, and we need backup. There were violent acts that day, including brutal assaults on police officers. Our officers acted as necessary. However, if the police hadn’t used concussion grenades and pepper spray, the situation might have remained peaceful. We were standing close to them, and they initiated the violence without provocation. We’ve been tear-gassed.