• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

January 6th, Just What Was It?

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
The Jan 6, committee never showed the video that Tucker Carlson is showing. Would a fair trial expect that? The Democrats cherry picked to fit their own narrative, just as the Democrats, now accuse Tucker of cherry picking to fit his narrative. How else can you explain never before seen footage, that did not 100% support Democrat talking points?

Let it play out, instead of running interference, unless there is something sinister to hide. If there is something to hide Democrats should keep running inference and sewing discord; New Lies to cover old lies worked after the Russian Collusion Coup was debunked. Not a single Democrat was jail or was shot in a firing squad for their failed Coup against a sitting President.

Honest people who make mistakes, might be embarrass and humbled, but they will take responsibility, and even apologize. Liars will not do that, if they wish to continue down the path of lying and running self serving scams. They will deny, accuse and double down on even more lying. How are the Democrats reacting? I do not see the natural reaction of honest people who made mistakes.

The approach of the Democrats is all about accusing the messenger, but not addressing the videos. This is called a distraction. Has anyone heard any Democrat directly refute any of the videos as tampered or edited? The answer is no. Their strategy is same as what they used for the Coup, all about attack the messenger. This is a tell for liars. They try to avoid talking about their lies and omission of facts, by avoiding direct discussion of the videos. They know nobody will buy the lies of someone who lies to their face, while the audience sees the opposite on hard video. They did the same thing with the Russian collusion coup; Liar 1.0 is never tell the truth, never apologize, and never talk about the evidence that you lied.

The fear of those who conspired to defraud the American people, is the unseen video now opens many to civil law suits. Tucker, in one of his monologues, I read yesterday, stated that the Lawyers for Q'Anon never saw the footage of him being escorted around the Capital, and therefore they could not use that footage at his trial for his defense. Whoops! Any reasonable Juror in a Civil trial, will have to assume he railroaded to fit the narrative. They did the same thing to General Flynn, as a prop, to make the lie look more convincing. General Flynn is now suing for $50M to cover his lost opportunity costs.

Can you say civil suits against a wide range of con artists? Once outside lawyers smell money, they will come out like cockroaches at night. That one Q'Anon trial and the General Flynn Trial can also bring dozens of liars to the stand; perjury traps, so they have to admit. Do pathological liars melt or explode if they have to tell the truth or go to jail? We will see. Biden can pardon all the crooks of crimes, but Civil Courts can go after their ill gotten nest eggs.

One of the former FOX new contributors; Megan Kelly made a comment how FOX is buffering itself from Tucker, while letting him do his thing. They have a law suit against them connected to the Voting Machine Company. I suspect the Left is making a deal; drop the suit, in exchange for them suppressing the video. The Left seems very desperate. The deal cannot look too obvious; sudden shut down, or else everyone will know the fix was in. Fox is not running as much coverage as one would expect based on the Left wing propaganda machine's current liar defense. Tucker is still given freedom on his program, which could explain the targeted get the messenger attack.

Another point Tucker made was during the Capital Riot, is that 114 officers were injured, which he agreed was a lot of injuries. He then pointed out in that during the Washington Riots in the Summer of 2020, the insurrection attempt on the White House, where the insurrectionists burned down an Historical Church, 180 officers were injured. That was worse on paper in terms of injuries and property damage, yet nobody went to jail, and there was no insurrection tribunal. It is strange who we have two similar protests, but two different results from the Left.

Trump, unlike Pelosi, took the advice of security and was prepared. The White House was protected. Pelosi could have also been prepared, and kept the riot outside the Capital, since she had several days of notice, and the offer of extra security including National Guard. Why did she make it easier for the worse case scenario, then did Trump? What these two similar and opposites result riots, have in common, is they both benefited Democrats and only the Right was accused. The could not happen if honest people were inn charge. It needs the special talents of con artists and liars.

It is important to let the Accused have its day, since the Democrat had two years to running their biased scam. Now it is time for the Defense to confront those who lied by the omission of facts. I have heard the Fascist word used. In my experience the best Fascists tend to use the same tactics as we now see from the Democrats, and they get the same results as when the American Democrats rig the game. Fascist that cannot rig the game are not fit for the title; Fascists. They are too honest and do not have al the extra tools that liars can bring to the game.

Watch and see if any Democrats directly attack the videos or whether liars avoid truth like vampires avoid holy water.
 
Last edited:

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
You bought into a carefully crafted narrative and are now all dramaqueenery about opposing views. I'm still here and haven't gone anywhere.

"Liars are touchy to the point of hysteria"


Literally, you have said nothing. That's all you ever seem to do - repeat Fox news talking points with no thought of your own, no consideration for reality, and no ability to address an issue put before you without running for the hills.

Let's make this simple: without using buzzwords, without repeating talking points from proven grifters like Tucker Carlson, without dedicating your entire being to whataboutism, can you definitively state - right now - that January 6th was a direct attack on democracy perpetrated by the former President and supported by still-sitting members of the Republican party?
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Literally, you have said nothing. That's all you ever seem to do - repeat Fox news talking points with no thought of your own, no consideration for reality, and no ability to address an issue put before you without running for the hills.

Let's make this simple: without using buzzwords, without repeating talking points from proven grifters like Tucker Carlson, without dedicating your entire being to whataboutism, can you definitively state - right now - that January 6th was a direct attack on democracy perpetrated by the former President and supported by still-sitting members of the Republican party?
No, I don't. I see Jan 6 as a riot by angry (misguided) citizens that damaged our capitol building and caused injury to law enforcement. I've said Trump and the perps are responsible regardless of the strange goings on inside the Capital building once breached.

I believe hysterical members of the Left really, really, really want it to be an attempted insurrection for obvious political reasons. That desire is an eager, opportunistic whataboutism on the part of the Left who have been doing much the same thing for years to advance its own agenda.

I think you are feigning outrage.
 
Last edited:

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Of course. But in a parallel universe, let's say if the army and all law enforcement had backed the crowd, I doubt that the certification would have taken place.
Because the Congress is unarmed. The army is armed.

Well, yeah, if the military had backed them, then it would have been a military coup.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Well, yeah, if the military had backed them, then it would have been a military coup.
That's the issue, though: they were there just to demonstrate peacefully. Because they were unarmed.
They cannot blame an entire crowd of peaceful people for the misdemeanor of few people.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
That's the issue, though: they were there just to demonstrate peacefully. Because they were unarmed.
They cannot blame an entire crowd of peaceful people for the misdemeanor of few people.

I don't think they blamed the entire crowd. Those who were just there and didn't break any laws were not charged with anything. From what I can tell, each case was considered individually. Some got lighter sentences than others. I recall some criticisms where they thought the sentences were too harsh and that they were being mistreated in jail. I recall seeing where Chansley complained because he asked for organic food, and they wouldn't give him any.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I don't think they blamed the entire crowd. Those who were just there and didn't break any laws were not charged with anything. From what I can tell, each case was considered individually. Some got lighter sentences than others. I recall some criticisms where they thought the sentences were too harsh and that they were being mistreated in jail. I recall seeing where Chansley complained because he asked for organic food, and they wouldn't give him any.
I watched an interview with Joe Hoft. He disclosed terrifying details about the Jan 6th.
It turns out that both female casualties had done nothing wrong.
 
Last edited:

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
No, I don't. I see Jan 6 as a riot by angry (misguided) citizens that damaged our capitol building and caused injury to law enforcement. I've said Trump and the perps are responsible regardless of the strange goings on inside the Capital building once breached.
So you see no connection whatsoever with the fact that the rioters entered the Capitol building on the specific date of the official counting of the electoral college ballots, after being specifically instructed that the counting of the ballots was false? To you, it was just a random angry mob with no intentions whatsoever towards subverting the democratic process?

I believe hysterical members of the Left really, really, really want it to be an attempted insurrection for obvious political reasons. That desire is an eager, opportunistic whataboutism on the part of the Left who have been doing much the same thing for years to advance its own agenda.
The fact that you would not call it such shows that you do not care about democracy.

I think you are feigning outrage.
This is hilarious coming from someone who goes on and on about the BLM riots. Since you clearly care very little about this one, it's very telling that you want to ignore it and put all the focus on others.

This was an attempt by a sitting president to deliberately halt the democratic process that would have removed him from power. To characterize this as anything less is not just dishonest, it's delusional.
 

dybmh

ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
The approach of the Democrats is all about accusing the messenger, but not addressing the videos.
I do believe the videos have been addressed.
  1. The capitol police were de-escalating due to being extremely outnumbered
  2. They were checking the doors to confirm they are locked preventing access to sensitive areas
  3. The individual in the video has confessed and has been convicted of entering the building through a door which was broken by the protesters
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
So you see no connection whatsoever with the fact that the rioters entered the Capitol building on the specific date of the official counting of the electoral college ballots, after being specifically instructed that the counting of the ballots was false? To you, it was just a random angry mob with no intentions whatsoever towards subverting the democratic process?


The fact that you would not call it such shows that you do not care about democracy.


This is hilarious coming from someone who goes on and on about the BLM riots. Since you clearly care very little about this one, it's very telling that you want to ignore it and put all the focus on others.

This was an attempt by a sitting president to deliberately halt the democratic process that would have removed him from power. To characterize this as anything less is not just dishonest, it's delusional.
If the intent was to carry out a real insurrection then the operatives would have been armed and fired shots. The only shots fired were at an unarmed women named Ashli Babbitt.
imageedit_4_8211783482.jpg
E2ck0AtWEAAorJb.jpg
 
Last edited:

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
If the intent was to carry out a real insurrection then the operatives would have been armed and fired shots. The only shots fired were at an unarmed women named Ashli Babbitt. View attachment 72740View attachment 72741
This is the best you got?

Just ignore literally everything leading up to and resulting from the insurrection and just claim that, because it wasn't exactly stellarly arranged, it doesn't count as an insurrection?

And I also find it hilarious the way you make it sound like Ashli Babbit - a woman who was shot by security while TRYING TO BREAK INTO THE CAPITOL BUILDING DURING THE COUNTING OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES - as simply "shooting an unarmed woman". You know full well that in any other scenario you would not give someone breaking and entering into a building - much less a building that contains elected officials carrying out a vital democratic process - this kind of benefit of the doubt. But because it's inconvenient for you to admit that the right is responsible for a literal attack on democracy, suddenly everything that you claim you value is an irrelevancy.

This is all you can do. Ignore facts and narrativise.
 
Last edited:

Colt

Well-Known Member
This is the best you got?

Just ignore literally everything leading up to and resulting from the insurrection and just claim that, because it wasn't exactly stellarly arranged, it doesn't count as an insurrection?

And I also find it hilarious the way you make it sound like Ashli Babbit - a woman who was shot by security while TRYING TO BREAK INTO THE CAPITOL BUILDING DURING THE COUNTING OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES - as simply "shooting an unarmed woman". You know full well that in any other scenario you would not give someone breaking and entering into a building - much less a building that contains elected officials carrying out a vital democratic process.

This is all you can do. Ignore facts and narrativise.
You would have a point if we didn't have video of cops casually standing around, even leading protesters around inside the Capitol building.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
You would have a point if we didn't have video of cops casually standing around, even leading protesters around inside the Capitol building.
Firstly, we have plenty of footage of cops being beaten, chased and attacked by the protestors.

Secondly, it's completely irrelevant and it does absolutely nothing to my point.

Yet again, all you can do is ignore all facts inconvenient to you. And you had the gall to claim that MY outrage was selective. It's ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

Colt

Well-Known Member
Firstly, that's not true. We have plenty of footage of cops being beaten, chased and attacked by the protestors.

Secondly, it's completely irrelevant and it does absolutely nothing to my point.

Yet again, all you can do is ignore all facts inconvenient to you. And you had the gall to claim that MY outrage was selective. It's ridiculous.
Unarmed girl climbs through window and he shot her in the neck.

If there was such concern, then why weren't other protestors shot elsewhere??? Since she was white she was disposable.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Unarmed girl climbs through window and he shot her in the neck.
Again, ignoring facts and narrativizing.

She was breaking into a government building, screaming her head off, backed by hundreds of other aggressive protestors. Oh, and the building just so happened to contain dozens of elected representatives carrying out a vital democratic process.

This is pathetic. The fact that you ignore all of the above and characterize it as "an unarmed girl climbing through a window" proves that you are not honest in your examination of this event. By your logic, Osama Bin Laden was just an unarmed guy chilling at home when armed agents of the state tore in and killed him and his family.

If there was such concern, then why weren't other protestors shot elsewhere??? Since she was white she was disposable.
That is literally the most ridiculous thing you have said so far, and that is going somewhere.

And people like you love claiming that the LEFT engages in identity politics. It's crazy.

If this is the standard of debate I can expect from you, this was over before it started.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Again, ignoring facts and narrativizing.

She was breaking into a government building, screaming her head off, backed by hundreds of other aggressive protestors. Oh, and the building just so happened to contain dozens of elected representatives carrying out a vital democratic process.

This is pathetic. The fact that you ignore all of the above and characterize it as "an unarmed girl climbing through a window" proves that you are not honest in your examination of this event. By your logic, Osama Bin Laden was just an unarmed guy chilling at home when armed agents of the state tore in and killed him and his family.


That is literally the most ridiculous thing you have said so far, and that is going somewhere.

And people like you love claiming that the LEFT engages in identity politics. It's crazy.
Why weren't the many other protesters shot who were climbing into the building?
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Could be many reasons. De-escalation is a common tactic of American security policing.

In any case, your claim that it was because she was white is beyond parody.

Are you a joke account? Seriously.
If she was black then the cop would be in jail, malls all across America would have been looted then burned, national day of morning, defund capitol hill police, BLM owners would buy some more mansions, everyone would know her name, "SAY HER NAME"!!!!
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
If she was black then the cop would be in jail, malls all across America would have been looted then burned, national day of morning, defund capitol hill police, BLM owners would buy some more mansions, everyone would know her name, "SAY HER NAME"!!!!
And here you are, making up stuff again and trying to run away from the topic of discussion.

You're cute.

Also, you lose. Consider re-evaluating your positions in future.

And I'm not yet convinced you're not a joke account.
 
Top