Tucker Carlson starts to divulge the Capitol video tapes

Carlson did not say that the demonstration was peaceful. Too smart -- I guess.

 

The suppressed video is a "lie"? Think.

 

Do you have a video of them engaging in violence? Please share.

"unlawfully parading or picketing"!!! Now that's really a serious felony!

 

Got it. So we are supposed to pretend that the manipulation of the media and the perception of the public (which we witnessed right on this site) shouldn't have any bearing so long as the truth comes out in court?

Is this now the play book for the left? Manipulate, censor, and apply bias to the dissemination of information to drive a political agenda, electioneering, and public perception?

Really?

Or I live in the reality of what is radicalism in politics, and your defense of it is glaringly suspect.

Now that the TRUTH is coming out about Covid, actual deaths, and the effectiveness of the vaccine, we are all just supposed to pretend that the left didn't push dis-information on us?

After an election?

What a fun game. We will just say whatever dis-truths push a political agenda and re-write narratives and paint pictures that results in our political ends with no bearing on reality?

Political extremism at its worse.

You are ignoring (I don't know if intentionally, but it's suspect) how this type of information manipulation affects things like elections and politics.

Haha, Right right. The news media that you put your full faith and trust in is the honest side, that only tells the truth, and doens't manipulate data. Right right.

Ok.

 

Just trying to find my seat to the movie


Is this the way to the bathroom?


Anyone see where my significant other went?

 

"Bring it on" she says.



Liz Cheney
@Liz_Cheney
·23h

Iff@HouseGOP
wants new Jan 6 hearings, bring it on. Let’s replay every witness & all the evidence from last year. But this time, those members who sought pardons and/or hid from subpoenas should sit on the dais so they can be confronted on live TV with the unassailable evidence.

 

I don't think whatever Carlson releases will be relevant either. Except to those who are already in the camp that the riot was just a sightseeing tour.
This will not change any independents mind about what occurred on 1/6/21.

Was there a riot True or False
Did congress gavel out of session? True or False
Was the peaceful transfer of power halted, by invaders? True or False
Have there been arrests for those who entered the Capitol? True or False
Have there been convictions? True or False

Most of America will say True to the above questions. Only Carlson viewers and a few others will answer FALSE

 

I Think the arrest count in now up to 1000 for those sightseeing.

 

No pretending needed.
If nothing else, just look at photos available from the Capitol on that day.

 

They're all innocent. This is how tourists are supposed to enter the Capitol building.

 

Ok.

This is fun.

I understand this was the situation at every BLM protest.

 

Nobody is making that claim.

That's a strawman.

What people are pointing out, which the left is incapable of defending, is the bias and selective information distributed by the democrats and their media arms that showcase that there were also civil protests which is the right of the people.

 

The key question is was it suppressed legally? Think? \

Do the videos exonerate those who have pled guilty to the crimes they were charged with?
Do the video exonerate those who were tried and found guilty of the crimes they were charged with?
Do the videos in question along with the videos that were shown taken in totality show that the riots were actually peaceful and that January 6th was not really about those stopping the certification of the election results.

BTW, any answer you want to give will now be considered under Miranda doctrine.

 

No what i am saying is you ingore the court of public opinion and look at the court of law to determine your answer. That is it. But if you play the court of opinion, you do realize both sides do it. And yet, you still have not answered the elephant in the room, why your side, no matter how defined, does the same thing you accuse the other side of doing? Do you ignore one and not the other?

The only truth you need to look at is who has pled guilty to what and who have been found guilty of the crimes they are charged with. The ultimate truth decider is the court of law, period. Nothing else matters when it comes to the truth. Second, as far as radicalism, I am an independent. I am not defending any radicalization whatsoever. I am simply stating to you that the evidence, the significant evidence has led us to that moment. Again, you cannot deny that the moment VP Pence denied the request to have the electoral college votes be reconsidered and use the alternative set of electoral vote is when all hell broke loose and the riot began. That cannot be denied no matter what your poliitcal outcome is. But somehow you are.

The reality is that people are going to vote in 2024 not because of January 6th, but because of trust in the candidate and issues that concern them the most at that point in time. This ain't one of them, neither is the so-called investigations into Hunter and the Biden family. Think again. That being said, the 2024 election is a long's way off. This is not going to be a major issue to most independents out there whom you need to convince to vote for you. If you try to pull the rug over them with January 6th, the independents will lose all trust and whatever you say will fall on deaf ears.

And what news media do you put your trust in. yes, that is the rub, isn't it. You rant and complain about all the news media that "we" or "me" put our faith in, but you never look yourself in the mirror and see what that image is like. You are either refusing to answer that question or trying to ignore the elephant in the room so you can feel superior to all others. In reality, you are like the following. I can't find the video, but it is a woman who is in her mid-20s, was caught DUI, with no fatalities or injuries, etc. The judge asked her a simple question: why are you here? Then asked her if she had anything to say. She literally said "I didn't do anything wrong?" A "discussion" ensued between the judge and the accused with the accused saying "I don't deserve to go to jail" and "I didn't do anything wrong." You and conservatives peddling this alternative reality are that women and then cannot understand why it matters to apologize. Instead, it is the classic me, me, me attitude and nothing more.

I am not arguing it is only conservatives, but when it comes to January 6th in particular, that is exactly how it is.

 

You must be confused.
This is the thread about video Tucker Carlson is releasing related to Jan 6.

I understand it is related to, or is actually this.


edit: My understanding is correct. I just looked at thread title.
Tucker Carlson starts to divulge the Capitol video tapes.

 

A 'straw man'?

Tucker Carlson: “They were peaceful, orderly, and meek. They were not insurrectionists. They were sightseers.”

 

I see Capital Police standing in the middle of the mass of demonstrators.
Were they still alive at the end of the day?

 

That is an out of context quote. Are you Tucker Carlson?
TC aired examples of the violence on J6 - in fact, he led off with that video.

OTOH, that almost all of the demonstrators on J6 were peaceful is well documented.

Insurrectionists are not contained by tourist rope lines.

 

Have you ever heard of the Brady Rule?

What does Miranda have to do with this discussion? Make a point.

 

Far-right group Proud Boys claim they will attend January 6 DC rally 'incognito' and wear all-black to blend in with antifa protesters
https://www.businessinsider.com/proud-boys-attend-january-6-dc-rally-incognito-all-black-2021-1

Members of the far-right group, the Proud Boys, will head to Washington, DC to rally for President Donald Trump on January 6 — the day on which Congress is scheduled to meet to finalize the 2020 presidential election results. Leaders from the group have shared with their followers that they intend to attend the rally "incognito" and wearing "ALL black." The Proud Boys' chairman, Enrique Tarrio, revealed on Parler that "the Proud Boys will turn out in record numbers on Jan 6th but, this time, with a twist."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
The far-right rioters at the Capitol were not antifa – but violent groups often blame rivals for unpopular attacks
https://theconversation.com/the-far...ten-blame-rivals-for-unpopular-attacks-153193

Some Republican congressional leaders, including U.S. Reps. Matt Gaetz, Mo Brooks and Paul Gosar, along with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, joined President Trump in trying to pin the violent siege of the U.S. Capitol building on antifa, a loose movement of left-wing, anti-racist and anti-fascist activists. The FBI negated the baseless claims, and people have recognized the conspiracy theory as a false flag – an act designed to disguise the actual source or responsible party and implicate another. In contrast, members of extreme right-wing groups like the boogaloo movement and the Proud Boys did in fact infiltrate the George Floyd protests this summer, trying to spark violence between Black Lives Matter protesters and police. And at the Capitol, it appears Proud Boys members hid their affiliation to better blend in with the crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Far-Right Infiltrators and Agitators in George Floyd Protests: Indicators of White Supremacists
https://www.justsecurity.org/70497/...yd-protests-indicators-of-white-supremacists/

The protests that have torn through the United States, following the murder of George Floyd at the hands of Minnesota police officers, shift the emphasis in real time videos broadcast nationally. The images challenge our beliefs about who is really protesting and for what reason.

Right-wing extremists and accelerationists

White Supremacists pretending to host a protest to honor Floyd George on Facebook to whip up violence in San Diego were posted on the BLMSD social media warning people not to go and that it was a white supremacist organized rally. People attending demonstrations remarked on the fact that the demographics were wrong, in places like Oakland where the majority of the destruction was perpetrated by young Caucasian men has inspired not just people on social media but reporting in the mainstream media to properly question whether this is a form of infiltration by outside extremist elements.

 

Probably. They should be brought up on charges of aiding and abetting?

Or maybe they were too frightened to try and herd the herd out of there. Was that herd suppose to be there?

 

There was no rope until they breached the area that was gated off.

At least you know some are known as insurrectionists.

 

Yes, I posted that very same rule. However, you are not correctly pointing out the Brady Rule here.

So, I will repeat myself just this once for your benefit.

The Brady Rule has to meet very specific requirements: they include the following:

1. “Reasonable probability” is a question of whether the government’s failure to disclose this information undermines confidence in the outcome of the trial.
2. “Reasonable probability” is not a sufficiency of evidence test and the defendant does not need to show that the evidence, barring any evidence undermined by the withheld information, is inadequate to support a conviction. Rather, the defendant merely must show that the withheld information can reasonably be taken to put the whole case in a different light.
3. Failure to disclose information which has a reasonable probability of changing the outcome of the trial is inherently harmful, thus there is no need for a separate harmless error review.
4. All information not disclosed must be considered collectively, not item by item.

The defense must prove all four of these points. If it cannot, then no violation occurred. And in my opinion and that of nearly every legal expert in this country, that has not happened. Again, it must be relevant AND favorable to the defendant. The videos may be relevant, but they are not favorable because none of the vidoes in question negate the guilty of the person who committed the crime. That's it. end of the story. Next.

 

How is it out of context? Was Tucker referring to another group that wasn't part of the one that forced its way into the building? Tucker was basically forced to air at least some portions of the violence because the entire nation had already seen it. He couldn't deny it even if he tried. But he thought he could get away with showing just a short snippet of violence, followed by nothing but 'peacefulness'. You can look at any riot in any part of the world and find calm moments of people just standing around doing nothing.

If anyone is taking anything out of context it's Tucker.

And we already know from my earlier posts that Tucker doesn't even believe the bullshit he's being very well paid to spew. Fox is well aware of the gullibility of its viewers and will air whatever they want/expect to see.

So it's okay that they crossed barricades, assaulted security personnel & forced their way into the building and into the congressional halls & chambers (after ignoring attempts by security to block their entry) as long as they remained inside the ropes? I'll just bet Richard Barnett (the guy in Pelosi's office) and his buddies also remained within the ropes when they made their way to busting into Pelosi's office.

The following are images of further damage done to the Capitol that Tucker won't show. Maybe the building just needed more 'tourist ropes'.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/07/us/rioters-capitol-building-damage-photos-trnd/index.html

They had no reason to cross the ropes because the roped area led directly to another chamber, which is where they were headed. Besides, the rioters were there to overturn the election, to re-install fuhrer Trump as the next Prez, and hang congressmen if necessary, not to simply vandalize the building which would've served no benefit. Most of the destruction took place in entering the building.

Insurrectionists know that destroying buildings is not enough to overthrow a government, but damage to buildings/infrastructure is something that's unavoidable in any insurrection, as history has shown.

Additionally, once the rioters entered the building they really didn't really know what to do next, because (1) they didn't have any real strategy or plan on how to effectively overturn the election by force alone, and (2) Pence & targeted congressmen were not in easy reach & were safe from assault. So they just muddled around aimlessly gawking at stuff they've never seen before, probably awaiting the arrival of their fuhrer Trump to tell them what to do next.

 

This is the type of attire some of the rioters were wearing that Trumpers had tried to use as proof of 'Antifa infiltration'.