I thought they said Jan6 was a violent insurrection

[FlufferNutter]

Now surveillance footage is surfacing that tells a different story than what the corporate media wants you to believe. I wonder what else might come to light in the coming months. And before anyone starts crying "I don't like X news anchor because he's not on my side", they didn't make the footage.

 

[RedColoredStars]

Tucker Carlson and Fox as your sources. LMFAO. Seriously? Gtfo. A person has to be an uneducated dolt to believe a word out of that ass-fucking-hats stupid mouth. He and Fox's own attorneys have stated that anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence wouldn't believe the shit he says. Yet here you are with this complete nonsense.

 

[caipora]

Dude wearing bison horns should've got 10+ years in jail for being this cringe

 

[AncientBoi]

PURE BULL !

FUQ MEGA DUMP tRuMp !

 

[linuxares]

"the corporate media wants you to believe" literally fox news... it's a corporate media organization....

 

[RedColoredStars]

Forgot this part in my op, but guess what? All of the violent insurrection footage? The ones showing that didn't make it either. Your attempt to make Carlsons account of things as being accurate based off of "He didn't make the footage" is as much flat out bullshit as Tucker and his stupid video are.

 

[KingVamp]

I like how they are acting as if all the other footage is now non-existent.

 

[Viri]

I wish it was a violent insurrection, instead it was a cringy LARP fest.

 

[caipora]

I wish it was a violent insurrection, instead it was a cringy LARP fest.

Lol an insurrection  pro-system

 

[Hanafuda]

I like how they are acting as if all the other footage is now non-existent.

Fair point as long as the footage that's coming out now, showing for example Capitol police officers walking the Viking horn idiot guy around on a tour and etc., is also considered in the whole. If a person's response is to reject all this new footage (see e.g. replies #2, #4, #6) as irrelevant, then it's hard to believe that person is really interested in objectivity or truth. Counterpoint is what makes a debate valuable and productive.

I think the OP's choice of words in saying that the newly released video tells "a different story" would have been better if he had instead said, "there's more to the story." We definitely were fed a filtered, biased narrative.

Also I'm wondering if this totality of the evidence was provided to those persons who have been convicted of crimes related to this incident, for use in their defense at trial? If not they should be filing habeus corpus motions NOW.

 

[supermist]

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/9177...s-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye

Fox "news" lawyers even state that he's not a news source.

Post automatically merged: Mar 7, 2023

"the corporate media wants you to believe" literally fox news... it's a corporate media organization....

Fox news is also highest viewed news network, which would mean they're actually the mainstream media they like to whine about

 

[RedColoredStars]

Fair point as long as the footage that's coming out now, showing for example Capitol police officers walking the Viking horn idiot guy around on a tour and etc., is also considered in the whole. If a person's response is to reject all this new footage (see e.g. replies #2, #4, #6) as irrelevant, then it's hard to believe that person is really interested in objectivity or truth. Counterpoint is what makes a debate valuable and productive.

I think the OP's choice of words in saying that the newly released video tells "a different story" would have been better if he had instead said, "there's more to the story." We definitely were fed a filtered, biased narrative.

Also I'm wondering if this totality of the evidence was provided to those persons who have been convicted of crimes related to this incident, for use in their defense at trial? If not they should be filing habeus corpus motions NOW.

There's an awful lot more I could say about all of that but I'll just keep it simple, and I'll speak for myself. Replies #2 and #6 have absolutely nothing to do with rejecting any new footage. It has to do with Carlson using cherry picked footage to illustrate a completely false and bullshit narrative. And a habeas corpus? Wtf? That's like saying a child molester should file for one because they gave the kid a cookie first. They still commit the crimes they have been found guilty of. It's not that difficult. The one that seems to be discrediting footage is you. See reply #7. Didn't take long.

 

[AncientBoi]

I SAY AGAIN !

PURE BULL !

FUQ MEGA DUMP tRuMp !

 

[Hanafuda]

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/9177...s-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye

Fox "news" lawyers even state that he's not a news source.

Post automatically merged: Mar 7, 2023

Fox news is also highest viewed news network, which would mean they're actually the mainstream media they like to whine about

Fox is mainstream media and all news reporting from any source regardless of TV, radio, print is tailored to attract a consuming audience. But the video footage was provided directly by the US Congress, so pointing out that this footage is being shown on Fox News doesn't make it disappear or irrelevant.

There's an awful lot more I could say about all of that but I'll just keep it simple, and I'll speak for myself. Replies #2 and #6 have absolutely nothing to do with rejecting any new footage. It has to do with Carlson using cherry picked footage to illustrate a completely false and bullshit narrative. And a habeas corpus? Wtf? That's like saying a child molester should file for one because they gave the kid a cookie first. They still commit the crimes they have been found guilty of. It's not that difficult. The one that seems to be discrediting footage is you. See reply #7. Didn't take long.

I see reading comprehension's not your strong point. As for reply #7, that's what I was replying to, and I said he makes a fair point ... if all the footage is considered. Not just what the Jan 6 committee cherry picked, nor just what Tucker Carlson cherry picked, but ALL of it. Unfortunately, not many people have 40,000 hours of time available. So, what we get instead is one side's biased edits, vs. another side's biased edits. That's pretty much how a trial works, so I don't see a problem with Carlson now presenting choice selections of footage that show there's more to the story than we have been previously told, when the Jan 6 committee released only footage that depicted what they wanted seen.

You probably don't know much about criminal procedure either, but withholding evidence from a criminal defendant, even if it is only potentially exculpatory, is a big no-no. See Brady v. Maryland. So if the persons who have been tried and convicted, and are now in jail, were not provided all of this footage, they may have grounds to have their convictions reversed.

 

[Intro_to_tech]

This is a troll post right?

 

[impeeza]

I shoot you on the head, but, I am not a murdered becase I was sitting on a bench for 400 hours before that?

 

[RedColoredStars]

Fox is mainstream media and all news reporting from any source regardless of TV, radio, print is tailored to attract a consuming audience. But the video footage was provided directly by the US Congress, so pointing out that this footage is being shown on Fox News doesn't make it disappear or irrelevant.



I see reading comprehension's not your strong point. As for reply #7, that's what I was replying to, and I said he makes a fair point ... if all the footage is considered. Not just what the Jan 6 committee cherry picked, nor just what Tucker Carlson cherry picked, but ALL of it. Unfortunately, not many people have 40,000 hours of time available. So, what we get instead is one side's biased edits, vs. another side's biased edits. That's pretty much how a trial works, so I don't see a problem with Carlson now presenting choice selections of footage that show there's more to the story than we have been previously told, when the Jan 6 committee released only footage that depicted what they wanted seen.

You probably don't know much about criminal procedure either, but withholding evidence from a criminal defendant, even if it is only potentially exculpatory, is a big no-no. See Brady v. Maryland. So if the persons who have been tried and convicted, and are now in jail, were not provided all of this footage, they may have grounds to have their convictions reversed.

You're the one with reading comprehension issues. I literally stated what I meant and did not mean. You're still here trying to tell me otherwise and that my intention is something else. Lmfao. Go away. You're not the telepath you think you are. I never once said the footage is discredited or does not exist because it's shown om Fox. I'm discrediting Carlsons bullshit narrative. How many times do I need to repeat myself? Yet here you are talking about reading skills.

The entire video is nothing more than VERY predictable, cherry picking, and pro MAGA misinformation & editing from the lie network. The prior footage does not discredit this footage. This footage also does not discredit the prior footage. Guilty. Period.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

PURE BULL !

FUQ MEGA DUMP tRuMp !
View attachment 357621

I SAY AGAIN !

PURE BULL !

FUQ MEGA DUMP tRuMp !

I logged in just to put a like on your two postings.

This is the most funny thing I will see today, I'm sure. (but there is a small part of me that wish to unsee it )

 

[AncientBoi]

I logged in just to put a like on your two postings.

This is the most funny thing I will see today, I'm sure. (but there is a small part of me that wish to unsee it )

It was a true posting in the news. Even on FOX The irony of it all.

 

[djpannda]

Now surveillance footage is surfacing that tells a different story than what the corporate media wants you to believe. I wonder what else might come to light in the coming months. And before anyone starts crying "I don't like X news anchor because he's not on my side", they didn't make the footage.

Welcome, Brand New Non-Burner account, who's first posts is this..Im sure you are just a gamer that just happened to see this site for the first time and decided to sign up, and not a banned user, who liked to post garbage. and/or a loser who creats burner accounts because you didn't have the Testicular fortitude to post on your main
My sincerest Welcomes to the GBAtemp communities