Tag Archives: January 6th video

Ignoring Some Violence–Amplifying Other Violence

Posted on by

On March 9th, Don Surber posted an article at Substack about how lawlessness is sometimes treated. Please read the entire article as it has multiple examples of inconsistencies on law enforcement’s handling of ‘mostly peaceful’ protests.

The article notes:

CNN reported on January 21, 2017, “Six police officers were injured and 217 protesters arrested Friday after a morning of peaceful protests and coordinated disruptions of Donald Trump’s inauguration ceremony gave way to ugly street clashes in downtown Washington.

“At least two DC police officers and one other person were taken to the hospital after run-ins with protesters, DC Fire Spokesman Vito Maggiolo told CNN. Acting DC Police Chief Peter Newsham said the officers’ injuries were considered minor and not life threatening.

“Bursts of chaos erupted on 12th and K streets as black-clad ‘antifascist’ protesters smashed storefronts and bus stops, hammered out the windows of a limousine and eventually launched rocks at a phalanx of police lined up in an eastbound crosswalk. Officers responded by launching smoke and flash-bang devices, which could be heard from blocks away, into the street to disperse the crowds.”

The limousine in question was hired by former CNN presenter Larry King and destroyed by rioters. A Muslim owned the vehicle. It was his livelihood.

The media sided with the Inauguration Day insurrectionists.

Esquire reported on April 12, 2017, “How the Government Is Turning Protesters Into Felons.”

The magazine whined, “While scattered vandalism and punching (a neo-Nazi) were deemed headline-grabbing militancy, the media relegated the most extreme incidents involving anarchists and antifascists — namely, recent treatment of them — to footnotes.”

Scattered violence and punching someone you claim is a neo-Nazi is OK.

Sitting in Nancy Pelosi’s office chair is an insurrection.

A year after the Inauguration Day violence, all charges were dropped.

The article concludes:

“Also, why is it hard to understand that when an election takes place during a pandemic, with millions of people shipping ballots rather than showing up at voting centers on election day, many people would be skeptical about the results of that election, especially when the candidate who lost won the election day vote?

“Instead of labeling people election deniers, is it not better to ensure that even the appearance of fraud is eliminated by having most people vote in-person on election day and with proper identification?

“When a country decides to live a lie and chases shadows, it conducts false investigations with predetermined outcomes and ends up blaming people like Tucker Carlson for showing the other side of the story. And that is a shame!”

It was not a security failure. It was a deliberate solicitation of protesters and an invitation for rioting in order to disqualify Trump in 2024. Thanks to Tucker Carlson, the Constitution and the truth, it won’t work.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Then ask yourself why the violent protestors of 2017 had all of their charges dropped and the mostly non-violent protestors of 2021 are still in jail.

Will Anyone Be Held Responsible For The Lies

Posted on by

Last night Tucker Carlson showed portions of the security tapes from January 6th on his Fox New show. The tapes clearly contradict what the American public has been told about the events of January 6th.

Fox News posted an article about the discrepancies last night. The question is, “Are you going to believe the media, or are you going to believe what you see with your own eyes?”

Here are some of the things learned from the video tapes:

The first batch of footage showed Trump supporters peacefully touring the building, “sightseers” as Carlson put it, but the footage of the rioters overwhelmingly consumed the news coverage of Jan. 6, which many in D.C. have compared to 9/11 and the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Capitol police officers were seen escorting Jacob Chansley, a Navy veteran widely referred to in the liberal media as the “QAnon Shaman,” around the building without incident. Carlson reported that officers were seen showing Chansley around, even trying to open locked doors for him. At one point, at least nine police officers were seen in close proximity to Chansley, and none of them slowed him down, as Carlson noted.

The article notes that Jacob Chansley has been sentenced to nearly four years in prison for his actions that day. Tucker Carlson asked, “If he was in fact committing such a grave crime, why didn’t the officers who were standing right next to him place him under arrest?”

The article continues:

The second batch of footage addressed the widely promoted narrative by Democrats and the media that the events of Jan. 6 was a “deadly insurrection,” often citing the death of police officers, most of whom who died by suicide after the riot, while others died of natural causes. Only one person, an Air Force veteran and Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt, was shot and killed by a Capitol police officer.

However, the one person who became a household name was Officer Brian Sicknick, whom the media alleged was “attacked” by the mob and once falsely claimed was hit in the head with a fire extinguisher.

Sicknick was seen walking normally while guiding Trump supporters out of the building as he wore a helmet, which appears to contradict the media narrative that he died of a head injury.

“This tape overturns the single most powerful and politically useful lie that Democrats told us about January 6th,” Carlson told viewers.

Please follow the link above to read the rest of the article. It is sad that our Representatives knowingly lied to us, assuming their lies would never be exposed, and the media went right along with it.

 

Controlling The Evidence In A Trial

Posted on by

On March 4th, The Washington Examiner reported the following:

A federal judge denied a request from a Jan. 6 defendant to access additional Capitol surveillance tapes recently made available by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy in an effort to delay her trial and gather more evidence.

U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg denied the request from Jan. 6 defendant Sara Carpenter on Friday, ruling her legal team failed to explain how the supplemental footage of her actions inside the Capitol building would be necessary in her case. Carpenter faces a number of charges for her participation in the Capitol riot, including disorderly conduct and obstruction of an official proceeding.

…Boasberg’s decision is the latest in the saga surrounding the Capitol riot tapes, particularly after McCarthy granted a trove of surveillance footage to Fox News host Tucker Carlson last month. News of the decision prompted an outcry among congressional Democrats, with several calling the move dangerous to national security.

McCarthy has repeatedly defended his decision to release footage to Carlson, noting the exchange fulfills a pledge he made during his bid for House speaker. He also argued the release was important to ensure a transparent investigation into the Capitol riot.

McCarthy also indicated he’d make the tapes more widely available once Carlson’s crew is done sifting through them, and several Jan. 6 defendants said they plan to access the materials.

The article concludes:

Prosecutors are required to provide defendants with any exculpatory evidence they may use in their trials, posing a significant challenge for cases related to the Jan. 6 riot that includes thousands of hours of footage obtained by surveillance cameras, police bodycams, journalists, and the rioters themselves.

Carpenter’s attorneys argued the new tapes made available by McCarthy would help provide additional context in their case, but Boasberg ultimately ruled any missing footage would be “minimal.”

I hope the attorneys for Sara Carpenter demand a mistrial. It seems to me that all possible evidence needs to be seen. If the evidence was on the side of the prosecution, would the judge admit it?

Semi-Transparency

Posted on by

On February 20th, I posted an article explaining that the producers of Tucker Carlson Tonight were given access to the January 6th video that had been withheld. Well, evidently things were not as they appeared to be.

On Wednesday, The Epoch Times reported the following:

A key Republican lawmaker said Fox News’ Tucker Carlson doesn’t have unrestricted access to tens of thousands of hours of Jan. 6 Capitol footage, said a Republican lawmaker, coming after it was confirmed that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) handed the footage to him.

“It’s basically controlled access to be able to view tapes. Can’t record, can’t take anything with you,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), the chairman of the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight, told The Hill Tuesday, adding that his panel is working with the House sergeant-at-arms and Capitol Police. “Then they will request any particular clips that—that they may need, and then we’ll make sure that there’s nothing sensitive, nothing classified—you know, escape routes.”

Elaborating, Loudermilk told CBS News that Carlson’s staff “may request any particular clips they may need, then we’ll make sure there’s nothing sensitive, nothing classified, including escape routes … we don’t want al-Qaeda to know certain things.”

While both McCarthy and Carlson have confirmed the move, few details about the agreement were provided. Other mainstream outlets have asked McCarthy to provide them with the footage.

Loudermilk said that those news outlets and the public would ultimately get access to the tapes. “Hopefully sooner rather than later, but I think we’re talking about weeks to months,” he told CBS.

This doesn’t sound like transparency to me–it sounds like cherry picking what the American public can see. Please follow the link to the article for further details. It is interesting to me that some legislators on the Democrat side are fighting so hard to prevent the public from seeing these tapes. It makes me wonder what they are hiding.