January 6th, Just What Was It?

[Colt]

And here you are, making up stuff again and trying to run away from the topic of discussion.

You're cute.

Also, you lose. Consider re-evaluating your positions in future.

And I'm not yet convinced you're not a joke account.

The topic is the only unarmed person killed in the purported "insurrection" wherein no one had guns except the cops.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The topic is the only unarmed person killed in the purported "insurrection" wherein no one had guns except the cops.

You really can't acknowledge a single actual fact, can you?

Call me when you're not explicitly defending violent insurrectionists who want to overturn democracy.

 

[Colt]

You really can't acknowledge a single actual fact, can you?

Call me when you're not explicitly defending violent insurrectionists who want to overturn democracy.

Yes, I have provided facts, you dont like them.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yes, I have provided facts, you dont like them.

Nope, you're ignoring facts. That's all you have. Ignore the truth and make up stories. Your second-to-last post is an absolute demonstration of this fact.

You do not live in reality. And there is no point in debating someone who is incapable of speaking about facts or dealing with them honestly.

 

[metis]

The topic is the only unarmed person killed in the purported "insurrection" wherein no one had guns except the cops.

False.
In the wake of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, a popular narrative has emerged: that because rioters did not fire guns that day, they were not really "armed."

But a review of the federal charges against the alleged rioters shows that they did come armed, and with a variety of weapons: stun guns, pepper spray, baseball bats and flagpoles wielded as clubs. An additional suspect also allegedly planted pipe bombs by the headquarters of the Democratic and Republican parties the night before the riot and remains at large... https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/9778...ere-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Jan 6, committee never showed the video that Tucker Carlson is showing. Would a fair trial expect that? The Democrats cherry picked to fit their own narrative, just as the Democrats, now accuse Tucker of cherry picking to fit his narrative. How else can you explain never before seen footage, that did not 100% support Democrat talking points?

Let it play out, instead of running interference, unless there is something sinister to hide. If there is something to hide Democrats should keep running inference and sewing discord; New Lies to cover old lies worked after the Russian Collusion Coup was debunked. Not a single Democrat was jail or was shot in a firing squad for their failed Coup against a sitting President.

Honest people who make mistakes, might be embarrass and humbled, but they will take responsibility, and even apologize. Liars will not do that, if they wish to continue down the path of lying and running self serving scams. They will deny, accuse and double down on even more lying. How are the Democrats reacting? I do not see the natural reaction of honest people who made mistakes.

The approach of the Democrats is all about accusing the messenger, but not addressing the videos. This is called a distraction. Has anyone heard any Democrat directly refute any of the videos as tampered or edited? The answer is no. Their strategy is same as what they used for the Coup, all about attack the messenger. This is a tell for liars. They try to avoid talking about their lies and omission of facts, by avoiding direct discussion of the videos. They know nobody will buy the lies of someone who lies to their face, while the audience sees the opposite on hard video. They did the same thing with the Russian collusion coup; Liar 1.0 is never tell the truth, never apologize, and never talk about the evidence that you lied.

The fear of those who conspired to defraud the American people, is the unseen video now opens many to civil law suits. Tucker, in one of his monologues, I read yesterday, stated that the Lawyers for Q'Anon never saw the footage of him being escorted around the Capital, and therefore they could not use that footage at his trial for his defense. Whoops! Any reasonable Juror in a Civil trial, will have to assume he railroaded to fit the narrative. They did the same thing to General Flynn, as a prop, to make the lie look more convincing. General Flynn is now suing for $50M to cover his lost opportunity costs.

Can you say civil suits against a wide range of con artists? Once outside lawyers smell money, they will come out like cockroaches at night. That one Q'Anon trial and the General Flynn Trial can also bring dozens of liars to the stand; perjury traps, so they have to admit. Do pathological liars melt or explode if they have to tell the truth or go to jail? We will see. Biden can pardon all the crooks of crimes, but Civil Courts can go after their ill gotten nest eggs.

One of the former FOX new contributors; Megan Kelly made a comment how FOX is buffering itself from Tucker, while letting him do his thing. They have a law suit against them connected to the Voting Machine Company. I suspect the Left is making a deal; drop the suit, in exchange for them suppressing the video. The Left seems very desperate. The deal cannot look too obvious; sudden shut down, or else everyone will know the fix was in. Fox is not running as much coverage as one would expect based on the Left wing propaganda machine's current liar defense. Tucker is still given freedom on his program, which could explain the targeted get the messenger attack.

Another point Tucker made was during the Capital Riot, is that 114 officers were injured, which he agreed was a lot of injuries. He then pointed out in that during the Washington Riots in the Summer of 2020, the insurrection attempt on the White House, where the insurrectionists burned down an Historical Church, 180 officers were injured. That was worse on paper in terms of injuries and property damage, yet nobody went to jail, and there was no insurrection tribunal. It is strange who we have two similar protests, but two different results from the Left.

Trump, unlike Pelosi, took the advice of security and was prepared. The White House was protected. Pelosi could have also been prepared, and kept the riot outside the Capital, since she had several days of notice, and the offer of extra security including National Guard. Why did she make it easier for the worse case scenario, then did Trump? What these two similar and opposites result riots, have in common, is they both benefited Democrats and only the Right was accused. The could not happen if honest people were inn charge. It needs the special talents of con artists and liars.

It is important to let the Accused have its day, since the Democrat had two years to running their biased scam. Now it is time for the Defense to confront those who lied by the omission of facts. I have heard the Fascist word used. In my experience the best Fascists tend to use the same tactics as we now see from the Democrats, and they get the same results as when the American Democrats rig the game. Fascist that cannot rig the game are not fit for the title; Fascists. They are too honest and do not have al the extra tools that liars can bring to the game.

Watch and see if any Democrats directly attack the videos or whether liars avoid truth like vampires avoid holy water.

How would you know? It probably was shown, just not in the edited version that Carlson used. Did you see that he was shown to have dishonestly edited it on the first page? There are hours of footage. Carlson and his team falsely edited it to show that story that he wanted to tell.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope, you're ignoring facts. That's all you have. Ignore the truth and make up stories. Your second-to-last post is an absolute demonstration of this fact.

You do not live in reality. And there is no point in debating someone who is incapable of speaking about facts or dealing with them honestly.

Well, only some of them. Just the ones that show that he is wrong

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Well, only some of them. Just the ones that show that he is wrong

The below is an analogy.

The full range of facts according to a sensible person:
"Osama Bin Laden was an internationally wanted terrorist, who operated as leader of Al Qaeda during the planning and execution of the September 11th terrorist attacks that killed around 3,000 people, as well as being considered directly responsible for countless human rights violations and war crimes leading to the America-Afghan war. He was shot to death by government agents while unarmed following nearly a decade of operations to uncover his whereabouts."

The full range of facts according to someone like cOLTER:
"Osama Bin Laden was an internationally wanted terrorist, who operated as leader of Al Qaeda during the planning and execution of the September 11th terrorist attacks that killed around 3,000 people, as well as being considered directly responsible for countless human rights violations and war crimes leading to the America-Afghan war. He was shot to death by government agents while unarmed following nearly a decade of operations to uncover his whereabouts."

 

[Colt]

False.
In the wake of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, a popular narrative has emerged: that because rioters did not fire guns that day, they were not really "armed."

But a review of the federal charges against the alleged rioters shows that they did come armed, and with a variety of weapons: stun guns, pepper spray, baseball bats and flagpoles wielded as clubs. An additional suspect also allegedly planted pipe bombs by the headquarters of the Democratic and Republican parties the night before the riot and remains at large... https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/9778...ere-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

No one had any real guns in preparation for a real insurrection.

 

[Colt]

 

[Jose Fly]

That's the issue, though: they were there just to demonstrate peacefully. Because they were unarmed.
They cannot blame an entire crowd of peaceful people for the misdemeanor of few people.

That's not true. I showed earlier the list from the DOJ of all the people who've been charged with having deadly or dangerous weapons at the insurrection, in addition to noting that members of the Oath Keepers have pled guilty to seditious conspiracy or been convicted of it. Further, as was shown at the Oath Keepers trial, they had a "quick reaction force" staged in a hotel room just outside of DC with a rather impressive arsenal.

Oath Keepers jury hears about massive weapon cache on Jan. 6

A member of the Oath Keepers who traveled to Washington before the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol testified Wednesday about a massive cache of weapons the far-right extremist group stashed in a Virginia hotel room.

apnews.com

 

[Jose Fly]

Unarmed girl climbs through window and he shot her in the neck.

If there was such concern, then why weren't other protestors shot elsewhere??? Since she was white she was disposable.

Did you even watch the video of when she was shot? People were smashing the glass on the last doors to the Speakers' Lobby (where just 3 minutes before, lawmakers were hiding), an officer on the other side of the doors shows his gun, someone yells "he's got a gun", Babbitt nevertheless attempts to climb through the doors, and gets shot.

What else did she think was going to happen? When you're in the middle of a riot and the cops are pointing guns at you, you don't rush them. Duh.

 

[Jose Fly]

Why weren't the many other protesters shot who were climbing into the building?

Sheesh, are you that dim? She was the only one who was climbing through the doors to the Speaker's Lobby.

If she was black then the cop would be in jail, malls all across America would have been looted then burned, national day of morning, defund capitol hill police, BLM owners would buy some more mansions, everyone would know her name, "SAY HER NAME"!!!!

I agree with others. You've entered the "too ridiculous to bother with" territory.

 

[dybmh]

The topic is the only unarmed person killed in the purported "insurrection" wherein no one had guns except the cops.

There is at least one person reporting they saw a gun at the protest. It's a bit buried in this article which refutes the Ray Epps narrative. Essentially, Ray Epps is believed by some to have been instigating the riot as a leftist plant. The entire article refutes that. The individual whom Epps was supposedly encouraging claims he was actually encouraged by a Proud Boys member who flashed a gun at him.

Here's the article. Search for the word 'gun' to advance the section which describes this.

New Evidence Undercuts Jan. 6 Instigator Conspiracy Theory (Published 2022)

Recordings released to defense lawyers directly challenge assertions by prominent Republicans that an Arizona man named Ray Epps was a federal informant and helped start the Capitol riot.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Colt]

There is at least one person reporting they saw a gun at the protest. It's a bit buried in this article which refutes the Ray Epps narrative. Essentially, Ray Epps is believed by some to have been instigating the riot as a leftist plant. The entire article refutes that. The individual whom Epps was supposedly encouraging claims he was actually encouraged by a Proud Boys member who flashed a gun at him.

Here's the article. Search for the word 'gun' to advance the section which describes this.

New Evidence Undercuts Jan. 6 Instigator Conspiracy Theory (Published 2022)

Recordings released to defense lawyers directly challenge assertions by prominent Republicans that an Arizona man named Ray Epps was a federal informant and helped start the Capitol riot.

www.nytimes.com

Oh good grief really!? That's your claim of an armed insurrection?


I took this photo at the "Unite The Right" rally in Charlottesville, there were maybe 600-800 armed militia like these guys at the rally.

 

[F1fan]

The topic is the only unarmed person killed in the purported "insurrection" wherein no one had guns except the cops.

Imagine if the far right wing mob had guns as they attacked the police. Gun control laws saved lived that day.

 

[F1fan]

Oh good grief really!? That's your claim of an armed insurrection?


I took this photo at the "Unite The Right" rally in Charlottesville, there were maybe 600-800 armed militia like these guys at the rally.

View attachment 72754

"Militia".

A guy who dresses up as Fidel Castro on Halloween. The rest of the year he dresses up as a "patriot that feels impotent without a gun".

 

[Subduction Zone]

No one had any real guns in preparation for a real insurrection.

I see, so deadly threats are deadly only if guns are involved.

No one has said that they were geniuses. And how do you know hat guns were not "involved"? There is little doubt that at least some of them were armed. They simply did not pull out their guns. Others used deadly weapons in other ways.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

How was that video in the least exculpatory?

It's amazing that they think it is. You've got an insurrection, 44,000+ hours of video surveillance, and a committee investigating the insurrection, who presented the footage that revealed much of the illegal activity, and the insurrectionists' apologists are critical that the shots that didn't provide such evidence were not included, going so far as to call the evidence exculpatory and the committee dishonest for not presenting it to the nation in its findings.

The capital was far too easily breached. It almost appears they were 'allowed' to do it

Agree.

as far as I know, no weapons were involved.

Really? Source (factcheck.org) - "Conservative social media posts misleadingly claim the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was not an “armed” insurrection, citing FBI testimony that no guns were seized from suspects that day. But 23 people have been charged with having deadly or dangerous weapons during the assault — including a loaded handgun found on a man arrested on Capitol grounds."

Maybe riot would be more appropriate?

That is also correct, but less descriptive. This was a particular type of riot, one intended to subvert democracy by attacking a government building during a government function in service of democracy because it was doing that. A prison riot is also a riot, but for a different purpose. So are race riots.

Maybe you should change your avatar?

Don't you recognize that? It's of Christian origin. That's how anybody the Christians don't like is depicted in Chick Tracts, which are small pamphlets in comic book form:

Here's a typical page from one depicting a professor presumably teaching evolution as a lunatic and the Christian as his victim, a snapshot of Christian wit and integrity:

Jose's avatar is mocking those tracts.

it could have been an attempted insurrection

It was.

There was hardly enough arms to make that happen.

Irrelevant.

Let's not forget that some officers committed suicide. You commit suicide when you feel guilty.

Not normally.

certain irregularities made people question the outcome [of the election].

I disagree. What irregularities were uncovered to justify that position? The claim has been investigated at length now in multiple jurisdictions and been debunked. The belief was based in nothing but the willingness to believe lies.

I understood the reasons why many people hated Trump on an intellectual level, though I could never understand the intensity and zeal behind it

Really? He is perhaps the most contemptible person I can name, and harmed America more than any other human being past or present. My contempt for him is greater than or equal to any other person ever. People like him, Falwell, and Limbaugh can only make the world better by leaving it.

What you have are allegations. Again.

Yes, but that's not all. There is also testimony and captured correspondences, and soon, indictments.

You don't seem to be concerned about woke Leftist mobs attacking buildings and police officers!

Of course we are. I am very concerned that they felt a need to express their anger. It's unfortunate for innocent shopkeepers that buildings were looted or burned, but that's what racial or ethnic injustice often produces. We may see Iranian women doing the same soon, and I'm concerned that they might feel that that is their only way to be heard or to get justice.

the biased (D)'s who were picked by the wicked witch of the west coast to run the sham!

Republicans with the same bias were also on the committee. The committee comprised congresspersons biased against insurrection. And shame on you for referring to that woman like that. She's a decent, law-abiding wife, mother, and patriot who has devoted her life in service of country, whose crime it seems was opposing the attempted toppling of the government. What a witch!

I don’t take any of the conspiracy claims seriously, but even if they were “set up” it’s their own idiot fault for falling for it.

You don't think that there was a conspiracy between Trump, his consiglieres, and his paramilitary accomplices?

I believe hysterical members of the Left really, really, really want it to be an attempted insurrection for obvious political reasons.

It was an attempted insurrection, and the left and sliver of decent people on the right who object with them aren't objecting for partisan political reasons. They object to crime, to treason. Why don't you? Why are you an apologist for these criminals?

Personally, I've lost interest in trying to help America. I no longer contribute to the ACLU or SPLC, for example, because America has so many citizens carrying water for its domestic enemies in their pursuit of its demise. Why would I help a country like that? It's like donating to a charity that has half its employees trying to cripple it. This thread reinforces that choice.

Unarmed girl climbs through window and he shot her in the neck.

And? She was breaking and entering. That's what happens with hostile invasions.

Since she was white she was disposable.

She made herself expendable, just like people overdosing on pills and powders that don't come from a pharmacy.

The Jan 6, committee never showed the video that Tucker Carlson is showing.

Why would it? It's meaningless footage.

The Democrats cherry picked to fit their own narrative

You mean the Democrats and the Republicans. It was a bipartisan committee despite McCarthy's effort to make it a purely Democratic party so people like you would discredit it out of hand by depicting it as partisan, which still seems to be the plan even though the committee was bipartisan. Yes, the committee cherry picked the crime out from the rest, and only presented the former.

just as the Democrats, now accuse Tucker of cherry picking to fit his narrative.

Are they wrong?

How else can you explain never before seen footage, that did not 100% support Democrat talking points?

Did you mean the bipartisan committee's findings? The footage is explained by the presence of CCTV cameras. You probably meant why was it not presented to the public in the committee's several televised summary reports. That would be because it was irrelevant to their purpose, which was investigating the resurrection. People walking through hallways to get from one part of it to another aren't generally useful to such an investigation.

Watch and see if any Democrats directly attack the videos

How do you attack a video? You might condemn the editing. The targets will be those who try to use it for propaganda purposes and who put Capitol security at risk releasing it to a propagandist at a lying, conservative indoctrination medium.

 

[Stevicus]

Really? He is perhaps the most contemptible person I can name, and harmed America more than any other human being past or present. My contempt for him is greater than or equal to any other person ever. People like him, Falwell, and Limbaugh can only make the world better by leaving it.

I thought Reagan and Bush were much worse, because they supported outsourcing, the breaking of labor unions, the deterioration of the US economy, and the decline in the U.S. standard of living.