US Capitol Police chief rips into Tucker Carlson over ‘offensive’ use of January 6 footage

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

So why are there these many more thousands of hours of nothing violent happening?

Did you expect the mob to be everywhere all the time?

[SunnyinBangrak]

5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Did you expect the mob to be everywhere all the time?

We didn't expect to see the violent insurrectionist ringleader being helped by the cops, that's for sure! Well it seems obvious now why Trump was not allowed a defense in the comittee hearings.

 

"In one of the clips, Capitol Police officers can be seen walking Chansley past seven armed colleagues standing just outside the Senate chamber.

The QAnon Shaman is walked around several locked entrances to the chamber before officers seemingly help him open one to enter the Senate."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1743217/QAnon-Shaman-Tucker-Carlson-January-6-riot-video-Capitol-Police-dxus

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

So why are there these many more thousands of hours of nothing violent happening?

First off, these cameras are everywhere in the building. Not just at the focal points of the violence.

Secondly, because once the rioters had violently forced their way into the capitol they didn't face any real opposition until they tried to storm the area where the Senators and Congressman were being protected. That's where Ashli Babbitt, martyr to the cause, got shot by the Capitol Police.

[placeholder]

55 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

We didn't expect to see the violent insurrectionist ringleader being helped by the cops, that's for sure! Well it seems obvious now why Trump was not allowed a defense in the comittee hearings.

 

"In one of the clips, Capitol Police officers can be seen walking Chansley past seven armed colleagues standing just outside the Senate chamber.

The QAnon Shaman is walked around several locked entrances to the chamber before officers seemingly help him open one to enter the Senate."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1743217/QAnon-Shaman-Tucker-Carlson-January-6-riot-video-Capitol-Police-dxus

So, has Tucker Carlson shared all the footage that features Chansley?

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

We didn't expect to see the violent insurrectionist ringleader being helped by the cops, that's for sure! Well it seems obvious now why Trump was not allowed a defense in the comittee hearings.

 

"In one of the clips, Capitol Police officers can be seen walking Chansley past seven armed colleagues standing just outside the Senate chamber.

The QAnon Shaman is walked around several locked entrances to the chamber before officers seemingly help him open one to enter the Senate."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1743217/QAnon-Shaman-Tucker-Carlson-January-6-riot-video-Capitol-Police-dxus

The Capitol police didn't abuse protesters who had been apprehended and didn't resist arrest or being escorted out of the building.  That's how they're supposed to do things.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Did you expect the mob to be everywhere all the time?

Why not? It was an insurrection, right?

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why not? It was an insurrection, right?

Maybe he believes that $400000 per year is how much middle class taxpayers earn. On the other hand, he may have a point insofar as it could hurt contributions to Democratic candidates.

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why not? It was an insurrection, right?

Are you being facetious?  The US Capitol building has over 175,000 square feet on five levels.

[pomchop]

Here we go again....the same bunch that still clings to the tired lie that the election was stolen in spite of recount after recount investigation after investigation and conclusions publicly stated by multiple republicans that it is all a BIG LIE to say there was any significant election fraud.  Now the same bunch wants to try and claim that the attempted coup was a nice peaceful visit to the capitol in spite of massive and overwhelming videos showing very clearly a massive amount of violence that anyone with an IQ in triple digits would recognize was not just a tour group.

 

Pathetic and pitiful and dangerous that anyone is still pushing these same old lies.

 

We get it that a lot of people liked Trump and think of him as some kind of savior.  That does not make lies true.  Move on.  Admit you bought into the big lie and take off the tin foil hats.

[Phoenix Rising]

4 hours ago, nauseus said:

Why not? It was an insurrection, right?

In order for us not to waste valuable seconds of our lives would it be too much to ask for that you drop the inane 'I-have-to-have-a-comeback-no-matter-how-lame-it-is' posts?

[ozimoron]

14 hours ago, nauseus said:

The complaints about cherry-picking are a bit laughable after the 'selected' footage allowed in those wonderful J6 hearings! I see Carlson did a follow-up on 7 March featuring a Capitol Police officer, Tarik Johnson, who was apparently responsible for getting the senators and congress people to safety - his only reward was a suspension after 22 years because he used a MAGA hat to help his way through the crowd to get to  his colleagues - he was also never asked to testify before the J6 committee. Now that's pretty selective.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-55700011

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11833301/New-Jan-6-tapes-reveal-Capitol-cop-used-initiative-evacuate-senators-boss-went-SILENT.html

 

 

Failure to provide all the footage to all the news outlets makes it impossible to fact check the cherry picking. 

[SunnyinBangrak]

10 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Failure to provide all the footage to all the news outlets makes it impossible to fact check the cherry picking. 

Did this also apply when the partisan comittee released cherry picked footage? Did you point this unfairness out at the time?

[ozimoron]

He went on to accuse Tucker Carlson of picking and choosing the bits and pieces of the surveillance footage to craft a fake narrative. Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) compared it to footage of the World Trade Center on 9/11 before the towers were hit by the planes and claimed that Sept. 11 was "mostly peaceful in New York."

 

https://www.rawstory.com/january-6-dominion-lawsuit

[ozimoron]

Just now, SunnyinBangrak said:

Did this also apply when the partisan comittee released cherry picked footage? Did you point this unfairness out at the time?

Link to evidence that they did as required by the rules here?

 

I'll wait, if I can hold my breath forever that is. 

[vandeventer]

17 hours ago, placeholder said:

In other words you haven't a clue.

In other words I don't want to know about it, preach it to someone else.

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

In other words I don't want to know about it, preach it to someone else.

You're the one doing the preaching or at least the sloganeering by making empty and patently ridiculous claims of Marxism. You've got nothing.

[heybruce]

If there were a bank video showing Trump robbing a bank, the Maga crowd would focus on all the hours of video that show the bank not being robbed and insist that it was proof no crime was committed.

[SunnyinBangrak]

31 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Link to evidence that they did as required by the rules here?

 

I'll wait, if I can hold my breath forever that is. 

? They released a tiny selection of footage that portrayed Chansley as a wild and out of control MAGA insurrectionist. Footage Carlson released shows definitively he was at one stage behaving politely and peacefully while he was assisted in entering the senate by numerous armed police.

 That is proof that the Jan6th sham only showed footage that fit the narrative they wanted. How this is not a criminal act I do not understand. I expect Chansley will sue and win. 

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

? They released a tiny selection of footage that portrayed Chansley as a wild and out of control MAGA insurrectionist. Footage Carlson released shows definitively he was at one stage behaving politely and peacefully while he was assisted in entering the senate by numerous armed police.

 That is proof that the Jan6th sham only showed footage that fit the narrative they wanted. How this is not a criminal act I do not understand. I expect Chansley will sue and win. 

What don't you understand about the fact that criminals aren't always being criminals? What relevance does footage of someone not committing a criminal act bear on the fact that they committed a criminal act? You think a criminal's life is just one long uninterrupted string of felonies with no time out for anything else? And that if you can show evidence that sometimes their behavior isn't criminal, then that's somehow exculpatory?

[candide]

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

? They released a tiny selection of footage that portrayed Chansley as a wild and out of control MAGA insurrectionist. Footage Carlson released shows definitively he was at one stage behaving politely and peacefully while he was assisted in entering the senate by numerous armed police.

 That is proof that the Jan6th sham only showed footage that fit the narrative they wanted. How this is not a criminal act I do not understand. I expect Chansley will sue and win. 

He was convicted by a court, not by The Jan.6 committee.

 

Carlson has his "pants on fire"! ????

"However, Chansley’s signed plea agreement, an officer’s firsthand account of the events, and an internal memo from Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger all contradict Carlson’s claim that Capitol Police acted as Chansley’s Capitol "tour guides" Jan. 6."

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2023/mar/08/tucker-carlson/evidence-rebuts-tucker-carlsons-claim-about-capito/

 

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

? They released a tiny selection of footage that portrayed Chansley as a wild and out of control MAGA insurrectionist. Footage Carlson released shows definitively he was at one stage behaving politely and peacefully while he was assisted in entering the senate by numerous armed police.

 That is proof that the Jan6th sham only showed footage that fit the narrative they wanted. How this is not a criminal act I do not understand. I expect Chansley will sue and win. 

1. Carlson won a civil jury trial based on his own claim that his shows are so whack job crazy that no reasonable person would take him seriously. The jury accepted that testimony.

 

2. His own CEO admitted that his hosts were lying about the election and Jan 6.

 

3. Where's the link Im asked for that the committee cherry picked the footage? Even a link to a credible claim to that effect would be fine. Again it seems that you can't step up to the plate when challenged. 

[xylophone]

23 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Fox admits that "no reasonable viewer takes Tucker Carlson seriously" yet you have used his quotes  as evidence to support your post.

Ah, and within that sentence lies the rub, as the saying goes, because it states that, "no reasonable viewer takes Tucker Carlson seriously", and there would be almost zilch "reasonable viewers" amongst the "Maga/trump nut jobs, and these are mainly his audience. Doublespeak solved!

[ozimoron]

One of the most powerful people in Congress, the Chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, James Comer, had two separate subcommittees holding hearings on Wednesday.

 

During Wednesday’s Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy Policy, and Regulatory Affairs, U.S. Rep. Cori Bush blasted one GOP witness who admitted to saying African, Latin American, Indian, and American Indian (his term) cultures “overall are inferior to Western culture.”

 

Also on Wednesday, a witness who appeared before the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic had written a book that was considered so racist it was the subject of a 2014 article in The New Republic titled, “The Dangerous New Scientific Racism.”

 

https://www.rawstory.com/oversight-republicans-just-held-two-hearings-with-witnesses-accused-of-racism-one-was-praised-by-david-duke/

 

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, Phoenix Rising said:

In order for us not to waste valuable seconds of our lives would it be too much to ask for that you drop the inane 'I-have-to-have-a-comeback-no-matter-how-lame-it-is' posts?

I was replying to a question from someone else. Not my fault if you're a nosy parker.

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Failure to provide all the footage to all the news outlets makes it impossible to fact check the cherry picking. 

I think the J6 committee  had access to everything so they could cherry-pick for more than a year! 

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, ozimoron said:

He went on to accuse Tucker Carlson of picking and choosing the bits and pieces of the surveillance footage to craft a fake narrative. Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) compared it to footage of the World Trade Center on 9/11 before the towers were hit by the planes and claimed that Sept. 11 was "mostly peaceful in New York."

 

https://www.rawstory.com/january-6-dominion-lawsuit

Another fake narrative then.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I think the J6 committee  had access to everything so they could cherry-pick for more than a year! 

If they did, where did they? Where is your link? Just more baseless right wing talking points with a much support as casper the ghost. 

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

? They released a tiny selection of footage that portrayed Chansley as a wild and out of control MAGA insurrectionist. Footage Carlson released shows definitively he was at one stage behaving politely and peacefully while he was assisted in entering the senate by numerous armed police.

 That is proof that the Jan6th sham only showed footage that fit the narrative they wanted. How this is not a criminal act I do not understand. I expect Chansley will sue and win. 

He might do. His lawyer was on the TC show last night and claimed that none of this "peaceful" footage was offered to him before the trial.  

[heybruce]

11 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I think the J6 committee  had access to everything so they could cherry-pick for more than a year! 

 

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

He might do. His lawyer was on the TC show last night and claimed that none of this "peaceful" footage was offered to him before the trial.  

It seems you define cherry-picking as going through 41,000 thousand hours of video, editing out the parts where nothing unusual is going on, and showing the times when crimes were being committed.  Is that correct?  If so, what is wrong with it?

 

Returning to my earlier bank robbery example, if a bank with a video surveillance system was robbed, would it be cherry-picking for the police and prosecution to only use the videos showing the robbery?  Or should they subject the court to years of videos showing business as usual when the bank wasn't being robbed?

[SunnyinBangrak]

5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

He might do. His lawyer was on the TC show last night and claimed that none of this "peaceful" footage was offered to him before the trial.  

Absolutely incredible to hear that. Isn't there a law against withholding exculpatory evidence? Rhetorical question, yes there is. The Brady rule.