Tucker Carlson starts to divulge the Capitol video tapes

No response necessary. It's just a reality check, and something people need to keep in mind when they keep questioning why our society just keeps getting worse - despite all the science & technology at our disposal.

You act like the J6 hearing was some kind of public press conference. The violence & illegal break in, plus the mob's intention to capture & potentially harm lawmakers is the reason why the violence had to be the focus.

When a criminal is tried before a grand jury, the prosecutor will focus on the crime, plus the events leading up to and after the crime. The prosecutor & jury aren't interested in events & material non-relevant to the crime in question. It's up to the defendant(s) to prove there was no crime.

So tell me, what difference would it make to have shown hours (out of 14,000+ hours) of the same mob milling around aimlessly? Would it have absolved their crimes & motives?

And you keep ignoring the fact that the public was already well aware of what transpired at the Capitol (including 'calm' moments), and, more importantly, why. If anything, the J6 Committee revealed MORE details that the public by and large may not have been aware of - including phone/text records, dialogue between rioters, Capitol police testimonies & cam footage, reactions/dialogue by lawmakers during the event, emails, time-lines, and so on, including the fact that Trump's intention at the rally was to incite his base to mob the Capitol and force (somehow) an overturn of the election & reinstatement of Trump as dictator. Keep in mind that Capitol CCV footage has no audio, so the hearing was important also in that it revealed the chatter among rioters, particularly about hurting lawmakers & other plans.

So if you want to see rioters milling around aimlessly, watch Tucker's show, and come away having no clue what it was all about. (Oh yes, I forgot. They were 'peaceful sightseers'.)

 

I call it 'covering all the bases' so I'm not constantly asked for citations or 'proof' of my claims. There's nothing better than hard facts to get the point across.

So basically, no real policy - like improving the lives of Americans, cleaning up the environment, and putting an end to Western imperialism.

Only because of the GOP-controlled Senate. Otherwise Trump would've been booted out after the first impeachment. It's unfortunate for Americans that their system tolerates so much corruption from a single individual, particularly the exceedingly immune-from-prosecution Presidential office. In Europe their leaders get ousted for only a tiny fraction of what Trump did. Look what happened to Boris Johnson of the UK.

* War --- Ain't gonna happen. But there are always economic & cyber wars.

* Inflation --- According to a recent study, nearly 54% of the rise in inflation is directly attributable to the astronomical increase in corporate profit margins. In America today, while the working class struggles to put food on the table, fill up their gas tanks and heat their homes, corporate profits are at a 70-year-high.
https://cleantechnica.com/2022/11/07/top-inflation-cause-54-corporations-robbing-you/
Note that the oil industry is still price gouging to this day, despite the fact that the US is LESS energy dependent on foreign sources than before.

* Instability --- Instability went through the roof during Trump's MAGA/Q-anon & grifting administration, with the fake covid 'pandemic' adding insult to injury.

* A breakdown in communication between the main global powers? --- There's no breakdown in communications. There's disagreement which means butting powers with opposing agendas have nothing to negotiate. It's dictators who don't want to be swallowed up by Western imperialism VS Western imperialism that wants to swallow up foreign nations.

* A breakdown in relations with Saudi Arabia? --- The economics are simple: overseas oil, even after shipping costs, is often cheaper than domestically-produced crude. That is because what oil people call "lifting costs," the cost of actually getting the oil out of the ground, are so much lower in some other countries.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/ame...l-to-meet-its-needs-so-why-do-we-import-crude

Not me. I know there will never be a nuke war. Leaders might be crazy, but they're not crazy enough to use nukes. They know better than to place their nation, their leadership (and their lives), and their army's protection on the chopping block.

But every leader knows one thing. If you have nukes, you can be guaranteed you won't be invaded by any Western power - which is why Iran wants (and needs to have) nukes. Nukes are a protection against invasion, and a means to resist Western geopolitical & economic hegemony.

Yes, Putin wouldn't likely have invaded Ukraine had Trump been re-elected. But not for the reason you may think or whatever simplistic reason right-wing media will tell you - eg, the claim that Trump's 'stronger' on foreign policy than Biden.

The following short video details the real reason why Putin didn't invade under Trump. It's worth watching the entire 9 minute video by Chris Hayes. He gives a short history lesson involving Paul Mannafort and his connections with Russian operatives and a corrupt pro-Russian Putin-puppet who once led Ukraine. Hayes then talks about Putin's three big moves after he lost his puppet in Ukraine, of Mannafort leading Trump's campaign & Russian election interference, of Putin-loving Trump being elected, of Trump losing the election and finally Putin invading Ukraine.

Summary: "Putin likely didn't invade Ukraine because he didn't need to, Because Trump was his ultimate gift, doing everything Putin himself wanted to do - ie, elevating Russia, denigrating NATO, and delegitimizing Ukraine. Without [Trump] in the White House, Putin took matters into his own hands - ie, invading Ukraine & putting the country once again at the center of US politics."



I should also include an interesting comment posted on the video's page which is relevant here regarding Putin's need for Western sympathizers.

Posted by @annerigby4400 1 year ago - I think it would have been interesting and relevant to include Russia's interference in the Brexit referendum. As a result of Brexit, Boris Johnson is the Prime Minister of the UK and he is stalling on freezing Russian assets in the UK. The City of London is the major source of financing for Putin via his oligarchs. Johnson has said he would take necessary steps in eighteen months which is the same as saying he is going to do nothing. The fact that they are Russian oligarchs is sufficient reason to freeze their assets. So, this is relevant to the topic of what is discussed in this video because it is part of the same strategy and it is still working.

They're probably laughing even harder now than before.

Germany says it is no longer reliant on Russian energy
Germany no longer depends on Russian imports for its energy supply, the country's finance minister has told the BBC. Christian Lindner said Germany had completely diversified its energy infrastructure since Russia's invasion of Ukraine last year.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64312400

And, just for fun...

Six times world leaders laughed at Trump
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/04/brief-history-world-leaders-laughing-trump/

 

I'm a fan of his views/ideas, position & logic, which he expresses very well when addressing right-wing talking points & double-talk. Other than that, I think he can be arrogant. To your latter point, I'm sure you're right.

 

Not 'who', but what. What's relevant will depend on the purpose of the investigation (as long as the investigation is impartial & inclusive to the facts).

Did you forget the building had been breached by a mob of rioters, and that mob was on the shaman's side, and that they were always nearby? You think police could've arrested or removed the shaman from the building without anyone else noticing. Besides, the shaman did look a bit imposing & crazy and I suspect the police didn't want to risk being injured. Would you have?

Yes, and the reason might be simple. The media channels may have received hasty, unvetted news about Sicknick before the truth was finalized by autopsy. Note that the autopsy report was release on APRIL 19, 2021, over 4 months after he died.

Even if it was Sicknick, we can't tell from the video if the person is or is not distressed (recall a CP cop stated she saw Sicknick in "significant distress" after fighting with the mob & being sprayed). After all, Sicknick didn't die till the following day, so it's likely he was still walking around in or near the building after being sprayed.

Good. But I wonder how many MAGA folks even noticed.

They didn't want it released to the media & public. It was however released to the appropriate investigators & authorities, and congressional committees who had a real need for it.

(1) Their baseless beliefs (MAGA folks), and persistent lying & deception (Trump & his loyal lawmakers).
(2) Their rabid hatred for anything progressive (eg, environmental protections, free healthcare, free education, green energy, reduced defense spending, social programs, etc.).
(3) Their insane leadership (Trump & his loyal lawmakers).
(4) Their tolerance for unlimited corruption as long as it's their party/leader.
(5) Their divisive & militant nature (733 right-wing hate groups in the US).
(6) Lack of substantive policy or desire for meaningful change to benefit all Americans.
(7) Their cult-like mentality & dependency on authoritarian figures.

I don't care about Biden. He's just another corporate Democrat who's purpose of removing Trump from office was served. America needs a European style progressive leadership, like yesterday.

It's whataboutism because rather than denounce Trump's litany of crimes, his disastrous & grifting administration, and J6, MAGA people & lawmakers simply deflect to (or even fabricate) some cherry-picked wrong-doing committed by another party in order to justify their party/leader's wrong doing & corruption.

The President makes the final decision, yes, but is not qualified or capable of performing the actual task - in this case, the planning behind the pull out from Afghanistan. He needs to be able to trust the generals & experts to carry out the assignment appropriately & efficiently.

It shouldn't be investigated by Congress because they should have more important things to do - like passing bills that improve the lives of Americans. Let the military investigate it since it was a military operation.

 

@JCS

Are you saying the videos Tucker showed us are not authentic? Are you claiming Tucker tampered with evidence and that these are not actual Capitol security footage?

 

Spiraling into conspiracy theory? LOL, the government has been practicing conspiracy theory ever since WWII ended.

 

Yaaa. All of this, is complete nonsense. Or a very asinine way of looking at things. Take Germany for example, to think there wasn't cost to swapping LNG and oil off of Russian dependance. Or that Russia falsely thought that dependance gave them leverage into being allowed to become more aggressive? Ya. Your hot take is garbo. Sure, it's great that they are being forced to pivot away from Russian energy dependance...but everything Trump warned them of came true. And their reaction was to laugh. It wasn't a good thing. And doesn't make laughing at Trump smart.

I'd say about the only thing you and I agree on is the dumb ass COVID lockdown policies. True, Trump started it. He started it because everyone went absolutely hysterical about COVID, it was an election year and if he did nothing to placate the hysteria that would have insured his presidential loss. The entire rest of the world shuts down but America? Ya...that would have played out badly. But he was already promoting how we need to calm the **** down...and open the economies back up. Biden on the other hand, LOVED the mandates and we hung onto that bullshit way longer then was logically necessary.

That's just a few examples as to my disagreement with all the bullshit you just typed out. You pick ONE and we can debate it, but I absolutely refuse to go on a 20 point argument that perpetually has you posters quote every single line I type with a response that says nothing.

Like this;

No dummy. I listed several policies. You saying "no real policy" is just your dipshit hot take that those policies do not count.

Anyways. You pick a topic... and we can go from there.

 

As required by TOS, I properly labeled the quotes and provided a link. Are you demanding that I violate TOS?

 

Again you've fallen prey to surface fluff making you vulnerable to party propaganda & out-of-context sound bites, which is easy to do if you're not interested in the history & details behind geopolitical events. You have to apply relevant context & logical questions regarding the event in question.

---------------------------------------------------
(1) How much of their natural gas was Germany receiving before the invasion?

Before the invasion of Ukraine, Germany was receiving up to 55% of its natural gas from Russia. Though that figure has now been whittled down to around 30%, it's still regarded as dangerously high because the Kremlin just cut supplies in half, and fears are growing that further cuts will follow.
https://www.marketplace.org/2022/08/03/germany-under-fire-for-its-energy-dependence-on-russia/

So Germany's supply from Russia dwindled down to 30% of their needs after the invasion & before Nord Stream was destroyed/cut off. And currently Germany no longer relies on it as I posted earlier.

----------------------------------------------------
(2) How much of Germany's energy consumption was dependent on natural gas at that time?

Only 25%. This is why Germans laughed at Trump when he stated, "Germany will become totally dependent on Russian energy if it does not immediately change course. Here in the Western hemisphere we are committed to maintaining our independence from the encroachment of expansionist foreign powers."

-----------------------------------------------------
(3) And we need to ask why Germany would have even allowed a portion of their energy needs to be sourced from Russia.

Germany's dependence on Russian gas is often linked to its decision to shut down its nuclear plants in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster. But the CREA report argues that wind power could have effectively substituted for that gas.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmc...with-drop-in-wind-investment/?sh=4e70abfc40f5

Fears about nuke energy risks after Three Mile Island in 1979 & Chernobyl in 1986 had also boosted Germany's environmental movement and the newly formed Green party.

Additionally, Germany had long been under fire from its neighbors for having any dependence on Russian gas at the time, so the warnings were nothing new. It's just that, along with shutting down almost all its nukes, and natural gas supplying only a quarter of its energy needs, Germany went ahead with it.
https://www.marketplace.org/2022/08/03/germany-under-fire-for-its-energy-dependence-on-russia/

----------------
And finally, if Trump was smart, he would've followed Europe's lead in sustainable/clean energy (like Bernie, Warren, and other progressives have long been wanting to do). But of course the former Grifter-in-Chief is always in the pockets of the oil lobby (and many others), and even went as far as appointing Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson as Sec. of State! Talk about being a corporate shill.

So you admit Trump did it to get re-elected. He lost anyway, do it didn't matter.

Like I said, Biden's a corporate democrat and is beholden to big pharma interests, just as was Trump. But, against tradition, a Democratic presidential candidate (Biden) received much more from big pharma than did his Republican opponent Trump - presumably because Biden ran at the height of the covid scam and big pharma would be gearing up to make billions on vaccines - and pharma executives likely predicted Biden would win, owing to Trump's disastrous administration, plummeting popularity, and his many violations & two impeachments. And I'm sure pharma executives did a thorough study of Biden's personal attitudes about covid, and predicted he'd go along with their plans. In terms of big pharma donations to lawmakers, the reverse was the case. The GOP received far more in donations (ie, bribes).

Donors in the pharmaceutical industry contributed $6.3 million to the 2020 campaign of Joe Biden, nearly four times more money than they channeled to Trump, who took in $1.59 million, based on data through Oct. 23. At the Congressional level, pharmaceutical political action committees channeled $6 million to Republicans and $3.7 million to Democrats during the 2020 election cycle. The pharmaceutical industry has historically favored Republican candidates, who have received 64% of the industry's contributions since 1990.
https://gigafact.org/fact-briefs/di...ical-industry-contributions-his-opponent-2020

You're likely not aware of it, but Trump's campaign in 2016 received $1 million from Pfizer. Plus the following:

Trump Completes Big Pharma’s Takeover of America’s Health Care With Nomination of Alex Azar to Head HHS
Azar served for five years as president of Lilly USA, LLC, the largest affiliate of global biopharmaceutical leader Eli Lilly and Company.
Just weeks after denouncing “out-of-control” prescription prices, President Donald Trump shows he doesn’t mean it by nominating a former pharmaceutical company executive to run the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
https://www.citizen.org/news/trump-...are-with-nomination-of-alex-azar-to-head-hhs/

If you don't want the facts, then don't make baseless claims or spew party propaganda. Do a little research first. Stay impartial & open to and accept the facts as they are. Would you rather be manipulated by your party/leadership, or would you rather be an independent thinker?

This issue with Trump telling NATO they need to step up their own defense spending was covered in my previous post to you. Go back and read the part about why Putin didn't invade Ukraine during Trump's administration. It's the part with the video.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ol-video-tapes.608839/page-32#post-1074084484

I'm not picking any topic. Just responding to false claims & propaganda.

 

When did I say or imply that?

 

Let's stick with Germany's idiocy for laughing at Trump when he warned them not to become energy reliant on Russia. You seem to have this idiotic notion that there wasn't consequences for such a stupid move. Like it was something easily shrugged off.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/02/germany-dependence-russian-energy-gas-oil-nord-stream

"In February this year, German Green economic affairs and climate action minister Robert Habeck said that gas storage facilities owned by Gazprom in Germany had been “systematically emptied” over the winter, to drive up prices and exert political pressure. It was a staggering admission of Russia’s power to disrupt energy supplies.

“I was wrong,” the former German finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, says, simply. “We were all wrong.”"

More from Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the German president; "“We held on to bridges that Russia no longer believed in, and that our partners warned us about.”" Not like they didn't have prior red flags to be concerned with.
"Thereafter it seemed, whatever the setbacks in German-Russian relations, nothing could shift the faith in trade – not Russia’s “peace enforcement operation” in Georgia in August 2008, not the Russian disruption of the gas pipelines in a dispute with Ukraine in January 2009, nor the news that Putin was planning to return to the presidency in 2012, replacing Dmitry Medvedev, in whom Frank-Walter Steinmeier had placed his faith. In 2011, the year Nord Stream finally opened, German total trade exports to Russia rose 34% to €27bn."

So this one article details the issues it faced with becoming energy dependant on Russia...and the damn President's admission that they were wrong. Think they were still laughing? Think they were still "lol silly Trump!! Always saying Trump stuff!"

Since you like videos, here's going over the current hardships of the German economy; TLDR? First reason he gives is the rising cost in what? Oh that's right! Energy! Kind of sucks when your energy costs suddenly spike in a country that is hard core in exporting.



See, you are in the impossible task of trying to pretend that the sudden shift off of Russian energy dependency and cheap gas wasn't going to have a negative impact on the German economy. Would have been less impactful had they listened to Trump instead of laughing at him, took him seriously and started slowly moving off of Russian oil dependency. But...they wanted to laugh and declare Trump so stooopid!

What would you like to discuss next?

 

Didn't see your reply the last time, so I will do it here.

Did I cut the video? Yes, I did. But is that the real legal question here? No, it is not. the one-hour of video that shows person X committing the crime is the only video that is exculpatory. If there is a video of Person X doing anything other than committing a crime, it is not exculpatory because it is not favorable per the Brady Rule to the defendant which shows that he did not commit the crime, especially when I use the example of grass growing.

Cops may or may not be showing him around. there are times in which a person who is cooperating and being escorted from the premises is not arrested. I know that is what Tucker wants you to think, but not all the facts are in place and it really has nothing to do with 18 USC 1512. It depends on the other factors involved that are not being discussed here. One option is the officers violated the procedure. Yes, it happens, but that does not exonerate him. And it does not exonerate him from the charge he pled guilty with. He does exonerate him for the charge of trespassing, which is why he was never charged with that crime originally.

Conspiracy theories that they were let in. The one video is being used to excuse all 1000 people who rioted, some of whom broke windows, and doors, and forced their way into the capital. There is another video of that too that has been shared on the internet. But not Tucker. He won't give you the full story, just his part of his political agenda. others include Jacob Chansley as BLM and Antifa, that those who were rioting were antifa and BLM, the infamous Ray Epps as an FBI agent in which he denied when asked directly and no evidence to the contrary, and a whole bunch more.

 

Simple answer, no. However that has not stopped some peope from beating around the bush to make frivelous arguments about the Brady Rule being denied, his due process rights were violated and so forth. And that is why we have about a dozen or so threads on this very issue from Tucker in two subforums.

That did not happen. And one video does not justify the quote you gave. Tucker is literally stating all of them, including Ashley Babbit who was quite literally going through a window before she was shot, had no permission, or was escorted by police. Notice the word "ALL" being used. Not most, not some, but all. And that is a bold face lie.

 

All he does is call all Republicans and right-wingers names, like racists, homophobes and transphobes.

 

So you are saying that is a DIRECT QUOTE from Carlson? I didn't actually think that you were quoting him when you said those words. I thought that you were making an accusation that he said something and that you just put it into your own words!

 

This is your problem. You think that the aim of Carlson and those of us who support his release of the footage, is to EXONERATE the piece of human WASTE shaman! We have no interest in that! The aim rather, is to show that it was NOT a "deadly insurrection." I mean, we didn't need this new footage to learn that fact. We already knew that from the fact that nobody was charged with insurrection. As Carlson said in his report: "Taken as a whole, the video record does not support the claim that January 6th was an insurrection. In fact, it demolishes that claim." Yes, it turns out that the whole 'deadly insurrection' narrative was just one big hilarious JOKE! These little pieces of SCUM wouldn't be capable of anything remotely CLOSE to an insurrection! And as for the idea that the stupid shaman was the LEADER of the thing? Well, I'll allow my favourite emoji to express how I feel about that:

Wait, how does the footage exonerate him for the charge of trespassing?

You're talking about "video" from Carlson's report last week?

Who, Carlson?

Do you have reason to believe that Epps did NOT remain at the Capitol for at least another half an hour?

 

Impartial? With two Republicans on the Committee, and with a bunch of Republicans rejected from being on the Committee? Yeah, SO super impartial!

They could have grabbed the piece of crap and taken him into a room somewhere.

WTF? Did they not have GUNS?

Yes, well after it had hardened into conventional wisdom that he was killed on the day with a fire extinguisher. Are you saying that the correction was widely reported in the media? As much as the false narrative that he was killed in the event with a fire extinguisher?

You're correct that we can't tell from the video if the person is or is not distressed, but it seems that we can at least know that it was in fact Sicknick. In the Carlson report, he says that: "the footage contains an electronic bookmark that is still archived in the Capitol's computer system"

So then the govt officials & Capitol Police lost their court case?

 

Chansley's lawyer did get a copy of the video except for 10 secs after Chansley pled guilty but before his sentencing. .

His lawyer then either didn't watch the video or did and didn't think anything of it.

He had yet to be sentenced so his lawyer definitely could have made a motion to delay sentencing and present the 4 mins to the judge and argue whatever.

These 4 mins of video are certainly not enough to negate Chanseley's behavior and speech which got him indicted in the first place.


'Prosecutors say newly aired Chansley footage paints misleading portrait of his Jan. 6 conduct'

"Prosecutors on Sunday rejected the notion that newly public footage of Jacob Chansley — known as the QAnon Shaman — accompanied by police in the Capitol undercuts his criminal conduct on Jan. 6, 2021.

In their first response since Fox News’ Tucker Carlson aired the footage — supplied to him by Speaker Kevin McCarthy — prosecutors indicated that Carlson aired footage only from a four-minute period toward the end of Chansley’s hourlong trip through the Capitol, omitting the most incriminating aspects of his conduct.

“The televised footage shows Chansley’s movements only from approximately 2:56 p.m. to 3:00 p.m,” prosecutors said in a 10-page court filing connected to the seditious conspiracy trial of five Proud Boys leaders, including Dominic Pezzola, who used a riot shield to initiate the breach of the Capitol.

“Prior to that time, Chansley had, amongst other acts, breached a police line at 2:09 p.m. with the mob, entered the Capitol less than one minute behind Pezzola during the initial breach of the building, and faced off with members of the U.S. Capitol Police for more than thirty minutes in front of the Senate Chamber doors while elected officials, including the Vice President of the United States, were fleeing from the chamber,” they continued."

cont:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/p...ing-portrait-of-his-jan-6-conduct/ar-AA18xhrm

 

Why are you conflating "Republicans" with "MAGA folks?"

That might make them 'mean' or 'selfish' in not wanting to help people or whatever, but how the hell does it make them "crackpots?"

McCarthy and McConnell are Trump loyalists?

You should talk to your friend Uygur. He talks alot about Democrat corruption.

What do these groups have to do with the Republican Party?

This is just a pointless rehash of point 2.

Trump and who else?

What the hell do you mean by "grifting administration?"

Top generals contradict Biden, say they urged him not to withdraw from Afghanistan - POLITICO

"Top generals told lawmakers under oath on Tuesday that they advised President Joe Biden early this year to keep several thousand troops in Afghanistan — directly contradicting the president’s comments in August that no one warned him not to withdraw troops from the country."

Is Congress not made up of many Committees?

Let the military investigate themselves? Surely you can't be serious!

 

Do you stand by this claim?

You must be the only person in America who came to the conclusion that Sicknick died by fire extinguisher, not because you read the incorrect reporting, but because you mixed up his death with the actual cop who got hit with a fire extinguisher. Unless there was some widely reported story that many people saw about the actual cop who got hit. I for one was not aware that there was an actual fire extinguisher attack, but I guess it stands to reason that it wasn't manufactured, and that it was just misattributed to Sicknick's death. The point is this: the media was far too quick to report this, without verifying it. because it was pretty convenient for the unbelievably stupid 'deadly insurrection' narrative. In doing so they further degraded what little credibility they have left. And something tells me that they would not have been quite so quick to report that a cop had died during a 2020 BLM riot.

Then why didn't the Jan 6 committee show the other people running in the corridor footage? And how the hell does it show Hawley as a hypocrite?

Nobody is suggesting that they should have shown only Democrats. So it's weird that you're bringing that up.

 

You have misunderstood what I said. I did not say that the violent rioters were "mostly peaceful", I said that it was a mostly peaceful protest. Did you not see wide shot footage of the number of people outside the Capitol? Do you really think that the majority of them even entered the building, let alone acted violently while inside? It's a FACT that January 6 was a mostly peaceful protest. Funny though that the media did not label it as this, while they were most willing to constantly label the 2020 BLM protests as "mostly peaceful." Interesting isn't it?

Hmm. That sure is a few people isn't it?

Well that's a curious ratio. Where are you getting that from exactly?

Oh, nothing major. Just 19 DEAD in the first 14 days of the George Floyd related protests:

14 Days Of Protests, 19 Dead (forbes.com)

And you ask me about mere INJURIES? Wow, you really are in a left wing mainstream media bubble, because it's clear that you are under the impression that the 2020 riots resulted in no deaths, and less injuries than January 6! Wow!

Also, why are you limiting it to human damage? You're forgetting about property damage, which you SURELY cannot be ignorant enough to not be aware of! Over 1 billion dollars worth of damage:

$1 billion-plus riot damage is most expensive in insurance history (axios.com)

It turns out that the 2020 riots collectively, were FAR worse than January 6.

Sure. I just find it hilarious that you thought that it could contribute to your argument! As you can see from the above media cites, that sure has backfired on you!

Did you even watch Carlson's report? And can you quote him calling the RIOT "mostly peaceful?" My gut tells me that the answer is a big fat NO on both counts, and that you have just being absorbing what CNN or MSNBC have to say about it, or some other Democrat shill lib network. But maybe you'll tell me that I'm wrong.

Perhaps he is just balancing out the politicisation. The Jan 6 Committee politicised Jan 6, and now it's Carlson's turn? Or does the politicisation only go one way?

 

To prove that the media and the left framed the perspective with manipulated dis-information for partisan gain with regard to the Capitol protest, all that you really need to ask the libs is: how was January 6 a deadly insurrection and how could it be blamed on Trump who called for a "peaceful" protest? Because the fact of the matter is that it was NOT an insurrection, by any honest standard, but the media wanted not only that to be the narrative, but that Trump was behind it!

 

I asked "get it now"? because I had already replied but I thought that you may have missed it because you didn't reply, so I was just checking to make sure that you saw my reply in which I clarified. This post: http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ol-video-tapes.608839/page-25#post-1074080474

 

Yes. Numerous times. Again, do you have any clue what is happening? LOL

 

I have told reds multiple times that the Officer(s) that were walking with that shaman dipshit have been interviewed and have also been on the HBO Documentary "4 hours at the Capitol" over a year ago, where they talk about, in their own words what they were walking with those dipshits.

Reds don't actually care about J6. They just desperately want Tuckers horseshit to be true and to pretend that day never happened.