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

[USincognito]

Isn’t it amazing how the people that usually second guess everything the police do are in full support of the police in this case and can’t fathom that this particular officer could have been wrong. The police are brave heroes in this case but are demonized routinely by the same people for doing their jobs.

She's at the vanguard of a rampaging mob that has just spent hours in Medieval combat with police and has broken into the Capitol. She's climbing through the broken window of a barricaded door to the speakers lobby where Representatives were still being evacuated. He's HOLDING A GUN ON HER and shouting for her to stand down.

She tries jumping through anyway.

What was he supposed to do? Embrace her and help her down from the barricades?

 

[USincognito]

Even more amazing that they say that the cops need more training, and then they throw fire bombs at the cops who are protecting a newly built training site for just that purpose. But they'll still defend the actions of cops when they shoot unarmed women who are white. And conservative.

There's that racist dog whistle.

And please cite one example of someone on the forum who said police need more training and then threw fire bombs at Cop City.

 

[USincognito]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/28/politics/capitol-security-footage-january-6-mccarthy/index.html

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s office said on Tuesday that lawyers for defendants facing charges in the January 6, 2021, insurrection will be granted access to US Capitol security footage as the top House Republican has faced scrutiny for allowing Fox News host Tucker Carlson to view the video before widely releasing it.​

​

The House Administration’s subcommittee on oversight “is making accommodations to schedule time for any attorney representing a defendant,” McCarthy spokesman Mark Bednar told CNN.​

​

You mean the defendants were not given access to possible exculpatory evidence?

That is a violation of the Brady rule

The Brady rule, named after Brady v. Maryland, requires prosecutors to disclose material, exculpatory information in the government's possession to the defense. Brady material, or the evidence the prosecutor is required to disclose under this rule, includes any information favorable to the accused which may reduce a defendant's potential sentence, go against the credibility of an unfavorable witness, or otherwise allow a jury to infer against the defendant’s guilt.​

​

Initially, the Brady rule was only applicable if the defendant made a pretrial request for specific information which the prosecution denied. In United States v. Bagley, however, the Supreme Court eliminated this request requirement and stated that the prosecution has a constitutional duty to disclose all material, favorable information in their possession to defendants regardless of whether it is requested. This duty is breached regardless of whether that information is withheld intentionally or unintentionally.​

The problem is it's a lie. All defendants have been provided with access to CCTV video during discovery.

Prosecutors say newly aired Chansley footage paints misleading portrait of his Jan. 6 conduct

The Justice Department says a four-minute segment played by Fox News' Tucker Carlson omitted the most incriminating aspects of the so-called QAnon Shaman's time in the Capitol.

www.politico.com

In Sunday’s filing, however, the Justice Department contended that it had shipped all but 10 seconds of the footage to Chansley’s attorney by Sept. 24, 2021 — about three weeks after Chansley pleaded guilty but more than a month before his sentencing.​

Chansley was actually inside the building for about an hour starting at about 2pm. The time frame of the supposedly exculpatory video that Carlson selectively aired was 2:55-3:00pm.

 

[USincognito]

I wonder what the average IQ of the people who looted and burned and caused 2 billion in property damage would be.

My guess is it was irrelevant to the events of January and an attempt at a red herring/whatabouthism.

 

[BPPLEE]

She's at the vanguard of a rampaging mob that has just spent hours in Medieval combat with police and has broken into the Capitol. She's climbing through the broken window of a barricaded door to the speakers lobby where Representatives were still being evacuated. He's HOLDING A GUN ON HER and shouting for her to stand down.

She tries jumping through anyway.

What was he supposed to do? Embrace her and help her down from the barricades?

Holster the gun and stop a 110 pound woman from climbing through a window. The tactical team was seconds away, A good push would have done.

 

[USincognito]

...are now revealed to have simply smiled and held the doors open for the "rioters" to enter the building; and even motioning for them to come in as if they weren't already entering on their own?

This is false. Why do you keep repeating it? You're even giving it your own embellishment.

 

[BPPLEE]

My guess is it was irrelevant to the events of January and an attempt at a red herring/whatabouthism.

Do you have conversations or do you just scan the thread and troll people? I was responding to a comment about the average IQ of the January 6th protesters

 

[Always in His Presence]

The problem is it's a lie. All defendants have been provided with access to CCTV video during discovery.

Prosecutors say newly aired Chansley footage paints misleading portrait of his Jan. 6 conduct

The Justice Department says a four-minute segment played by Fox News' Tucker Carlson omitted the most incriminating aspects of the so-called QAnon Shaman's time in the Capitol.

www.politico.com

In Sunday’s filing, however, the Justice Department contended that it had shipped all but 10 seconds of the footage to Chansley’s attorney by Sept. 24, 2021 — about three weeks after Chansley pleaded guilty but more than a month before his sentencing.​

Chansley was actually inside the building for about an hour starting at about 2pm. The time frame of the supposedly exculpatory video that Carlson selectively aired was 2:55-3:00pm.

Three weeks AFTER he plead guilty -

Exculpatory evidence is required through the Baker Act to be provided BEFORE the trial.

So no - it is not a lie

Additionally - the CNN article was speaking of ALL the defendants - not just the guy in costume being escorted by police.

 

[USincognito]

Oh this is interesting. I didn't realize that the defendant's had no access to this footage. We may find some cases tossed out based on this and prior cases could be overturned.

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. But honestly I am not surprised they hid the video.

The problem is it's just not true.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.241009/gov.uscourts.dcd.241009.689.0.pdf

A. The Government Has Produced the Videos Shown on Tucker Carlson to These Defendants in Discovery According to public reporting, in or around February 2023, the Speaker of the House of Representatives granted television host Tucker Carlson access to a wide range of U.S. Capitol surveillance footage related to the events of January 6, 2021.1 Beginning on Monday, March 6, Carlson’s show began airing portions of the footage.2 Based on what was shown on television, Pezzola now asserts that (1) the government withheld certain footage of rioter Jacob Chansley (who pleaded guilty in case 21-cr-3-RCL), and (2) the footage was exculpatory to Pezzola, creating a Brady violation. ECF 679 at 4-6. Both claims are false.​

​

1. The videos were produced in discovery. Pezzola’s motion describes “shocking footage” of Chansley “walking calmly through the halls of the Capitol” with two police officers who purportedly “escort[] Chansley (and apparently other protestors) into the Senate chamber.” ECF 679, at 4. Pezzola quotes Chansley’s former attorney for the proposition that the government “withheld” this footage from discovery in Chansley’s and Pezzola’s cases. Id. The footage is not shocking, and it was not withheld from Pezzola (or Chansley, in any material respect, for that matter)​

 

[JacksBratt]

I guess the right-wingers who infiltrated the protests were pretty violent. I saw a great deal of video of right-wingers smashing windows and trying to provoke the peaceful protesters. How unfortunate. You didn't hear Joe Biden encouraging violence. But I do see Trump supporters defending the violent actions of the mob on January 6, and we saw Trump encourage violence on numerous occasions. It's no wonder the voters overwhelmingly rejected him.

How do you know that they were "right wingers"?

 

[USincognito]

Three weeks AFTER he plead guilty -

Exculpatory evidence is required through the Baker Act to be provided BEFORE the trial.

When he pled guilty that negated the need for a trial. There wasn't going to be a trial.

So no - it is not a lie

Additionally - the CNN article was speaking of ALL the defendants - not just the guy in costume being escorted by police.

You might want to read the prosecution's filing.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.241009/gov.uscourts.dcd.241009.689.0.pdf

 

[USincognito]

How do you know that they were "right wingers"?

Because

https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/07/28/896515022/minneapolis-police-reportedly-identify-viral-umbrella-man-as-white-supremacist

they

Self-Described Member of “Boogaloo Bois” Pleads Guilty to Riot

www.justice.gov

were

Alleged 'boogaloo' member pleads guilty to killing federal guard during 2020 protests

Steven Carrillo, 33, changed his plea to guilty after federal prosecutors last month agreed not to seek the death penalty.

www.npr.org

 

[USincognito]

If the cop had been white, and Babbitt had been a black protester for a liberal cause, she would be labeled as the victim. But the roles were reversed.

That certainly is a narrative which insurrectionists apologists have pushed since Lt. Byrd's identity was revealed. I guess it's easier to sound the racist dog whistle than it is to defend her actions.

 

[BPPLEE]

That certainly is a narrative which insurrectionists apologists have pushed since Lt. Byrd's identity was revealed. I guess it's easier to sound the racist dog whistle than it is to defend her actions.

Lt. Byrd is very fortunate not to be facing any charges.

 

[USincognito]

Can someone help me here?

Did Tucker Carlson show any footage of the action at the Speaker's Lobby including the shooting of Ashli Babbit?

Edit - my timeline was wrong. The New Yorker video happens about the same time as the heavily edited video that Tucker showed.

He did not. Ironically he showed Chansley entering through the busted out door at about 2pm. The rest of the video was 5 minutes of CHP trying to get him out of the building at between 2:55pm and 3:00pm with segment of Chansley inside the Senate chamber from 20 minutes earlier taken by an independent and sold to the New Yorker magazine.

 

[BPPLEE]

He did not. Ironically he showed Chansley entering through the busted out door at about 2pm. The rest of the video was 5 minutes of CHP trying to get him out of the building at between 2:55pm and 3:00pm with segment of Chansley inside the Senate chamber from 20 minutes earlier taken by an independent and sold to the New Yorker magazine.

And what is your point? The post had already been answered

 

[Bradskii]

And, these capitol police were so certain that Pence was in such grave danger that they let these "want to be murderers" walk around the capitol and take selfies? After shooting an unarmed female?

You could go to any large event with large amounts of people.. there will be, at anytime, a very small percentage of the crowd that has any number of radical thoughts.... That does not warrant labeling the entire crowd with those same views.

Not to mention that, with the amount of exposed corruption in regards to this event... it's pretty obvious that you could have far left radical people who are wearing Trump supporter clothing... who were purposefully and cognitively presenting themselves as violent DT supporters.

It is also quite obvious, when one looks at the events of the last three years... that the right leaning people are not near as violent and brazen vandals as the left.

May I sum up?

Why didn't the police shoot more people?
It wasn't us, it was people dressed up like us.
Someone else was violent once, so...umm...that makes it ok.

I guess with arguments like that, we can release all those jailed, reverse the election and give thanks to all those patriots who have opened our eyes.

I for one have seen the light. Pass me that red hat and a sharpie, dear.

 

[Always in His Presence]

When he pled guilty that negated the need for a trial. There wasn't going to be a trial.

You might want to read the prosecution's filing.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.241009/gov.uscourts.dcd.241009.689.0.pdf

The prosecutors filing, if the exculpatory evidence was not ALREADY PRESENTED means zero.

Oh, you plead guilty - well here is some evidence that could have proven your innocence or created reasonable doubt.

I’ve answered your questions. Please answer one for me.

Why do you think the two officers shown escorting him around looking for unlocked doors, or the group of officers that he walked through never stopped him from going into the chambers?

 

[Bradskii]

I'm still waitingfor someone to actually make an attempt to explain what all these posts are about. We know what happened. We saw what happened. We have people who admitted doing what we saw happened. They are In jail because of what happened.

This is like complaining about the colour of the lifeboats on the Titanic.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The prosecutors filing, if the exculpatory evidence was not ALREADY PRESENTED means zero.

Oh, you plead guilty - well here is some evidence that could have proven your innocence or created reasonable doubt.

I’ve answered your questions. Please answer one for me.

Why do you think the two officers shown escorting him around looking for unlocked doors, or the group of officers that he walked through never stopped him from going into the chambers?

There were already a few dozen people in the Senate chamber when Chansley entered (and just one cop) adding one more invader wasn't going to change anything. (The court documents repeatedly tell of officers, well mostly the one officer, telling him to leave and then Chansley failing to comply. You put this forward as if the only way the police were *really* trying to stop him was if they subdued him. There wasn't the manpower to waste on that.)