New January 6 Video
It is a shame that the Democrats refused to show so much of the January 6 video that was taken.
Watch it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Opy7MLGAPBkI watched the video in full. I can only say, as I have been saying we have many in Washington, as well as media fabricating lies, not only about Jan 6th but whatever narrative they feel will destroy Donald Trump. A man that set out, and in my mind did expose the corruptness of our Government. He threatened the power that is.
In my view, we have a dangerous situation in the country due to the democratic party, and the left media. If more Americans do not have the ability to wake up and really make their way out of the weeds, the country will falter.
When people can't believe was is put forth visibly before their eyes, IMO, it shows a form of brainwashing literally has occurred. I can honestly say I fear for the country. This phenomenon, the phenomenon where some will believe what they are told, and not what is factually true, has come about swiftly and has taken hold.
What can be done to stop this kind of madness? This video should at least make some stop and think --- A mere pundit on a cable show, saying over, and over, "shout him" "he should be killed" he should be killed"! Should certainly be eye-opening.
Sorry folks, IMO, Tucker showed a video that should have been shown to us all and was held back, to support a hateful narrative. A narrative to divide, and spread hate.
My words are not meant to take away the fact that many broke the laws on that day, but we just were not offered all of the facts.I think the word I would use is a need for "transparency."
The purpose is less to spread hate and more to maintain control.
The narrative that brought Trump to power has not gone away.
The Middle Class is being gutted, pensions, social security, the rich are getting richer.
Power is shifting to other nations, China has drastically expanded its trade around the globe since the Pandemic, America has shrunk, Nations are choosing to trade oil and other goods in currency other than the Dollar, the Dollar will soon lose its Reserve status.
America has been in a constant State of War for decades now.
We are 30+ years of continual wars, continual spending of trillions of dollars, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, now Ukraine. We are throwing away the National Wealth and Goodwill we had, as a nation, we will soon be paying the price for it all.Folks, a tent revival meeting complete with a covered-dish dinner on the grounds could have been being held in other parts of the Capitol. That wouldn't diminish the violence and damage shown clearing on video and testified to by eye witnesses. The willingness of some to deny facts is unbelievable.
If news outlets didn't chose to show every minute of available footage, it was because it wasn't news. They make those decisions every day. Nobody complains when they show the lunacy of Marjorie Taylor Greene day after day, but don't bother to show her walking out of committee meetings she is responsible to attend after her 60-second soundbite has been recorded.I don't think anyone on this thread has diminished what occurred on that day. I think some are just disturbed about some of what was left out, and some that were added to reports that just were not true. Especially in the cases of the shaman, and Sicknick's death.
The tapes Tucker has been showing are eye-opening, and I feel we need media that reports all the news and does not pick and choose to support a narrative.
No, they could not show all the footage, they did not need to leave out videos to create false narratives.And yet, the claim that the insurrection contributed to the death of Sicknick is not a false narrative. The narrative about the fire extinguisher was already corrected in the media - Tucker's video did not disprove it but aimed to paint its own false narrative that if Sicknick was walking on his own between 5pm and 6pm that the insurrectionists did not contribute to his death - something the medical examiner contradicts.
And the Shaman narrative that Tucker painted did not dispel anything he was charged with. Showing police escorting him out, but ignoring everything leading to his entry might have helped people realize he did not perform any violent acts, but the facts remain of his guilt.I can only go by what the DC Medical Examiner reported very clearly
Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes a day after defending the Capitol during the January 6 assault.
Sicknick died from strokes, the chief medical examiner's office said in a report summary, citing "acute brainstem and cerebellar infarcts due to acute basilar artery thrombosis." In an interview with The Washington Post, chief medical examiner Francisco J. Diaz said Sicknick suffered two strokes at the base of his brainstem caused by a clot in an artery.
Despite being sprayed with a chemical substance, Sicknick's manner of death was still determined to be "natural," the medical examiner's office said. In the interview with the Post, Diaz said the autopsy found NO evidence of INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL injuries, or of an allergic reaction to the chemical substance.
The "natural" classification is used "when a disease alone causes death," the medical examiner's office said in the summary. "If death is hastened by an injury, the manner of death is not considered natural."
The Shaman pleaded guilty, and he clearly broke the law by even entering the capitol building and disrupting Congress.And every time you talk about Diaz, you conveniently leave out this part:
Citing privacy laws, Diaz did not divulge whether Sicknick had a pre-existing medical condition that may have contributed to the 42-year-old's death, though he did say "all that transpired" during the highly tense situation at the Capitol on Jan. 6 "played a role in his condition."
Why is that? Why do you always leave out the part that the actual medical examiner notes that the events of January 6 played a role? You have not once acknowledged that half of the story. Not a single time.Valeant: It's where she wants the discussion to go. But thanks for your contribution in spite of that.
Yes, I see your point. But then there is this statement that clearly is in contrast with Diaz's statement.
"The "natural" classification is used "when a disease alone causes death," the medical examiner's office said in the summary. "If death is hastened by an injury, the manner of death is not considered natural."
I think with the lawsuit Sicknick's family has filed, we will see experts in the field (such as Diaz ) give testimony to what scientifically could cause the types of strokes Sicknick had. There are several kinds of strokes, and certainly, trauma can cause a certain type of stroke. Such as a Stroke risk following traumatic brain injury. Yet Diaz said there were no signs of . internal or external injuries. No one was charged with causing his death.
On March 14, Julian Khater and George Tanios were arrested by federal authorities and charged with crimes that included the assault of Officer Sicknick with a chemical spray. There could not be a charge of homicide because the cause of death had not been determined.
Jan 24 2023 --"Federal prosecutors have recommended that one of the two men initially charged with a role in the assault on the late U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick receive a time-served sentence.
That rioter, George Tanios, was initially charged with multiple serious felonies in connection with the Jan. 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol, including assaulting law enforcement. Those charges received a serious downgrade at the time of his plea hearing last July, where Tanios ultimately admitted to a pair of misdemeanors: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds and disorderly conduct inside a restricted building or grounds.
Those two misdemeanors carried a maximum penalty of one year — and a recommended guidelines range of up to six months.
Prosecutors noted that Tanios has nearly served that amount of time already since his arrest: five months and six days.
“In the instant case, the Guidelines sentence will provide a deterrent"
"Though Tanios brought bear spray with him to Washington, D.C., prosecutors agree that he was not the man who ultimately deployed the chemicals on Sicknick and two other officers. His co-defendant, Julian Khater, ultimately pleaded guilty to that crime. Prosecutors previously alleged that the two of them worked together with the assault on Sicknick, who died the day after the attack on the Capitol."
https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-bre … -law-feds/
I thus far have concluded that if that Artopcy would have shown Sicknick had the type of stroke caused by trauma, these men should have been charged with a crime that caused death. The charges would have been brought in my view if the Medical examiner felt Sicknick died due to trauma.But then there is this statement that clearly is in contrast with Diaz's statement.
"The "natural" classification is used "when a disease alone causes death," the medical examiner's office said in the summary. "If death is hastened by an injury, the manner of death is not considered natural."
"all that transpired" during the highly tense situation at the Capitol on Jan. 6 "played a role in his condition."
It is not in contrast. A trauma/injury is not the only cause for an Ischemic Stroke.Anxiety and stress are notable factors that add to the chance of a stroke. Pretty sure those were part of that highly tense situation at the Capitol that day and would not have been present had the Capitol not been attacked. Therefore, they played a role in increasing his chances of having those strokes.
Shar keeps trying to omit these simple facts from why Sicknick collapsed around four hours after the Capitol was cleared and died the next day.Yes, any police officer should be kept from any job-related highly-tense situation as that could contribute to their chance for a stroke. We need to have stress-free policing for the health of all police officers.
Seriously?Is that what I advocated for in my post? I must have missed that as another far-right creation of a position that just does not exist based on the words that were written or spoken.
Or was my statement acknowledging that the same person the right trusts about a natural causes finding is the same one they ignore about noting that the situation at the Capitol on January 6 played a role in his condition.Not ignore just add to the equation. The two statements contradict one another. So which should we go with? The one that suits a narrative? Or maybe just leave it up in the air until or if we get more information?
What makes me very curious is the fact his autopsy showed no internal or external injuries. Injury can cause blood clots. So can high cholesterol, and high blood pressure as a result of cholesterol problems can cause a stroke. The autopsy would show what form of stroke this unfortunate man had. I am not going to guess.
Yup. High blood pressure was the cause of my sisters stroke.
I am not omitting anything. I just suggest we need more information on Officer Sicknick's type of Stroke. No more than that. There are many kinds of strokes. And I will thus far just go with what has been reported.
"The "natural" classification is used "when a disease alone causes death," the medical examiner's office said in the summary. "If death is hastened by an injury, the manner of death is not considered natural."
It is apparent he had two, and they were caused by blood clots. Other than that I have found no information on what type of stroke he had.You've literally omitted the part where Diaz noted the activities of January 6 played a role for four pages of comments already. It seemed a conscious choice to leave out the part that put some culpability on Trump's people and willful to avoid even acknowledging it until pressed.
As I read the report, stress seemed to be a major part of just why he thought the riot played a part.
Did he have a fight with his wife that morning? Was his kid picked up for dealing drugs? Was traffic particularly bad? If stress was a major (or even minor) cause, what other stress was he under? More importantly, why was other stress not investigated; why was only one of the stresses of his life mentioned as causal?
'Whispering' Could it have been political?
I am not omitting anything. I have not made mention of anything that was not reported by several media outlets. In my view, it is irresponsible to even place what form of stroke killed this man. We have too little information. And as I point out contradicting statements from the DC Medical examiners department.
I have tried to make a point we should not be assuming anything, and just go by what we know thus far. I think the family's lawsuit will offer every fact about the man's health, and what type of stroke he had. I do feel the prosecutors would have charged the two protesters with a more stringent crime if they could prove that Sicknick was killed by their hand or that their actions caused his death. I feel the autopsy report could have prevented those types of charges if we are now just assuming.
I am not going to assume, I will wait for more information. Do you know or have you read Sicknick had underlying health problems? Yes, high blood pressure could cause stroke, and we know high blood pressure can be a hidden problem. But man, to just assume --- not cool.
Thus far I am sticking with what little has been reported. I think going out on this limb, makes no sense right now.
I agree with Mike, this man was a law enforcement officer and stress, and sometimes violence comes with the job.Your argument that the bear spray attack would be the only contributing factor during the five hours of the attack is where I feel the hole lies in that argument. Or that criminality and culpability are the same concept.
Certainly stress and violence comes with the job, but those who create those things with illegal conduct bear the culpability - even if not the criminality.Again this is all I know about the chemical bear spray that the officer was sprayed with. What has been reported?
".U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, who engaged with pro-Trump rioters during the Jan. 6 insurrection, died of natural causes the day after the attack, Washington, D.C.'s chief medical examiner announced Monday.
Sicknick died after suffering strokes, the Office of Chief Medical Examiner, Dr. Francisco Diaz, said in a report. In an interview, Diaz told The Washington Post, which first reported on the determination, that Sicknick suffered two strokes.
Sicknick, 42, was sprayed with a chemical substance outside the Capitol at around 2:20 p.m. ET on Jan. 6, the report said. He did not suffer an allergic reaction to the chemical irritants dispensed by rioters, Diaz told the Post, nor was there evidence of internal or external injuries.
https://www.npr.org/2021/04/19/98887672 … xaminer-ruYou miss the point of that last post - My own belief of the contributing factors of the bear spray are my own speculations. But the Medical Examiner clearly saw a linkage between the activities of January 6, outside of the bear spray attack, and Sicknick's death otherwise he would not publicly stated it. Even if others have their own speculations about Sicknick's lifestyles.
I think you are missing my point. I can see your point, it is a valid point. Males sense. But are we not just adding our personal views to the issue? I am cautious too and want more info. You are putting two and two together. I am not saying that is all bad, I do that most frequently in smaller matters. But, with this situation, a man's death, I am just being a bit cautious.
Perhaps, but it seems more just common sense that the physical nature of the attack and defense raised the stress levels of those protecting the Capitol that day - and that clearly was seen as contributory, even if not criminal, by the medical expert that analyzed Sicknick's death.
Either way, I've enjoyed our debate on this. Very spirited.I agreed your logic is not flawed. You are putting dots together. We just don't have all the dots to come up with a solid conclusion. I too enjoyed this one. We may have gotten to know each other a bit better... I think our thought processes are different, but I see where and how you have come up with your view. It's lodgical.
t out a contradicting media Statement. Sorry, I feel it is very unclear of what kind of stoke the officer had. I do know he was in a hospital under care until the next evening when he passed. I can't assume they would not have diagnosed the form of the stroke he had.
I am not going to just assume this man had any underlying health conditions that lead to his death, or that mere stress and undiagnosed high blood pressure lead to his death. An autopsy would clarify all the media needs to know, as well as prosecutors. No one was prosecuted for killing the officer.
The way the vid was initially handle by the. Democrate has a sinister motive. Lives were lost. Innocent person(?) sent to prison. Americans were being divided. Yet, the Dem persists in they lies. Have these a conscience I may ask?
"It was a mistake, in my view, for Fox News to depict this in a way that's completely at variance with what our chief law enforcement official here in the Capitol thinks," (Mitch) McConnell said.
I don't think it was depicted in any way, the truth about it was finally shown. It begs the question as to why such video was withheld and makes the Jan 6 commission look like the total farce it was.
The tapes released to Tucker Carlson just reenforces my belief of just how much rot there is in the nazi democrats party. There is no bottom of how low nazi democrats will stoop to lie to the American people. And to think the nazi democrats want us to believe the 2020 election wasn't stolen from Trump. I'll believe it when hell freezes over and add another 20 years.
There is no bottom to how low people will go who defend attacking our Capitol in an effort to prevent a peaceful transfer of power (as has always been done). America's most shameful day. Indefenseable.
I don't see KC defending the riot here. I see her very mad about being lied to. The tapes Tucker showed, clearly give another view of what went on that day. This takes nothing away from the fact there were forms of violence, and law-breaking --- Tucker is pointing out information that shows we were lied to on several issues. KC is clearly mad, and the context of her comment show's she is mad about being lied to... She makes no mention of the riot at all. IMO, she is pissed off about lies.
I understand and sympathize. I hate being lied to also. What is Trump's tally of lies up to?
You don't think it was depicted in any way by leaving all the violent content out? Thom Tillis would disagree with you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnaXnBdEob0All this tells me is that these senators are afraid of the truth. We've all seen the violence of the day, but these newly released videos provide additional perspective as to what happened that day. To me, the bottom line is this video footage should have also been part of the January 6 committee hearing. They kept this out, which means they had an agenda. It is more proof as to how much of a farce the committee was.
Didn't the January 6 Committee acknowledge that there were people that were peacefully, yet illegally, inside the Capitol? Wait, why am I asking you that? You were on the ground that day and probably still believe the election was stolen from Trump, it's highly unlikely you watched any of the January 6 Committee hearings.
"January 6 Committee acknowledge that there were people that were peacefully, yet illegally, inside the Capitol?"
No idea.
"You were on the ground that day and probably still believe the election was stolen from Trump, it's highly unlikely you watched any of the January 6 Committee hearings."
Yes and yes. I was gone from the rally for almost an hour before they incident at the capital occurred.
Was the January 6 committee simply a partisan political exercise to further the lies of the left.
Obviously.
Did the recently released video of January 6 prove the committee lied about some important issues.
Yes.Since you have no idea what the January 6 Committee presented, I find you to not really be in a position to determine if what they presented was honest or accurate.
As to the recently released video, all it shows is that some were there peacefully, yet still illegally, while ignoring the majority of the violent acts that occurred on the day. That they found footage of Sicknick continuing to serve a few hours before he collapsed really does not absolve the right as the medical examiner noted that the day's activities were a contributor in his death. He will likely be called at the upcoming trial of the two that attacked Sicknick and Trump, who is named in the civil suit and bears responsibility for sending his rally crowd there without warning the Capitol Police - which created the dangerous situation.
And those that can still cling to the lie of election fraud is why the rest of America finds them to be so dangerous. They can be convinced of anything by their leaders and media - regardless of the actual facts and truth. Many of those that committed crimes on that day also believed the lies - with a lot realizing how those lies cost them so much after their sentencings. You got lucky this time to not get caught up in the violent part, but clearly fell for, and continue to be programmed, by those same lies. But what this thread shows is that so many are still susceptible to the far-right whitewashed narratives that liars like Tucker Carlson are feeding them.Once I saw the cast of characters on the January 6 committee, I knew it was nothing but a political propaganda fest from the left. I was right.
Do I still think the 2020 election was stolen by the Democrat. Yes. There is so much evidence I could spend the rest of the day posting links. I believe in time, all will be revealed.
Maybe it is you who are content with lies.
You don't seem at all disturbed by the significant footage that was hidden by the January 6 committee.
They tried to make the "Qanon Shaman" out to be this ring leader. Footage shows he was led around the Capital building by the Capital police and even said a prayer thanking God for the Capital police. This footage was not made available for his criminal defense. It would have made a big difference. In the past when people have illegally entered the Capital building they've been given a summons and a fine. This man was sentenced to four years on obviously false charges.
I'm sure much of this footage would have made a big difference in many of the criminal trials.
The released video shows the accused FBI informant and provocateur Ray Epps blatantly lied the the January 6 committee. They had the video footage to show he was lying and refused to use it.
The January 6 Committee blatantly lied and withheld important footage that would have made a huge difference.
I was right about the committee. In time, the facts will show I'm right about the stolen 2020 election,
I think it is the left who fears the truth more than anything. It's obvious they try to prevent it from being seen.
Quick question. After looking at the two videos did you not see how some facts were skewed in regard to not only Sicknick, but the Shaman?
I think we need to at least consider facts that were kept from us, and some were purposely kept from us, to promote a narrative."some facts were skewed in regard to not only Sicknick, but the Shaman"
I'm certain with more effort more skewed facts would be revealed. I believe it is much worse than we realize.The Sicknick video does not change anything for me since I see a brave man, likely battling through injuries from an earlier attack, who collapses four hours later due to the trauma of the events of January 6 and dies the next day. No amount of video can change that narrative and I find it disgusting to dishonor him by trying to do so. Shame on all who are attempting it.
In terms of the police escorting Chansley, I would want the context of the time of day that happened. Carlson makes it appear as if the police were escorting him into the Senate chamber early in the day when I would surmise that Chansley was being escorted out of the Capitol at the end of the insurrection as he is the only insurrectionist shown on that video. When the gravity of what he had done hit him, and the police presence was overwhelming, Chansley likely realized that he was in deep trouble.Gotta love the extreme labels!
That costumed fool, the "shaman", is now attempting to overthrow the US government and is thus an "insurrectionist". Presumably he intended a dance to call the gods to send lightning, right?
What's so extreme about an accurate definition for those that used violence on the day against their own government? Even the FBI Director, the Republican appointed by Trump, called this event a domestic terror event. How about this - don't be an extremist that attacks your own Capitol based on lies and you won't get labeled with extreme labels.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/w … pitol-riotThat's what I mean: the label you chose is so appropriate for a costumed loon following Capital Security around. Who would ever think of anything but an "insurrectionist", bound and determined to bring the wrath of the gods onto the US, and take over the country?!?!
Actually, now that I read my own words, "costumed loon" seems to fit far better than "insurrectionist". He was there on a lark (as shown by the silly costume and his actions), not to violently overthrown the government of the US. He had no intention of murdering anyone and didn't even do property damage outside of a little dirt here or there. He fits in with the majority of the rioters - just out for a good time and some fun.
Just like the large majority of rioters in Portland, Or. were as the city burned.'He had no intention of murdering anyone and didn't even do property damage outside of a little dirt here or there.'
That statement is such a colossal falsehood as Chansley was among one of the first to break into the Capitol, according to his own admission in court. And just because Carlson decided to show Capitol Police escorting Chansley, which could have just as easily been after the rest of the insurrectionists were removed from the building, that does not absolve him of his crimes.
Breaking in to the Capitol at the very moment the government is certifying an election is an attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power. In other words, it was to prevent the overthrow of the government that he prefers. It was just overthrown by a legitimate election that Chansley did not agree with and chose violent means to try to subvert.We will have to disagree on this, for I refuse to put motives on people that their actions don't show. You obviously find it a fine thing to do as long as it meets your predetermined conclusion, but it is not for me.
Your statement had two claims, an intention of murder and not doing property damage. Again, you misinterpret which of those claims I rebutted as colossally false - which should have been obvious but as always is lost on you. Perhaps you should give up trying to understand my words, they seem above you.
They certainly are, for you never mean what they say. Or at least you claim to mean something different after you discover that what you wrote was proven wrong.
Wait a moment --- Chansley, who pleaded guilty to a felony charge of obstructing an official proceeding, was among the first rioters to enter the building. He was found guilty and imprisoned for the crime he was accused of, which he admitted to. There was nothing in regard to him becoming violent at any point.
"It was just overthrown by a legitimate election that Chansley did not agree with and chose violent means to try to subvert."
It certainly is true he was there to protest the election and entered the capitol unlawfully, but thus far I have not seen any videos of him being violent. have you?
In my view, we had some there at the capitol that was violent, and most likely came to cause trouble. Many were there just to protest the election, walked around, and left.
I think it proper to see both elements that attended the protest.
I feel and have from day one that it was unlawful to enter the capitol for any reason. The capital was closed to visitors on that day.
However, I also felt, and still do think the media and the Dems in Washington truely were at fault for their reporting of all that went on.
I am sure the fear factor for the Congress persons was justified, and that the violence that occurred was true. But, the spreading of mistruths ran deep. These videos are giving proof that the riot was not all that it was being reported.
I will be honest, I felt the worst issue of the day was that we actually had American citizens so displeasure with the election outcome that they took to protesting. This scares me more than anything that occurred that
day.
It showed me the split in our country was at a fever pitch. Which in my view has become much worse.And my claim did not accuse Chansley of being violent, it was that if he was one of the first to have broken into the Capitol that he did more than kick around a little dirt.
No one has denied that there were people peacefully, yet illegally in the Capitol, but the Dems in Washington did not need to pass laws against those people. That was not the intent of the inquisition to prevent another attack of the sort.
And we can peacefully disagree about the worst issue. That those people were even convinced, without actual proof to be there, and let themselves get enflamed enough to attack their own country in what the Director of the FBI calls a domestic terror attack, is the most distressing issue. Ending 200 years of tradition of peacefully transferring power based on lies is the greatest issue for many like myself."And my claim did not accuse Chansley of being violent, it was that if he was one of the first to have broken into the Capitol that he did more than kick around a little dirt. "
What? I quote --- "
"It was just overthrown by a legitimate election that Chansley did not agree with and chose violent means to try to subvert."
I agree, many were and still are convinced that the election was fraudulent. I can't say why an individual thinks the way they do. But we are left with a segment of Americans that do believe there was fraud in the 2020 election.
So, we can blame Trump, and the media had a huge hand in pitting one side against the other. In the end, we have what we have.
I was one that felt a quick investigation by Congress as Trump was bringing his complaints forward would have worked wonders to provide truth. I think it was Senator Cruz, that made that very suggestion.
I think it would have gone a long way to start healing the great divide. It would have been a very common sense thing to do.I will more than concede that Chansley was not accused in any way of any violence against other people - just violence against property. Again, understanding the definitions of the word violence - behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something - more than fits the usage of the word for Chansley's actions of breaking into the Capitol by force.
As for a 'quick' Congressional investigation - when does Congress ever do anything quickly? And investigations were done by Homeland and the Department of Justice. Which chamber does investigations? The House - which had a majority with Democrats in the lead. In what world would Trump supporters have trusted a Democratic House more than departments run by Trump's Administration? The January 6 Committee findings should have been evidence of their partisan belief structures.Your view in regard to a quick investigation makes sense. However, grasping at some chance that investigation would have helped calm both sides was better than how all this has festered, and become a true bone of contention to further the split.
And yet investigations were done and ignored by Trump's base. One more by a chamber in the hands of the opposition would have made no additional difference. Which means that his lies would have festered regardless due to repetition and the fealty he has conditioned his supporters to feel. There's no curing a split where one side exists in a fabricated reality that they deny exists.
"And my claim did not accuse Chansley of being violent..."
" he (Chansley) is the only insurrectionist shown on that video"
in·sur·rec·tion
[ˌinsəˈrekSH(ə)n]
NOUN
a violent uprising against an authority or government:
Please note that an insurrection is violent; therefore an insurrectionist is causing that violence. You termed Chansley an insurrectionist; a person violently rising up against the government.
Question; will you now claim that your words mean something other than what they say?Indeed, you seem to have me here as I do believe, and the evidence shows, Chansley was violent on that day. He used violence to break into the Capitol. I am not so proud as to admit a mistake. Well played.
Now, let's look at your claim: 'We will have to disagree on this, for I refuse to put motives on people that their actions don't show.'
My post rebutted your claim that Chansley 'didn't even do property damage outside of a little dirt here or there.' And yet, his actions did show violence on the day as being one of the first to break into the Capitol, and I rebutted that false claim of yours.
I imagine you believed, falsely, that I thought he went there with the other motive you listed - your usual tactic of trying to paint others in these forums to the extremes while doing your best to deflect any of your own 'mistaken' claims."I rebutted that false claim of yours. "
You rebutted...with an unsupported claim. Where is the video showing him breaking down the door? Where is the photo showing him using a sledge hammer on something?
Here: I will rebut your rebuttal with a claim of my own. "Chansley was carried into the Capital on a stretcher, doing zero damage during his stay". Is that good enough that you will now believe it?The video evidence submitted at this trial would contradict your claim of him being carried in on a stretcher. It's available and took all of two minutes to locate and download. He was right in the middle of the group that broke the windows, climbed through, and then open a locked door to let the masses inside. It does not show him, personally breaking the windows, however. Another point I have to concede. But when crimes are committed, all those present and contributing can be charged with those crimes if the state/government wished to do so.
https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/cases-interestYour link does not contain a video.
So he did NOT commit a violent act, in spite of you claiming he did. Kind of what I said, isn't it? Your whole case depends on a listener (reader) accepting your gross exaggerations as truth - something I decline to do after reading your posts here. In my mind you are noted for making false statements, thus I decline to believe hardly anything you have to say.
(Sorry you didn't catch the sarcasm in the "claim" he was carried in on a stretcher. It was a direct rebuttal to the false statement that he was a violent insurrectionist, intent on overthrowing the US government by violent means.)My link does contain videos (2), you just struggle to locate them. Not easy to do either since they are labeled with the guy's name.
And not sure they are 'gross exaggerations' when the guy is standing within the crowd of people who are breaking their way into the Capitol, and then in the videos that I sent you, someone pepper sprays one of the Capitol Police shortly after entering. Members of that group are being charged with seditious conspiracy.
You are right that Chansley himself does not seem to carry out any of the violent acts, I have to concede that. But he is within a group of thirty where multiple people do, so it's easy to link him with the violence when he's among some of the main perpetrators.Yep. And everyone at the riot is equally guilty of violence as the guy that beaned a cop with a fire extinguisher.
Heck, might as well go ahead and claim that everyone in DC is guilty as well. Or maybe the Eastern Seaboard.
After all, even after admitting he did no violence, he is still a "main perpetrator" of the violence - what's a little more exaggeration?Maybe not as the guy that beaned a cop with a fire extinguisher. But being among the first group to breach the Capitol, and knowing that they had to break through police barricades and then destroy windows using a police shield that they stole off a police officer to accomplish that, some violent activity is certainly attributed to that group of people.
And you need to reread my last sentence there. Another one you misunderstood. All it claims is Chansley was among (in the company of) some of the main perpetrators of the violence of the day, such as Pezzola, who is being charged with seditious conspiracy."After all, even after admitting he did no violence, he is still a "main perpetrator" of the violence"
Sorry. I did not read that to say he "was among (in the company of) some of the main perpetrators of the violence". It pretty plainly says he is a "main perpetrator" of that violence.
I have looked high and low for footage of the shaman. I also have checked out many articles. I think it all boils down to what he was charged with, and plead guilty, and received prison time. He did not appear in any of the footage I looked at become combative or was he charged with any form of violence?
Chansley, who pleaded guilty to one felony charge of OBSTRUCTIMG an official proceeding. Footage shows he was among the first citizens to enter the building. He was found guilty and imprisoned for the crime he was accused of, which he admitted to. There was nothing in regard to him becoming violent at any point.And yet he was a violent insurrectionist, overthrowing the US government by force and violence.
Yeah, right!I don't understand why after seeing the video as well as the charge, this Shaman, did not commit any other crime than what he was charged with. I have not found any clips of him being violent.
In my view, those that be could not find what they needed - a really violent actor that stuck out to be committing an overly violent attack, so let's have a look at a guy that was all decked out in a crazy outfit and direct our reports smack on him.
I have watched a load of videos at this point on the protest. Finally found one that a judge showed at trial on when the Shaman first entered the capitol. He walked in --- Judge releases new video of 'QAnon Shaman' Jacob Chansley during Capitol riot - Exhibit 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbxng-nIMu0
I would think what would be more riveting about that day would be so many Americans showed up, and were willing to voice their grievances.
"peaceably but illegally" That's the point.
Possibly it was kept out in an effort not to sensationalize an event that was terrible enough without reliving it blow by blow.
Hiding the truth means people are afraid of it.
Republicans were offered equal representation and refused. Any propaganda fest was on their part. As much as the ultimate Dog & Pony Show/Benghazi hearings were, the Democrats fully participated. To rail against what transpired is the little boy crying WOLF much too late to be credible.
"They could lie about what happened and you would never know the difference," says Tucker from Fox.
That confession is about the only honest thing he said in that whole montage.Good to be back.
I was recently banned. I believe it was because someone objected to me pointing out that TDS is alive and well.
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest"
Thomas Paine
So, glad to see the thread is going well.ReadMikeNow, welcome back. Yes, the thread is going on well. What d'you do in the meantime? Did you monitor your feed?
Thanks,
Yes, I did look at the feed.
I just couldn't respond.
Yeah, weird how accusing others of having a disorder, even one a person had fabricated in their own mind, might be construed as a personal attack.
You're like me, you've been banned more than once. I'm just surprised how people get so upset over words on a computer screen especially in a forum this small. Do you feel the same way? Some people just don't have the mental or emotional toughness to engage in a debate. I have been insulted and have had many negative things said about me on here. I think you may have said many of them. I've never thought of trying to get you or anyone banned. To me, it's part of the game. I can take it.
Yeah, my writing style tends to be one that goes at people and you and I have had our fair share of taking hammers and chisels to each other. But as long as members here feel that reporting personal attacks is on the table, we all need to watch what constitutes an attack versus what you call 'engaging in a debate.'
It's not a debate to invent a disorder and accuse half the members here of suffering from it because one does not agree that holding lawlessness to account is appropriate in this country.You made me laugh
"goes at people and you"
Good to know I'm in a category separate from people.
"to invent a disorder and accuse half the members here of suffering from it"
Oh, get down of your pedestal.
I think it was you and those on the left who claimed, after many of us complained about biden, that we suffered from "biden derangement syndrome."
Don't even get me started on biden and lawlessness in this country. That is an entire new thread.Yes, Mike, We have so much corruption, and issues in the country at this point it is hard to keep up with them... The second largest bank collapses, with bigwigs pulling thief cash out before the collapse. But Biden says don't worry, he is taking care of the problem.
And then there is the fact Russia is at this point selling energy to support their war. Shokng to see who is buying energy from Russia, in light of the war.
"Key findings of the briefing
Russia’s fossil fuel export revenues have fallen 50% below their 2022 peak in January–February 2023, with revenue from exports to the EU falling almost 90%.
Yet, Russia is making an estimated EUR 560 mln per day on exporting fossil fuels.
The key enabler of Russia’s ongoing export earnings and therefore the invasion is the European shipping industry. Ships owned or insured in the EU and the UK are carrying EUR 310 mln per day worth of Russian fossil fuels, 65% of the total value of Russia’s seaborne fossil fuel exports.
The excessively high levels of the oil price caps as well as gaps in enforcement allow the Kremlin to continue to profit handsomely off fossil fuels transported and insured by the European shipping industry. Revising the price cap for crude oil to USD 30/barrel and for premium oil products to USD 35/barrel would cut Russia’s revenue by an estimated EUR 150 mln per day.
The EU, Japan and South Korea continue to import approximately EUR 125 mln per day of oil, gas and coal from Russia. Restricting or placing price caps on these imports would be effective in squeezing Kremlin’s revenue." https://energyandcleanair.org/publicati … n-ukraine/
And lets not forget the open borders, we have been told that was on it's way to being solved --- really?
"The number of unique individuals encountered nationwide in December 2022 was 225,797, a 10 percent increase in the number of unique enforcement encounters than the prior month. In total, there were 251,487 encounters along the southwest land border in December, a 7 percent increase compared to November."
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-m … 0November.
Then this -- A group of at least 1,000 migrants rush El Paso border bridge
https://abc7amarillo.com/news/local/a-g … der-bridge
I could write a book on the current disasters that are going on --- all right in front of our eyes.
Going down fast...It is going to be a very costly war for the West.
Russia has gone to a full blown war footing, because we wanted to inject our politics into the Ukraine (back in 2014 and earlier).
Russia now considers themselves in WWIII. They are mobilizing their nation as if they were. Prior to the Ukraine escalation into open conflict, Russia did not have the means to pose a threat to anyone, as was witnessed in the disaster that took place early in this escalation.
What people do not realize, is that the West spent from 2014 to 2020 training and readying Ukraine for the conflict, arming them, anticipating the push to take back Crimea. Russia smacked right into those forces that were ready and waiting for them. Now those Ukraine forces have been exhausted, hundreds of thousands are now dead.
Anyways... that was then, now Russia is on a war footing, they are building their army, focusing their manufacturing on building ammo, weapons, missiles, etc. they feel they are fighting for their very existence. They will throw everything they have into this war before they give up Crimea or any region they have accepted into the Russian Republic.
Americans don't get this... Biden will dictate nothing to Putin or Russia, for Russia this is a war of survival now, they will not accept any agreement that returns those territories to Ukraine."those Ukraine forces have been exhausted, hundreds of thousands are now dead."
I usually try to ignore what you write about Ukraine because you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about on this topic.
Do you have any idea the devastation the Russian military has experienced? Latest estimates are over 120,000 soldiers killed. Russia is now down to using tank from the 1960s. In Bakmut alone, Russian causalities are almost three times higher than those of Ukraine. The only thing keeping Ukraine from driving the Russian military closer to their boarder is the weather. Russia is now trying to fight a war of attrition, and they are losing. In the spring, things will change. The next large Ukrainian offensive will begin. The Russians know it. They don't have the resources to stop it.
Crimea will be returned to Ukraine.
As they say in Ukraine
Путін, пішов нахуй!Time will tell.
I will trust in my sources, you have yours.
Or if we look at the latest report, there are some improvements.
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-m … nal-update
“The January monthly operational update clearly illustrates that new border enforcement measures are working, with the lowest level of Border Patrol encounters between Ports of Entry since February of 2021,” said CBP Acting Commissioner Troy Miller.
U.S. Border Patrol encounters of individuals who entered the country between Ports of Entry at the southwest border in January 2023 totaled 128,410, down 42% from 221,675 in December 2022.
So go ahead and write that book, just be sure it includes the most current information.Interesting , however numbers up from Jan 2022 --
The number of unique individuals encountered in January 2022 was 111,437, an 18 percent decrease compared to the number of unique individuals encountered the prior month. In total, there were 153,941 encounters along the southwest land border in January, a 14 percent decrease compared to December.Feb 18, 2022.
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-m … 0December.
I believe that Jan's numbers are as a rule lower due to the season, fewer migrants make the trip.
Point taken... I did not catch the update that was added Fri.
'I think it was you and those on the left who claimed, after many of us complained about biden, that we suffered from biden derangement syndrome.'
Yeah, we chose to mock that fabricated disorder by turning it back on the right because it is so ridiculous.
If trading on your name or making policy based on other countries donating to members of your family is the lawlessness you speak of, that just adds to the growing list of the last administration as well.
Well, it appears Tucker lied to you again. All of the video that appeared on his show was given to defense attorneys according to a legal filing to the courts from the DOJ.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_xH-4SqKtA&t=487sAs an outsider, i realized I could be short of the actual information on what actual cause Sicknick death. I was not on the Capitol ground on the insurrection day January 6. Nor was I an eye-witness day one and two. So what Dr. Diaz said mattered less to me, sincd the issue revolved around more of politics. The doctor may be bias or not. But who knows? Why not a 2nd and 3rd doctor re-examine Sicknick? Is the the initial examination clearly independent? Just spraying Capitol stressed officer with bear (chemical) enhanced underling stroke condition? I'm sorry I couldn't buy the thought.
I agree with your view. I think we need the opinions of a couple of other medical examiners. It appears Diaz's statement does not coincide with his department's statement. It would be very simple to just have a couple more medical examiners have a look at the autopsy findings. It certainly would work to prevent any mistruths from being spread.
This is where the problem occurs in our government, they don't do the most logical, they do the most political.'they don't do they most logical, they do the most political.' Certainly.
Related Discussions
- 212
The FBI role in January 6th
by Readmikenow 2 years ago
There is evidence that the FBI was involved in inciting the January 6 incident.Watch the video below. Ted Cruz questions Assistant FBI Director Jill Sanborn. She will neither confirm or deny that the FBI had operatives in the crowd on January 6 posing as supporters of President Donald...
- 53
Report: President Donald Trump ordered 10,000 troops for January 6
by Readmikenow 8 months ago
This report proves there was no insurrection on January 6. If someone wanted to have an insurrection, why would they order 10,000 troops to help with crowd control? The report proves that President Donald Trump ordered 10,000 troops for January 6 and it was the democrats who decided not...
- 175
Jan 6th Tape Brian Sicknick Was The Root Of A Big Lie.
by Sharlee 2 years ago
It shows Sicknick walking through the building “after he was supposedly murdered by the mob outside.” Yet the Jan 6th committee did not reveal this fact or show this video. Time to ask why. Tucker Carlson releases exclusive Jan. 6 footage, says politicians, media lied about Sicknick ...
- 221
Fox and MAGA News Expose
by Mike Russo 4 years ago
I watched Laura Ingram, Tucker Carlson, and Sean Hannity last night. They have changed from defending Trump, to attacking Biden and the left, just like they did with Obama. Only the name has been changed. They are up to their old tricks.I'm going to try to post their propaganda everyday...
- 1121
Jan 6th Hearings Are Approaching Will You Be Tuning In?
by Sharlee 2 years ago
The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol will hold the first of at least a half-dozen public hearings this week, having already promised stunning revelations that would lay bare just how dangerously close the U.S. came to losing its democracy. So, will you tune in? ...
- 54
Trump Supporters Storm Capitol Building at Trump's Urging.
by Allen Donald 4 years ago
This is your President:a man who claims fraud in the 2016 election and organizes a committee to find fraud which fails and disbands.a man who again claims fraud in the 2020 election before the election even happens and does not commit to the peaceful transfer of power.a man who claims fraud after...