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

[Larniavc]

Perhaps he does not trust the MSM on this issue

Tucker Carlson is the MSM.

 

[ralliann]

But Carlson is not likely to show everything as he doesn't even pretend to be a journalist or unbiased, truthful or factual. He has maintained in court that he is merely an entertainer, not a serious newsman.

My big question is why only Carlson and not everyone else?

Well when we have already seen things which Carlson could leave out. We will see things which were left out.

 

[ralliann]

I'm trying to imagine the outrage from Republicans if Nancy Pelosi had given this type of exclusive access to MSNBC. I have the feeling we never would have heard the end of it.

Um, Jan 6 hearings pretty much already did that heh?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Um, Jan 6 hearings pretty much already did that heh?

No, the Committee releasing material to the general public is not the same as releasing it exclusively to one person.

 

[ralliann]

No, the Committee releasing material to the general public is not the same as releasing it exclusively to one person.

You mean selective material. Now, the general public can see more material. Let's wait and see what comes of this as more information becomes available to the general public.

 

[Arcangl86]

You mean selective material. Now, the general public can see more material. Let's wait and see what comes of this as more information becomes available to the general public.

Tucker Carlson is not the general public.

 

[ralliann]

You mean selective material. Now, the general public can see more material. Let's wait and see what comes of this as more information becomes available to the general public.

The general public did not get see all before.

 

[Belk]

The general public did not get see all before.

You are OK with the government playing favorites in it's dealings?

 

[ralliann]

You are OK with the government playing favorites in it's dealings?

They have already done that for a very long time now. Now we all have more material available to us. So let's just see what comes of it.

 

[durangodawood]

They have already done that for a very long time now. Now we all have more material available to us. So let's just see what comes of it.

Very long time >>> Im ok with it.

Interesting ethical principle.

 

[ralliann]

Very long time >>> Im ok with it.

Interesting ethical principle.

Yep, there were those that were ok with it. More information is good. Let's just wait and see the results of it all. I think not going off half cocked is a good ethic.

 

[durangodawood]

Yep, there were those that were ok with it. More information is good. Let's just wait and see the results of it all. I think not going off half cocked is a good ethic.

So because we can find those that were ok with it in the past, that means we should be ok with it now?

I dot think such an ethical principle can survive scrutiny. If it did we'd be approving of all sorts of atrocities.

 

[mark46]

Much was not provided to the public.

Now FOXNEWS and Carlson have access to lots of security information, including placement of cameras, protocols and how various people and organizations work in crisis situations, lots of information that enemies of the state might spend years trying to get. Now this information will be available to friends of Tucker Carlson. Y'all can make your own list. I'd list the far-right militia groups, the white supremacists, fringe right conspiracy groups, and the country of Russia.

Next time, those assaulting the Capitol will have much more information than they did the last time.

 

[Belk]

They have already done that for a very long time now.

Are you OK with that?

Now we all have more material available to us.

No, "we" do not.

So let's just see what comes of it.

No. I will continue to advocate for a government that does not play favorites depending on who is currently in charge.

 

[durangodawood]

Also, Tucker is not the right guy to filter out "information" for us. He's a pure polemicist who affirms in court that he himself should not be taken seriously.

 

[disciple Clint]

You mean like from the quote you yourself posted?

The House speaker said he plans to release the footage more widely after Carlson’s crew is done sifting through it

How widely is it distributed now, do we know, based on what?

 

[disciple Clint]

More widely later does not tell you how widely it has already been distributed now does it?
AND the multiple media sources are simply quoting the same original media release, it is the game the media has been playing, one source publishes an Anonymous source, and the rest of the media publishes the same report using that release as a source.

 

[Belk]

How widely is it distributed now, do we know, based on what?

Oh good grief man. Have you quiet finished trying to deny reality?

 

[essentialsaltes]

'It's Like a Cover-Up' - Lindell Promises to Drag McCarthy to SCOTUS Over Handling of Jan. 6 Footage​

My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell is vowing to wage a fight over the decision by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s exclusive deal to give footage from the Capitol incursion to Tucker Carlson at Fox News.

After asked why he was making this battle a priority, Lindell said it was a matter of both access and principle.

“Well, because number one, Fox is going to sift through it and only put out what they want."

--

Even clocks with erratically spinning hands are occasionally right.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm trying to imagine the outrage from Republicans if Nancy Pelosi had given this type of exclusive access to MSNBC. I have the feeling we never would have heard the end of it.

Go back and read all those CNN articles detailing insider information from the Trump raids.

Notice they come from "a source close to the investigation".

Democrats already do this. It's not news. McCarthy gave some footage to Fox News....so what? You can literally tour the Capitol. I don't see what secret security information is going to be revealed.