Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
“A senior GOP aide with knowledge of the process of releasing the footage said that there was coordination with Capitol Police.And Tucker told you this?
“A senior GOP aide with knowledge of the process of releasing the footage said that there was coordination with Capitol Police.
The Capitol Police gave a list of what would be considered security sensitive, the aide said.
When Carlson’s team picked out the clips to air, only one of those – the clip with the door – was considered to be security sensitive based on that list, and then given to the Capitol Police to review. “
abcnews.go.com
He sent the questionable video to them for review. And certain pictures that posed a security risk were taken out.So, they did not approve of what he put on his show or the story he is trying to tell with it. All they did was say "these videos show security sensitive information, please don't use them".
That is a very different story than you were trying to push with your first post on this.
The Capital Police also commented on Tucker's show...
Chief Thomas Manger sent an internal memo to U.S. Capitol Police on Tuesday saying the commentary on Fox News host Tucker Carlson's program Monday night was "filled with offensive and misleading conclusions about the January 6 attack."
The memo, obtained by ABC News, said "the opinion program never reached out to the Department to provide accurate context."
"The program conveniently cherry-picked from the calmer moments of our 41,000 hours of video," Manger wrote. "The commentary fails to provide context about the chaos and violence that happened before or during the less tense moments."
Capitol Police chief slams Carlson's comments about Jan. 6 video as 'offensive and misleading' in internal memo
Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger said Fox News host Tucker Carlson's program was "filled with offensive and misleading conclusions" about Jan. 6.
Why didn’t Democrats want more video released over the past two years? Why did it take a shift in power to release more video?Yes, I have said this 100 times yesterday.
Why didn’t Democrats want more video released over the past two years? Why did it take a shift in power to release more video?
The Republicans should have just released as much video as possible.Because the Dems are just a shitty as the Repubs. Both had/have the power to release them all, and until they do both are in the same boat.
The Republicans should have just released as much video as possible.
That's been done.Then post video of police escorting people into the Capitol...
Easily available online. But, you prefer to remain ignorant of the facts so any excuse is better than none to view them, right?Don't have cable.
Sooooo...the far left had control of the thousands of hours of CCV for years. Released a few hours and lied about it and now REPUBLICANS are being divisive!Just put it all on a public sever, or at least all that does not have "sensitive security footage" and let us watch if we want.
Instead they gave it to one of the most biased people on TV, ensuring that the divide would grow even wider.
Sooooo...the far left had control of the thousands of hours of CCV for years. Released a few hours and lied about it and now REPUBLICANS are being divisive!
Got it!
I watched the hearings.Easily available online. But, you prefer to remain ignorant of the facts so any excuse is better than none to view them, right?
Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats hired a CBS TV producer to air the fiasco.I watched the hearings.
I listened to the sworn testimony.
You watched 25 minutes of TuckTuck curated crap.
I've already answered this for you.No, the left is as well. I have said 100 times they should have released it. They are both the same in this.
Let me ask you this, if the left had given it to Maddow, would you trust it as much as you do with Tucker?
Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats hired a CBS TV producer to air the fiasco.
Nancy selected the Republicans she would allow on the committee. If you swallowed what you were being fed, I really feel sorry for you
Demanding to be ignorant must be an awkward way to go through life.
I've already answered this for you.
IF Republicans had been in charge and had only shown peaceful segments of the riot for two years. Then Maddow came out two years later proving what the Republicans had shown was fake, yes, I would have believed my eyes.
I'm sorry that is beyond your capability.
Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats hired a CBS TV producer to air the fiasco.
Nancy selected the Republicans she would allow on the committee. If you swallowed what you were being fed, I really feel sorry for you. Demanding to be ignorant must be an awkward way to go through life.
What it actually was was "highly effective" and a brilliant pre-emptive strike against "the Year of Revenge Hearings"...pulled the rug right out from under them.All true. It was nothing but political kabuki theater
You might think about this comment when you blindly trust people like Tucker. His job is not to inform you.
What it actually was was "highly effective" and a brilliant pre-emptive strike against "the Year of Revenge Hearings"...pulled the rug right out from under them.
Ask Gym Jordan at the moment.
The reason it succeeded was exactly because it WASN'T the kabuki theater we normally associate with this art form.
The evidence and testimony were so compelling, the commission members could play it perfectly straight and just let it roll.
Name the person denied the opportunity to speak.It was a bull shit one side of the story affair. If both sides are not given equal time to respond it is not a hearing, it is just a waste of time
