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.

That is just outright false.
The only video that defense counsel had was the video the DOJ allowed them to have. And, much of what Carlson aired was NOT included in that.

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.

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.

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?

That's an interesting hypothetical unrelated to anything we're talking about. Go talk to your 1L buds about this on Thursday.

In other words, you know I’m right

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?

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?

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?

Anonymous wrote:this tweet pretty much makes the point

Anonymous wrote:The videos will confirm those who already know the J6 panel was hyperpartisan and greatly exaggerated what happened and that it was little more than a spontaneous crowd of not very bright people running around for a few hours with no real aim or objectives except to protest and have fun with it. It will not change the views of those who believe the J6 panel and that democracy was about to be overthrown and the US become a fascist state.

Anonymous wrote:this tweet pretty much makes the point

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dems have no issue with what about ism so here is a few for them.

They seem to have no issue with the radical far left who rioted and destroyed property when Trump was inaugurated. Those were anarchists and yes we had a problem with them

They seem to have no issue with the far left radicals who actually set of a bomb in the Senate building in 1983 nor do they have an issue with the fact Clinton pardoned those convicted.yes we had a problem with that, but you realize, that was 40 years ago, right?

They also have no issue with the fact the bomb went off outside an office of a former leader of the Klan who was the longest serving member in Congress. Let’s see Dems can apologize for their abhorrent behavior and get a pass.
While not a fan of leaving bombs, I can understand why someone would want to bombs a former Klan leader
The hypocrisy never ever stops!

So sure, let's equate some one off bad acts from decades past with thousands of "patriots" storming the US Capitol in the name of overthrowing a validated and issue free election in 2021.

Who's talking decades ago?

Just 3 years ago we had violent mobs attacking the WH and dozens of official buildings across the whole building, and one party celebrated the coup attempt.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Dems have no issue with what about ism so here is a few for them.

They seem to have no issue with the radical far left who rioted and destroyed property when Trump was inaugurated. Those were anarchists and yes we had a problem with them

They seem to have no issue with the far left radicals who actually set of a bomb in the Senate building in 1983 nor do they have an issue with the fact Clinton pardoned those convicted.yes we had a problem with that, but you realize, that was 40 years ago, right?

They also have no issue with the fact the bomb went off outside an office of a former leader of the Klan who was the longest serving member in Congress. Let’s see Dems can apologize for their abhorrent behavior and get a pass.
While not a fan of leaving bombs, I can understand why someone would want to bombs a former Klan leader
The hypocrisy never ever stops!

So sure, let's equate some one off bad acts from decades past with thousands of "patriots" storming the US Capitol in the name of overthrowing a validated and issue free election in 2021.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This goes against the family's "story."
The video suggests their story is wrong.
The autopsy also says that their story is wrong.

It is human nature to want to blame someone else. I have compassion for the family, but,they have also been lied to. How many times have people on the Jan 6 committee said that Sicknick was killed that day?

The committee should have been honest about this. The White House should have been honest about this.

This makes me doubt EVERYTHING the committee did. Especially, since it was reported within days that Sicknick did not die that day.

Did the event contribute to his death? Maybe. Maybe not. But the story coming from the White House and the committee was unequivocal.

Have you ever considered, just for a moment, that the family is right, the story is right, the video shows that the family is right, as well as the autopsy, and because you are getting your information from Fox "we laugh at our stupid viewers" News, maybe, just maybe YOU are wrong?

JFC. The video shows it was lies

Nope, selectively showing a few seconds of over 40,000 hours of footage can provide a skewed version of events. That is what Tucker is feeding you, and despite his being an admitted liar, you are believing him.

This is actually what the J6 Committee did. And, edited them for full effect. Like adding sound to silent video.