Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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![]()
Schumer is doing nothing of the sort. The outlet is free to do as it is. He is right to call out the BS though. If Fox doesn't want to be called out for it, then it shouldn't give Carlson a platform. They do, and they will be held accountable for it.
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: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.
It was not. Can you provide evidence that video was shown to the jury please?
I don't know what video you are talking about. There are lots of reasons a video might be not be shown to a jury. Defense counsel may not have wanted to. Or maybe they didn't find it. Or maybe the judge ruled it was not admissible. Even if this video that you haven't identified wasn't shown to the jury, it doesn't mean it wasn't made available to defense counsel.
I think they are talking about the video of the 'shaman". i have no idea if the defense had it or if they did, whether it was shown to the jury. It is possible that they do not have it.
Well if it was for the Shaman, then it obviously was not shown to a jury because that guy pleaded guilty.
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: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.
It was not. Can you provide evidence that video was shown to the jury please?
I don't know what video you are talking about. There are lots of reasons a video might be not be shown to a jury. Defense counsel may not have wanted to. Or maybe they didn't find it. Or maybe the judge ruled it was not admissible. Even if this video that you haven't identified wasn't shown to the jury, it doesn't mean it wasn't made available to defense counsel.
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: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.
The morality of the leftYour best day as a prosecutor should be the day you turn over evidence that clears a man or woman.
Are you aware that "the left" has been fighting for decades for more resources for criminal defendants, and they've been blocked at every turn by conservatives? Suddenly it's a huge issue for conservatives when a bunch of people they like are the defendants. But you don't a flying f^ck about the poor black folk who are ground down by this system every day.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
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 wrote:I can't believe people are actually buying Tucker's crap. We all saw what happened in real time. They were not tourists, they did not just wander into the Capitol. Ashli Babbit got shot after multiple warnings;she was not "murdered".
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?
Crickets....
Was it presented at trial to the jury?
So you have no evidence at all for your wild accusations.
It was not. Can you provide evidence that video was shown to the jury please?
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: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.
The morality of the leftYour best day as a prosecutor should be the day you turn over evidence that clears a man or woman.
Anonymous wrote: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 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.
Anonymous wrote:I can't believe people are actually buying Tucker's crap. We all saw what happened in real time. They were not tourists, they did not just wander into the Capitol. Ashli Babbit got shot after multiple warnings;she was not "murdered".