The Tucker Carlson videos are dropping

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:bLuE lIvEs mAtTeR

And every person prosecuted unfairly on this BS is in pain too, as are their families

Then don't do the crime. If they have been prosecuted and been found guilty, that is our system.

When the jury doesn’t have all the information, it’s a huge problem. You and I both know that. I’m just the one who believes in fair trials, not you

No jury is presented with 44,000 or 14,000 hours of videotape. By the prosecution or the defense.

Defense should have what the prosecution has. If Pelosi withheld anything, that’s on the Dems

Pelosi bastardized Congress to run a partisan hack job.

If there's a crime it's for prosecutors to prosecute, not for a media circus with little credibility and much --as we're niw seeing-- censorship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They arrested and jailed that guy for being escorted throughout the Capitol by the police. There’s something seriously wrong with all of this.

I know. What reasonable person WOULDN’T think he was just taking a tour in that environment. /s/

JFC dude.

Doesn’t matter. If an officer is escorting you around, it’s reasonable to think it’s all ok.

Uh, no, if you break into a building and a police officer follows you but does not tackle you, that doesn't make it okay.

Reasonable? Are you 10?

So you maintain the officer knew he broke the law and was simply following him, knowing there were cameras everywhere?

Maintain what? He was arrested, charged, and convicted. All without being tackled!

That's how our system works.

Again, if the evidence was withheld, no, it’s not how our system works. That video should have been handed to the defense by prosecution.

The videos that Carlson showed were shown to the defense and the prosecution. He didn't put up new stuff - he hasn't gone through 44,000 hours of videos to find any gotcha stuff because that's a tremendous amount of footage and the gotcha footage has already been by the J6 committee.

The prosecution, with their many, many lawyers, knew that video existed and deliberately withheld it from defense.

What is your evidence that anything relevant was withheld?

Let’s say the Feds had no idea that footage existed. Now they do. New trial?

That's not the question. You keep saying it was deliberately withheld. What's your evidence of that? DOJ created a huge database for January 6 and let the defendants lawyers have full access to it. It included tons of video. So what is your evidence that they didn't get any relevant video?

Do they have the same manpower to go through it? Did the prosecution know that video existed? If the prosecution had evidence in video format that could be exculpatory, that should also be provided to the defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:bLuE lIvEs mAtTeR

And every person prosecuted unfairly on this BS is in pain too, as are their families

Then don't do the crime. If they have been prosecuted and been found guilty, that is our system.

When the jury doesn’t have all the information, it’s a huge problem. You and I both know that. I’m just the one who believes in fair trials, not you

No jury is presented with 44,000 or 14,000 hours of videotape. By the prosecution or the defense.

Defense should have what the prosecution has. If Pelosi withheld anything, that’s on the Dems

That's not what the law is. Don't like it, complain to SCOTUS who came up with Brady.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They arrested and jailed that guy for being escorted throughout the Capitol by the police. There’s something seriously wrong with all of this.

I know. What reasonable person WOULDN’T think he was just taking a tour in that environment. /s/

JFC dude.

Doesn’t matter. If an officer is escorting you around, it’s reasonable to think it’s all ok.

Uh, no, if you break into a building and a police officer follows you but does not tackle you, that doesn't make it okay.

Reasonable? Are you 10?

So you maintain the officer knew he broke the law and was simply following him, knowing there were cameras everywhere?

Maintain what? He was arrested, charged, and convicted. All without being tackled!

That's how our system works.

Again, if the evidence was withheld, no, it’s not how our system works. That video should have been handed to the defense by prosecution.

The videos that Carlson showed were shown to the defense and the prosecution. He didn't put up new stuff - he hasn't gone through 44,000 hours of videos to find any gotcha stuff because that's a tremendous amount of footage and the gotcha footage has already been by the J6 committee.

The prosecution, with their many, many lawyers, knew that video existed and deliberately withheld it from defense.

What is your evidence that anything relevant was withheld?

Let’s say the Feds had no idea that footage existed. Now they do. New trial?

That's not the question. You keep saying it was deliberately withheld. What's your evidence of that? DOJ created a huge database for January 6 and let the defendants lawyers have full access to it. It included tons of video. So what is your evidence that they didn't get any relevant video?

Do they have the same manpower to go through it? Did the prosecution know that video existed? If the prosecution had evidence in video format that could be exculpatory, that should also be provided to the defense.

The prosecution could only see what was turned over to DOJ. Nancy did not turn it all over to DOJ. I'm guessing that they now will have access to what Carlson showed, but I am not sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What Americans want to know is who shat on the floor of the Capitol and why has no one aired the video ofnit? We demand to see it.

I’m confused why no J6 defenders will answer this question. Surely you also want that video released too in the name of transparency?

I do, actually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They arrested and jailed that guy for being escorted throughout the Capitol by the police. There’s something seriously wrong with all of this.

I know. What reasonable person WOULDN’T think he was just taking a tour in that environment. /s/

JFC dude.

Doesn’t matter. If an officer is escorting you around, it’s reasonable to think it’s all ok.

Uh, no, if you break into a building and a police officer follows you but does not tackle you, that doesn't make it okay.

Reasonable? Are you 10?

So you maintain the officer knew he broke the law and was simply following him, knowing there were cameras everywhere?

Maintain what? He was arrested, charged, and convicted. All without being tackled!

That's how our system works.

So by your standards, if a black man kills a white man and there is video of the white man physically assaulting the black man first and screaming racist bs, you would be ok with the white man’s lawyers withholding that video from defense. After all the black man was arrested, charged and convicted so it doesn’t matter, right?

False equivalence.

The people who are being charged with crimes, and prosecuted with crimes actually committed the crimes - they either admitted it as part of a plea, or there is actual video of them beating on officers, destroying government property, illgally being in a restricted area, etc. Are you trying to claim that the people being prosecuted were egged on by the Capitol Police?

I’m talking about ONE man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They arrested and jailed that guy for being escorted throughout the Capitol by the police. There’s something seriously wrong with all of this.

I know. What reasonable person WOULDN’T think he was just taking a tour in that environment. /s/

JFC dude.

Doesn’t matter. If an officer is escorting you around, it’s reasonable to think it’s all ok.

Uh, no, if you break into a building and a police officer follows you but does not tackle you, that doesn't make it okay.

Reasonable? Are you 10?

So you maintain the officer knew he broke the law and was simply following him, knowing there were cameras everywhere?

Maintain what? He was arrested, charged, and convicted. All without being tackled!

That's how our system works.

Again, if the evidence was withheld, no, it’s not how our system works. That video should have been handed to the defense by prosecution.

The videos that Carlson showed were shown to the defense and the prosecution. He didn't put up new stuff - he hasn't gone through 44,000 hours of videos to find any gotcha stuff because that's a tremendous amount of footage and the gotcha footage has already been by the J6 committee.

The prosecution, with their many, many lawyers, knew that video existed and deliberately withheld it from defense.

What is your evidence that anything relevant was withheld?

Let’s say the Feds had no idea that footage existed. Now they do. New trial?

That's not the question. You keep saying it was deliberately withheld. What's your evidence of that? DOJ created a huge database for January 6 and let the defendants lawyers have full access to it. It included tons of video. So what is your evidence that they didn't get any relevant video?

Do they have the same manpower to go through it? Did the prosecution know that video existed? If the prosecution had evidence in video format that could be exculpatory, that should also be provided to the defense.

I'm sure they did not have the same manpower. So what? They were given access to all of the material evidence, including material exculpatory evidence, in a gigantic discovery database. Those are the facts and it complied with the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So… if I rob a bank, and the police are there and don’t stop me as I do it… does that mean I didn’t commit a crime?
Serious question.

Robbing a bank is a crime. Being shown around the Capitol by police is not.

But defecating on the Capitol floors and smearing it around IS a crime. Smashing windows and destroying other people’s offices and causing tens of thousands of dollars in damage that we, the taxpayers, have to pay, IS a crime. Attacking police officers so they lose body parts IS a crime.

Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an independent who doesn't love much of what Biden and the Democrats do, I am just amazed that the GOP has decided to make defending a bunch of trash terrorists their signature issue. You people are nuts. I don't want to vote for democrats, but you are really leaving me no choice.

I believe in due process and honesty in prosecution. For everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They arrested and jailed that guy for being escorted throughout the Capitol by the police. There’s something seriously wrong with all of this.

I know. What reasonable person WOULDN’T think he was just taking a tour in that environment. /s/

JFC dude.

Doesn’t matter. If an officer is escorting you around, it’s reasonable to think it’s all ok.

Uh, no, if you break into a building and a police officer follows you but does not tackle you, that doesn't make it okay.

Reasonable? Are you 10?

So you maintain the officer knew he broke the law and was simply following him, knowing there were cameras everywhere?

Maintain what? He was arrested, charged, and convicted. All without being tackled!

That's how our system works.

Again, if the evidence was withheld, no, it’s not how our system works. That video should have been handed to the defense by prosecution.

The videos that Carlson showed were shown to the defense and the prosecution. He didn't put up new stuff - he hasn't gone through 44,000 hours of videos to find any gotcha stuff because that's a tremendous amount of footage and the gotcha footage has already been by the J6 committee.

The prosecution, with their many, many lawyers, knew that video existed and deliberately withheld it from defense.

What is your evidence that anything relevant was withheld?

Crickets....

Was it presented at trial to the jury?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They arrested and jailed that guy for being escorted throughout the Capitol by the police. There’s something seriously wrong with all of this.

I know. What reasonable person WOULDN’T think he was just taking a tour in that environment. /s/

JFC dude.

Doesn’t matter. If an officer is escorting you around, it’s reasonable to think it’s all ok.

Uh, no, if you break into a building and a police officer follows you but does not tackle you, that doesn't make it okay.

Reasonable? Are you 10?

So you maintain the officer knew he broke the law and was simply following him, knowing there were cameras everywhere?

Maintain what? He was arrested, charged, and convicted. All without being tackled!

That's how our system works.

Again, if the evidence was withheld, no, it’s not how our system works. That video should have been handed to the defense by prosecution.

The videos that Carlson showed were shown to the defense and the prosecution. He didn't put up new stuff - he hasn't gone through 44,000 hours of videos to find any gotcha stuff because that's a tremendous amount of footage and the gotcha footage has already been by the J6 committee.

The prosecution, with their many, many lawyers, knew that video existed and deliberately withheld it from defense.

What is your evidence that anything relevant was withheld?

Crickets....

Was it presented at trial to the jury?

So you have no evidence at all for your wild accusations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually Carlson is exposing obvious lies by the partisan J6 crew.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

And Schumer is trying to stop Fox News from airing more tonight. Run Chuck, RUN

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an independent who doesn't love much of what Biden and the Democrats do, I am just amazed that the GOP has decided to make defending a bunch of trash terrorists their signature issue. You people are nuts. I don't want to vote for democrats, but you are really leaving me no choice.

I believe in due process and honesty in prosecution. For everyone.

All of them got due process and honesty so you should be happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:bLuE lIvEs mAtTeR

And every person prosecuted unfairly on this BS is in pain too, as are their families

Then don't do the crime. If they have been prosecuted and been found guilty, that is our system.

When the jury doesn’t have all the information, it’s a huge problem. You and I both know that. I’m just the one who believes in fair trials, not you

No jury is presented with 44,000 or 14,000 hours of videotape. By the prosecution or the defense.

Defense should have what the prosecution has. If Pelosi withheld anything, that’s on the Dems

That's not what the law is. Don't like it, complain to SCOTUS who came up with Brady.

So your position is that hiding exculpatory evidence is a moral position? If a black man is accused of murder and evidence surfaces showing that man far away from the location of the murder at the time, it should be hidden from defense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They arrested and jailed that guy for being escorted throughout the Capitol by the police. There’s something seriously wrong with all of this.

I know. What reasonable person WOULDN’T think he was just taking a tour in that environment. /s/

JFC dude.

Doesn’t matter. If an officer is escorting you around, it’s reasonable to think it’s all ok.

Uh, no, if you break into a building and a police officer follows you but does not tackle you, that doesn't make it okay.

Reasonable? Are you 10?

So you maintain the officer knew he broke the law and was simply following him, knowing there were cameras everywhere?

Maintain what? He was arrested, charged, and convicted. All without being tackled!

That's how our system works.

Again, if the evidence was withheld, no, it’s not how our system works. That video should have been handed to the defense by prosecution.

The videos that Carlson showed were shown to the defense and the prosecution. He didn't put up new stuff - he hasn't gone through 44,000 hours of videos to find any gotcha stuff because that's a tremendous amount of footage and the gotcha footage has already been by the J6 committee.

The prosecution, with their many, many lawyers, knew that video existed and deliberately withheld it from defense.

What is your evidence that anything relevant was withheld?

Let’s say the Feds had no idea that footage existed. Now they do. New trial?

That's not the question. You keep saying it was deliberately withheld. What's your evidence of that? DOJ created a huge database for January 6 and let the defendants lawyers have full access to it. It included tons of video. So what is your evidence that they didn't get any relevant video?

Do they have the same manpower to go through it? Did the prosecution know that video existed? If the prosecution had evidence in video format that could be exculpatory, that should also be provided to the defense.

The prosecution could only see what was turned over to DOJ. Nancy did not turn it all over to DOJ. I'm guessing that they now will have access to what Carlson showed, but I am not sure.

And she’s what? Say it with me. A Dem