Ignoring Some Violence–Amplifying Other Violence

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.

Exposing The Truth

The reaction to Tucker Carlson’s showing the video tapes from January 6th is just as interesting as the video tapes. This article highlights one of the lies the video debunks.

On Tuesday, Power Line Blog posted an article detailing one of the most egregious lies:

The Democrats’ preferred narrative is that Trump supporters “incited a deadly insurrection.” Police officers were killed. Initially, in unison, the legacy media repeated the claim (started by the New York Times) that Sicknick (Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick) had been struck in the head with a fire extinguisher by a protestor. The mob had killed him. Carlson said:

But only after that lie had hardened into conventional wisdom did the newspaper bother to retract it. … Brian Sicknick, a Trump voter, had been transformed without his consent into a political martyr of the left.

The Democrats’ insisted that Sicknick’s cremated remains lie in honor at the Capitol Rotunda for maximum political impact. President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden were the first of many to pay their respects to the fallen officer. Or rather to exploit his death.

But it turned out that Sicknick had not been “murdered by the mob outside.” In fact, after his murder was said to have occurred, he is captured on video walking normally, even vigorously, directing people through the corridors of the Capitol (at the 19:45 mark).

“This tape overturns the single most powerful and politically useful lie the Democrats have told us about Jan. 6,” Carlson said. He knows that Jan. 6 Committee investigators saw this particular clip because the “footage contains an electronic bookmark that is still archived in the Capitol’s computer system.”

There were actually at least two protesters killed on January 6th. One was Ashli Babbitt. The other was Rosanne Boyland who was killed inside a tunnel on the lower west terrace of the Capitol building. The official report was that Rosanne Boyland died of a drug overdose, but the witnesses say otherwise (article here).

Why The Release Of The January 6th Tapes Matters

On Tuesday, Red State posted an article illustrating why the release of the January 6th surveillance tapes is so important. The Democrats and the mainstream media have created a narrative about the events of that day that is fictional. The tapes illustrate that fact. That is why the Washington elites are making so much noise about the release of these tapes. Much of what the media has reported about January 6th for the past two years is fiction. Now the American people have a chance to see for themselves what actually happened. It should be noted that the January 6th Committee hired a television producer to help them with their propaganda efforts (article here). There was never any intention of the committee to get to the truth–the intention was for the Democrats to win the mid-term elections and destroy President Trump.

The article notes:

Nothing says “saving democracy” by trying to stop the speech of your political opponents.

Schumer out and out lied on the Senate floor — claiming that Carlson said Jan. 6 was not violent. Carlson said no such thing. He said that while there was violence, there were other protesters inside the Capitol who were not violent. Schumer is the one lying because he doesn’t want that basic truth to be told.

This isn’t the first time that Schumer has gone after Fox and tried to suppress speech. I wrote just last week about how Chuck Schumer had threatened Fox, saying he not only had a “right to tell Rupert Murdoch and Fox what to do but an obligation.” He said “democracy was at greater risk than it’s ever been,” that Fox must admit they told “lies” or he will take other “steps.”

I don’t disagree with him that “democracy” and our freedoms are at risk — from Schumer threatening them himself.

They are truly panicking that the narrative is becoming unhinged when it comes to Jan. 6, that people are seeing that there are other takes, apart from the cherry-picked narrative of the Jan. 6 Committee and the Democrats which was all about using the riot to attack former President Donald Trump and affect the midterms. Among the people the show reached was Twitter head Elon Musk, he saw the points being made.

But while Schumer and Kinzinger were certainly deplorable with their remarks on the day, it may be Attorney General Merrick Garland who had the worst lie. He was asked by a reporter during a press briefing what he thought about Carlson’s coverage. Listen, as even now, Garland lies. He talks about officers assaulted on “that day” and then says, “Five officers died.” (click link to article to see video)

The article concludes:

But this is just an example of why Tucker Carlson’s Jan. 6 coverage was so important. Dems and media have been lying about this specific point since the beginning, as Carlson noted, to make the riot worse, to add “deadly” to it. That’s why this lie is so disgusting, yet even now, it’s continuing, proving Tucker’s point. The Democrats don’t care about honesty or the facts, just that narrative.

Just a note–we are not a democracy–we are a representative republic.

 

Will Anyone Be Held Responsible For The Lies

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.

 

Semi-Transparency

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.

Threatened With Exposure?

Adam Schiff has an interesting relationship with the truth. He claimed to have information proving collusion between President Trump and the Russians. Somehow that information never appeared. He created a fictional telephone call between President Trump and Ukraine that he wanted to be the basis for impeachment. And he sat on the January 6th Committee supposedly investigating the events of that day. So far he has never been held accountable for his lies. However, that may be changing.

On February 20th, I posted an article about 14,000 hours of footage from cameras around the Capitol complex from January 6th that has been released to Tucker Carlson. Red State posted an article on February 20th about Representative Schiff’s reaction to the release. Somehow the Representative is less than thrilled that the footage will probably be made public fairly soon.

The article notes:

“Kevin McCarthy turned over Jan 6 videos to right-wing propagandist Tucker Carlson,” Schiff huffed. “A man who spews Kremlin talking points. Suggests Jan 6 was a false flag. And spreads the Big Lie. Make no mistake: This isn’t about transparency, it’s about fueling dangerous conspiracy theories.”

It’s always a conspiracy theory until we find out that it is true!

The article notes:

So the man who lied his head off about the Russia collusion hoax is concerned about “dangerous conspiracy theories” when he helped to promote one?

How is the actual video footage that was shot a “dangerous conspiracy theory”? What Schiff is saying is he has a problem with the truth coming out, that the truth is “dangerous,” and that he fears it, that’s what he’s saying here. That’s why neither he nor Pelosi wanted this video out there, otherwise, he wouldn’t be so desperate to try to attack the release now. If he cared about the truth, he’d welcome the release. But to Schiff, the truth is just something to lie about, to achieve his political aims.

During the next few weeks, I suspect that the Tucker Carlson Tonight will have many ‘get-out-the-popcorn segments.’

Holding Social Media Accountable

On Wednesday, The Western Journal posted an article about Kyle Rittenhouse. The article might cause some news outlets and social media platforms to lose more than a little sleep.

The article reports:

During an appearance Monday on Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Kyle Rittenhouse and his attorney, Todd McMurty, had a message to send to the many establishment media hucksters who smeared his name.

“We are going to make the media pay for what they did to me,” the 19-year-old Rittenhouse told Carlson.

It won’t just be members of the media who will pay, however. According to both Rittenhouse and McMurty, the legal team will be zeroing in on some Big Tech platforms, starting with Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook.

…Prior to and during the trial — before a verdict had even been reached — numerous media personalities forwarded unfounded claims about Rittenhouse, including that he was a murderer and a white supremacist.

“They made it hard for me to live a normal life. I can’t go out into public. I can’t go to the store. It’s hard for me to go anywhere without security. Doing basic things like taking my dog to the dog park is difficult,” Rittenhouse told Carlson.

“They made it really difficult to be normal, and they affected future job opportunities to me. I don’t think I will ever be able to work or get a job because I’m afraid an employer may not hire me.”

McMurty then chimed in, making it clear that several defamation lawsuits were on the way, specifically targeting those in the media and on social media who called Rittenhouse a “murderer” and a “white supremacist.”

While I don’t necessarily agree with the fact that Kyle Rittenhouse was out on the street the night of the riots, I do believe he has the right to defend himself. I have no doubt that had he not shot his attackers, he would not be alive to tell his story. Unfortunately, his actions that night and the reporting of the incident will follow him for the rest of his life.

Please follow the link to the article to get a picture of the articles that have resulted in this lawsuit. I wish Kyle luck in his lawsuit and hope he will use the money he wins to continue his education as he had originally planned.