For those who wonder why I call them Faux News
- Thread starter BNIBoiler
- Start date
What is your best estimation of how many people on Jan 6 engaged in 'violent' acts? I'm not talking about walking into the capital and taking some selfies, I'm talking about fighting with the cops, breaking stuff, etc.
How many?
I've seen estimates that between 175 and 2000 people actually entered the capital building, (depending on the article you read).
More than I admit? Dude, I’ve been forthcoming for years here about watching Faux News. I've been watching Faux News since way back when it used to be Fox News watching the coverage of the OJ trial. After that, I would watch Fox News to get my conservative fix in as I like to get both sides of the issues. Bill O'Reilly's show used to be good. The morning show, "Fox & Friends" use to be good. Before "Hannity" it was "Hannity & Combs" where Combs was the progressive on the show they would go back in forth discussing the issues with both side's points of view.
Then came the 2009 election and Obama won, That January 2009 is when Fox News could not handle Barack Obama as president and became Faux News. Bill O'Reilly became ridiculous. They got rid of Combs and then it was just "Hannity". He became ridiculous. Tucker Carlson eventually came over to Faux News. Ingraham's show started. "Fox & Friends" became right wing hacks. Then when Chump became president, Faux News became basically state-run TV. The evening shows are unbearable for me to watch. I still take a peek from time to time at their hard news shows like Brett Baer, Bill Hemmer, and others.
I always thought Alan Colmes was a reasonable lib, if there is such a thing.
the mainstream narrative that was originally propagated and then the actual truth of the situation that came out later.
For example, the MSM portrayed that kid as attacking/instigating an elderly NA man. The narrative was "Look at this Trump follower. Look at how racist he is"........
That was the immediate knee jerk reaction of the MSM. However, not long after that, more unedited video comes out and shows what really happened, which was very different than from what the MSM was originally saying/showing.
In the case of Jan 6, the MSM portrayed every person in attendance at the Trump rally as someone who was a violent rioter. And that's the video they showed. However, they failed to show the capitol police essentially acting as tour guides as the "rioters' walked around inside the capitol building taking selfies.
I would say 2,000 deplorables is my estimation that committed violent acts. Just look at the footage at all the people either fighting with cops, scaling the walls, breaking windows and entering the building. Throwing bottles, flag poles with the American flag attached, and climbing on roofs and balconies. So, what is your point? I still say that if this were 2,000 black people fighting with the cops it would have been 2,000 dead black people out there. You can etch that in stone. Y'all say that Jan 6 was not an insurrection. It was definitely an insurrection attempt, that's for sure.
Like I said in my other posts, the folks walking around the Capitol and taking selfies with the police were the early arrivals from the Chump rally. Believe me when the rest of the deplorables got there, there were no more selfies being taken. That's for sure.
Back then, Hannity seemed to be a reasonable conservative, not sure if there is such a thing either.
You are still ducking this, @BNIBoiler , despite putting forth incoherent responses to others.
Your statement I replied to here was even more oblivious than your recent claim that CRT is only taught in law schools, which you later claimed was 'misspeaking'.
You're ducking too @BuilderBob6 . I am going to start calling you two the quack twins.
CNN doesn’t really show news do they? In the days they had a great news team and a great sports team, now it’s all opinion, I don’t consider one sided debates news. CNN does have some good shows on their network, their 70’s/80’s/90’s shows were really good, they just did one on HQ trivia, it was a good watch. As for myself, I’ll watch some local news usually ABC 7 in Chicago and sometimes World News with David Muir, the other stuff is opinion with hosts saying what he or she knows will best fire up a partisan audience. In this case a few of the Fox hosts knew this was mostly bs, they were worried about ratings, accept the loss and move on, I hope Trump if DeSantis beats him does this, my guess is he won’t.
Didn't respond because your assertions are weak at best. Faux News with Tucker saying that the Jan 6 folks are "tourists" when hundreds of Capitol and Metro police are injured, several knocked out cold is egregious. Outright lies.
Well both Fox and CNN have been canning people left and right for some time now. It’s most difficult if not impossible to get news that isn’t biased or an outright lie from any media outlet.
Not true. I’ve seen videos before on Fox and the liberal news of people meandering through the Capitol after the mayhem died down. They’ve been shown since videos started being released. There’s new video now but other video has been shown before.
They didn’t portray EVERY person as being violent. That’s BS. The facts themselves regarding who was prosecuted and who wasn’t clearly showed that most people entering the Capitol were charged with misdemeanors and received fines and/community service.
How does your view as to how the media “portrayed” them change the facts of what happened before the tourists took a stroll? Wtf does it matter what they did once they got inside? Are we to change our view of those who beat cops on the outside but then walked around calmly inside?
Some people watched the riot from the outside, didn’t participate, and came in to look around after things died down. This was the vast majority and they were still breaking the law. So what?
Some broke down the doors and windows, assaulted the police, then walked in and broke into offices, trashed them, and stole items.
What facts changed regarding those who broke the law changed after seeing all the video? Those charged were convicted based on video as well. You’re acting like a perception of the number of people involved changes something. Doesn’t change a damn thing.
As for the police walking around with people inside, what did you expect them to do? Start arresting people while surrounded by a crowd that just broke into the Capitol? They were trying to diffuse the situation, not exacerbate it. Do cops normally try and make arrests in the middle of a crowd of rioters? There remains the possibility that some were sympathetic to the cause of the “rioters” as you call them.
So the videos you’ve been whining about for two years have finally been released, only to Tucker, and now your response isn’t to the content of the videos themselves……..it’s just more whining about how long it took. Goalpost is moved.
My 'assertions' are facts in response to your absurd post comparing Fox to ABC, NBC, etc.
I challenge you to show even one of the three is not based in fact - or else to admit what is obvious, that once more you did not know what you are talking about.
My question to you was now that we have seen some more of the suppressed video, do you as a citizen think it was proper for the feds to sit on it. You are ducking the question.
Since you asked about the content, what I saw on Tucker appeared to show:
- The Shaman being politely escorted by police through the building, after which he said a prayer in thanks for the police allowing people access. There is no record he did anything that was violent that I know of, but that guy is now in jail for four years. His lawyer said last night he did not have access to the evidence shown in video by Carlson, nor did the judge handling the case, which would mean the 'conviction' is invalid and the government set him up. Do you agree? Let's ask @HoosierfanJM if he agrees since you are likely to go back into hiding.
- Also appeared to show Epps lied when saying he was back at his hotel when he sent the text bragging he had 'orchestrated' the whole thing.
- And the officer who was alleged in media and by Biden hacks to have been beaten with fire extinguishers was walking around toward the end of the event putting aways signs and so forth. He later died of a stroke according to the medical examiner - but of course that didn't stop Biden and his hacks from using that officer's death as part of their dishonest narrative.
Anything you disagree with here? How about you, HoosierHysteria?
Glad you asked -- it's a step forward for you to seek credible information when you don't understand how a process works.
The government is required to provide all Brady material, which is defined as:
Evidence known to the prosecution that is favorable to a defendant's case and material to the issue of guilt or to punishment and that the prosecution is obligated to disclose to the defense : exculpatory evidence known to the prosecution that must be disclosed.
That doesn't mean that the government is required to know about or locate all evidence favorable to the defendant's case that could possibly exist. However, if they have it they must provide it. So, if the prosecution team didn't have the entirety of the video of QAnon guy, then there is no production requirement.Also noteworthy; there is a deadline for provision of discovery materials and QAnon guy took a plea. If the discovery provision deadline hadn't passed yet and the guy took a plea with the assistance of competent counsel, then the plea will stand.
However, if the government had evidence favorable to defendant's case and did not provide it, the lawyer can file a motion to have the plea and the conviction appealed. So there's your tell! The lawyer can spout off about how unfair life is on some cable talk show with impunity. The rubber hits the road if the lawyer appeals the plea and conviction. And to do so that lawyer will have to cite how the appropriate discovery process was violated. That happens all the time -- if you've got the goods it's a winner and there's unlimited resources to make it happen. And not just from right-wing sources; the ACLU will go to bat for him in a heartbeat if there's merit to it. but if it's bullshit a lawyer won't go into a courtroom with it.
My question is this: Will you actually read and attempt to understand what I just posted in an adult manner? Because if not, you will not get a measured, knowledgeable response on this topic again.
I read it and understand it, but I see no evidence you posted it in an adult manner - although maybe you are trying with a reduction in boldface, underlining and other editing gimmicks that add nothing to the discussion except allowing you to express your Hoosier hysteria.
The shaman doesn't have a lawyer now, apparently, but I hope he gets one since he was obviously railroaded by the police state.
Attorney for QAnon Shaman says new footage proves his client was peaceful
This week, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson released new footage of the January 6 attacks on the U.S. Capitol. St. Louis defense attorney Al Watkins, who represented Jacob Chansley — also known as the “QAnon Shaman” — shared his reaction.
www.audacy.com
Shame on me for giving you the information you requested. You say youI read it and understand it, but I see no evidence you posted it in an adult manner - although maybe you are trying with a reduction in boldface, underlining and other editing gimmicks that add nothing to the discussion except allowing you to express your Hoosier hysteria.
The shaman doesn't have a lawyer now, apparently, but I hope he gets one since he was obviously railroaded by the police state.
Attorney for QAnon Shaman says new footage proves his client was peaceful
This week, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson released new footage of the January 6 attacks on the U.S. Capitol. St. Louis defense attorney Al Watkins, who represented Jacob Chansley — also known as the “QAnon Shaman” — shared his reaction.
- Read the definition of Brady material,
- You have no access to it for this matter, and
- You have zero knowledge as to what the status was of the possession or provision to defense counsel was for that potential Brady material, and yet
- You have concluded that "he was obviously railroaded."
The lawyer who represented him said he didn't have the videos nor were they offered. The gov had the videos and knew they had the videos. They Jan 6 farce committee had access to the videos.
Yet you still give the police state the benefit of the doubt after all of its past corruption pertaining to Trump? You'd make a good member of the CCP.
Unless I mis-understand you--good lord you're terrible at digesting information. And that's some awesome 'whattaboutism' when you throw in China, 'police state', or the corruption by Trump as a distraction.
Here's what matters:
The legal standard is not whether someone in government somewhere had video. It's whether the prosecution team had the video.
You continue to make broad, conspiratorial conclusions, yet you have no time to digest the legal standards that apply.
So you be you -- you will counter with your usual message board trash buffet of name-calling, whattabouts, "you bolded stuff and that makes Riveting sad", and Indiana football or 'clown-pants' middle school nonsense, but I gave you the legal standard and as usual, conspiratorial broadsides based on your opinion is all you've got as a counter.
The DOJ had the videos. The DOJ prosecuted the Shaman.
Are you saying the Shaman's rights depend on whether one part of the DOJ gave another part of the DOJ the videos?
I always felt sorry for him. He had to take stances that were obviously illogical. Monica probably tried keeping him grounded.
If the DOJ had the entirety of the videos and there were security concerns releasing them to defense counsel, I'd expect the DOJ to go to the court and ask for guidance, but would probably need to provide them., or a redacted (building escape route scrubbed, etc) version.
But, if the guy took a plea before the discovery production deadline required all Brady material to be produced? he is shit out of luck.
Luck should have nothing to do with an innocent guy, a Navy vet no less, having to spend the next several years in prison. If the DOJ had any honest leadership, which it clearly does not, it would petition the court to release him based on the 'new' videos.
He pled guilty. He admitted guilt. He stood at the podium in Congress after breaking in and advocated for the overthrow of the US government.
You picked a hell of a criminal scumbag for a role model.
Some episodes it felt like Alan like was the WWE guy who was told to lose to Hulk Hogan or Macho Man or whoever the star was…
Based on the info he and his lawyer had at the time. Moreover, he had been diagnosed with mental problems many years ago.
You libs used to distrust the fed police establishment. Now you are fine with whatever they do - sending SWAT teams to arrest dangerous Christian ministers and dangerous first-time, elderly nonviolent offenders like Roger Stone, railroading a harmless Navy vet, whatever.
You would make a good Stalinist as well as a loyal ccp member - except the clownpants would not be allowed. But you would be fine with that too, no doubt.
2952-0. Your kind of government. You'd fit right in.
Xi awarded 3rd term as China's president, extending rule
BEIJING (AP) — Chinese leader Xi Jinping was awarded a third five-year term as the nation's president Friday, putting him on track to stay in power for life at a time of severe economic challenges and rising tensions with the U.S.
apnews.com
Bullshit. The shit went crazy outside. Some inside, but very little. The "Q-Anon" Shaman got 4 years in prison. 4 YEARS! For what? What did he do other than the left making him the face of the whole thing? Justify why he deserved the most harsh sentencing out of everyone so far based on the information that is out there. I guarantee you that you won't be able to. This example alone should be enough to prove that the J6 committee was horseshit and making shit up. The officers being killed narrative is another. Open your fuklking eyes man!
The BLM Marxist/Terrorist groups did a million times more damage to this country in the summer of 2020 than the right wingers did on Jan 6th 2021.
'Bulls---': GOP senators rebuke Tucker Carlson for downplaying Jan. 6 as 'mostly peaceful'
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called the Fox News host's portrayal a "mistake," while Sen. Kevin Cramer said it was “just a lie” to compare Jan. 6 to a peaceful protest.www.nbcnews.com
And this is why you are a fukking moron because you have NOTHING to back up this position. THOUSANDS of black people have rioted and looted for months and years now. I don't see them getting gunned down like you claim they would have.
You have no proof of this position. In fact, the video evidence would say otherwise. I'd say the violence was mostly early and before most people arrived. It took violence to get through the initial barricades that were blocking the steps to the Capitol. What do you think happened? They violently entered the steps and then decided to become peaceful inside the Capitol, and then deciding to become violent again later on? You cannot be this dumb.
He never said they were ALL tourists. You obviously lied about watching the video if you're going to claim that. He clearly said there were some violent people, but he said the narrative around J6 has been misleading, and he's right.
Same question goes to you. Why was the "Shaman" given a 4 year sentence? What did he really do? The media made him out to be the face of the violence. Some pundits on shows like Bill Mahr was calling for him to be shot. The new video released shows that he did nothing and was IN FACT being escorted by Capitol Police. What did he do to deserve the most harsh sentencing? Do you think it's right that this video evidence of him doing NOTHING was withheld from him and the court?
