Why did McCarthy Give Tucker Carlson Exclusive Access to J6 Footage?

[Bradskii]

Please explain how I’m lessening the culpability of January 6th offenders and what videos from Fox I used.

No problem. These are your words:

The video tells a different story than what we have been told about him the last two years though

That is the line you have been following continuously.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I don't set the sentences. But the 4 years he got seemed suitable for the overall seriousness of the event. Put it this way, I was neither surprised or dissapointed. And bear in mind that one of the reasons we punish people is to act as a deterrent. I don't think that anyone today thinks they could do something similar and just get a slap on the wrist.

The guy seems genuinely contrite and I'd like to think he'd get out early on good behaviour.

It's not only not 5 years, but it isn't even 4 years. It is 41 months, 3 years and 5 months, just less than 3 1/2 years.

 

[Bradskii]

Then what is @Bradskii talking about? You should know since you are responding to a post addressed to him. Do you speak for him now? Is he not capable of speaking for himself or do you just feel he needs your help?

As someone has already said, there is no argument on that point. Everybody agrees that it was incorrect- we’ve all known about it for 2 years. Nobody’s addressing it because it’s not relevant - you just keep bringing it up to muddy the waters.

 

[BPPLEE]

No problem. These are your words:

That is the line you have been following continuously.

I believe I said that once and that in no way reduces anyone’s culpability. This is a forum, it’s not a court, I would think that you know the difference

 

[Bradskii]

I believe I said that once and that in no way reduces anyone’s culpability. This is a forum, it’s not a court, I would think that you know the difference

You said that you had never done it. That is a verbatim example of you actually doing it. And it has been the point of all your posts throughout this thread. If you like we can put the cards on the table. I'm calling you:

Do you think that the videos presented by Fox give any indication that anyone convicted of an offence on Jan 6 was wrongly convicted? In other words, do the videos reduce anyone's culpability in any way?

 

[BPPLEE]

You said that you had never done it. That is a verbatim example of you actually doing it. And it has been the point of all your posts throughout this thread. If you like we can put the cards on the table. I'm calling you:

Do you think that the videos presented by Fox give any indication that anyone convicted of an offence on Jan 6 was wrongly convicted? In other words, do the videos reduce anyone's culpability in any way?

I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer and when did I say I NEVER did anything? I said the video ( of the so called Shaman) told a different story than what we’ve been told the last two years. I said my posts have been about the fact that no one was killed with a fire extinguisher and that it was falsely reported. That doesn’t change the fact that some people acted violently and should be held accountable. See post #

• 294

 

[Bradskii]

I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer...

I don't care about your profession. I'm asking for your personal opinion. Do the Fox videos shown any lack of culpability, in your personal opinion, to any of the people convicted. That was the reason they were aired and that is the line that Fox and Carlson was taking. A line that quite a few people in this thread have followed. So, do you think it has any veracity?

It's almost the very reason for this thread. It's what everyone has been discussing. So please don't try to tell me that 400+ posts in and you have only been concerned with a faulty news report about a fire extinguisher. I may not the brightest tool in the shed but please don't insult what intelligence I do have.

 

[BPPLEE]

I don't care about your profession. I'm asking for your personal opinion. Do the Fox videos shown any lack of culpability, in your personal opinion, to any of the people convicted. That was the reason they were aired and that is the line that Fox and Carlson was taking. A line that quite a few people in this thread have followed. So, do you think it has any veracity?

It's almost the very reason for this thread. It's what everyone has been discussing. So please don't try to tell me that 400+ posts in and you have only been concerned with a faulty news report about a fire extinguisher. I may not the brightest tool in the shed but please don't insult what intelligence I do have.

Then go back and read my posts. What do most of them concern? I only saw the video on Tucker Carlson of the Qanon Shaman being escorted around by the Capitol Police and of Sicknick alive and well and doing his job after he was allegedly hit in the head with a fire extinguisher. As I said those videos tell a different story than what we’ve been told the last two years. Are they enough to affect anyone’s court case? I don’t know I haven’t seen all of them and I was a law enforcement officer not a prosecutor or defense attorney

 

[Hans Blaster]

Then go back and read my posts. What do most of them concern? I only saw the video on Tucker Carlson of the Qanon Shaman being escorted around by the Capitol Police and of Sicknick alive and well and doing his job after he was allegedly hit in the head with a fire extinguisher. As I said those videos tell a different story than what we’ve been told the last two years. Are they enough to affect anyone’s court case? I don’t know I haven’t seen all of them and I was a law enforcement officer not a prosecutor or defense attorney

Since I haven't watched the full clip from Tucker's show, does *he* say that the video illustrates "Sicknick alive and well and doing his job after he was allegedly hit in the head with a fire extinguisher" or something to that effect? (I do know that Tucker makes the escorting Chansley claim.) If so, that would at least let us know why you are interested in the debunking of the "fire extinguisher" narrative.

 

[Bradskii]

Then go back and read my posts. What do most of them concern? I only saw the video on Tucker Carlson of the Qanon Shaman being escorted around by the Capitol Police...As I said those videos tell a different story than what we’ve been told the last two years.

Does the video change the culpability of Chansley? If not, then there's nothing for you to discuss except fire extinguishers, a matter with which nobody disagrees and have stated on numerous times that they don't disagree. But feel free to keep beating that dead horse if you really feel the need.

But if it does change his culpability, then it's time to nail your colours to the mast and say what you mean. let's quit the dancing around and speak plainly.

 

[Arcangl86]

This is supposed to be the world’s best law enforcement agency, they have video, they have the devices, probably have DNA and one of the devices was in the vicinity of the Vice President

They have video of somebody who's face is covered on the bottom by a mask and obscured on top by a hood. They have the devices, but if this person hadn't made them before that doesn't tell them much. If they even have DNA, which we don't know for sure, that doesn't do any good if he's not already in a database. The largest DNA database in the US only has about 9 million people in it. Our population is well over 330 million, so less then 3% of all people in the US is in that database. I'm sure they are still looking for him, but they really don't have much to go on. Contrast this to the 1000 people who either were caught clearly on camera or bragged on social media about what they did. It's not an apples to apples comparison.

 

[BPPLEE]

Since I haven't watched the full clip from Tucker's show, does *he* say that the video illustrates "Sicknick alive and well and doing his job after he was allegedly hit in the head with a fire extinguisher" or something to that effect? (I do know that Tucker makes the escorting Chansley claim.) If so, that would at least let us know why you are interested in the debunking of the "fire extinguisher" narrative.

I’m interested in debunking it because it’s not true.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Since I haven't watched the full clip from Tucker's show, does *he* say that the video illustrates "Sicknick alive and well and doing his job after he was allegedly hit in the head with a fire extinguisher" or something to that effect? (I do know that Tucker makes the escorting Chansley claim.) If so, that would at least let us know why you are interested in the debunking of the "fire extinguisher" narrative.

I’m not going to go back and dig through the thread, but the discussion about Sicknick in this thread may have started when I corrected another poster’s comments on the matter.

 

[BPPLEE]

Does the video change the culpability of Chansley? If not, then there's nothing for you to discuss except fire extinguishers, a matter with which nobody disagrees and have stated on numerous times that they don't disagree. But feel free to keep beating that dead horse if you really feel the need.

But if it does change his culpability, then it's time to nail your colours to the mast and say what you mean. let's quit the dancing around and speak plainly.

I’ve already told you I don’t know. This is not the inquisition and I’m not on trial.

 

[Bradskii]

I’ve already told you I don’t know. This is not the inquisition and I’m not on trial.

So it was just about a fire extinguisher. How many posts have been made arguing a point with which nobody disagrees...

What a complete waste of time.

 

[BPPLEE]

So it was just about a fire extinguisher. How many posts have been made arguing a point with which nobody disagrees...

What a complete waste of time.

A lot of your discussions are a waste of time like when you try to put words in my mouth. It’s nothing new

 

[USincognito]

They have video of somebody who's face is covered on the bottom by a mask and obscured on top by a hood. They have the devices, but if this person hadn't made them before that doesn't tell them much. If they even have DNA, which we don't know for sure, that doesn't do any good if he's not already in a database. The largest DNA database in the US only has about 9 million people in it. Our population is well over 330 million, so less then 3% of all people in the US is in that database. I'm sure they are still looking for him, but they really don't have much to go on. Contrast this to the 1000 people who either were caught clearly on camera or bragged on social media about what they did. It's not an apples to apples comparison.

Many people are saying that the bomber is a certain loudmouthed member of Congress.

 

[Pommer]

This is why the Chucks and Mitches and other fake republicans are freaking out. They never wanted this footage to reach the eyes of the public. They had this fake "insurection" narative all tied up with a bow..... until the full story was presented....

Nothing they hate more than being allowed to see the truth.

Oh my, Mitch (McConnell?) is a “fake Republican”?
Wow, he went under the bus fast.

 

[USincognito]

So he wasn't convicted of anything he supposedly did, he was convicted and sentenced to prison to "set an example", and to be an emblem of a barbaric crowd. IOW, it's all for show.

No, that would be false. Chansley was facing numerous charges, but worked out a plea agreement on obstruction of a offical proceeding.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/page/file/1352916/download

Count 1
(Civil Disorder, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 231 (a)(3))
Count 2
(Obstruction of an Official Proceeding, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1512(c)(2))
Count 3
(Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section l 752(a)(l ))
{remember all the times the officer you guys think was "escorting him" was actually following him and asking him to leave?}
Count 4
(Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1752(a)(2))
Count 5
(Violent Entry and Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building, in violation of Title 40. United States Code, Section 5104(e)(2)(A))
Count 6
(Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building, in violation of Title 40, United States Code, Section 5104(e)(2)(G))

He's guilty of every one of these counts and the video Tucker showed proves that he is guilty of them.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I suspect it was because he knew the CNNs and MSMBCs of the world would do what their Democrat bosses did... hide the footage that does not support their narrative. Those who withheld the footage during the trials should be impeached, tried, and even jailed for their corruption.