Report: 26 FBI INFORMANTS in J6 protest, some entered the Capitol

[Rand]

That is the critical element of establishing Trump's complicity (at very least)

You can't aknowledge that obvious point because of your partisan bindings, no other reason.

I haven't acknowledged or denied. Simply stating facts. There is no actual evidence that Trump incited, only perspectives based on statements, comments and perceptions of what he meant, of which statements could be taken multiple ways.

And still, you haven't mentioned the later released Capitol Bldg footage that contradicts the narrative. Why is that?

 

[Political-Junkie]

Now that the case has run the Liberal gauntlet of the NY court system, it seems likely that it will be reversed based on several factors.

E. Jean is quite the nut, and in most venues would be considered a very unreliable Plaintiff/witness.

As can be discerned from this interview, she certainly doesn't act like a victim of sexual abuse.

The Supreme Court rules on the merit of the lower court, not the mental heath of the plaintiff. Since no lower court ruled on that, the Supreme Court won't. Also, the SCOTUS rules on the appeals presented to them. They don't just invent their own reasons to reverse a lower court, and the question E. Jean Carroll's mental health is not among Trump's appeals.

I don't mean to be insulting, but your view on what the function is of the Supreme Court is very naive.

 

[Political-Junkie]

I think the point is to demonstrate the hypocrisy and selective outrage of the Left.

That might be the intent, but playing with that double-edged sword does come with consequences.

 

[Rand]

No one was let into the Capitol from outside by police. That stems from a corridor where protesters were already inside and a cop held the inside door open for them. No cops held the outside door open for them.

Here's another showing Cap Cops leading Qshaman around, letting him into chambers.

 

[AntonToo]

I haven't acknowledged or denied. Simply stating facts. There is no actual evidence that Trump incited, only perspectives based on statements, comments and perceptions of what he meant, of which statements could be taken multiple ways.

Yes absolutely you are denying that Trump's refusal to condemn that violent attack, refusal to tell his supporters to stop the break in as it was happening, clearly shows his complicity. Instead, you post wishy-washy bullshit about how it is all just a matter of perspective.

So you are down to pathetic denials of denial now.

I really don't get how you Trumpy fools can post this garbage and keep a straight face when you look in the mirror. I guess it takes certian ammount of intelligence to feel shame.

 

[Lesh]

1 Cop does not make a riot.

You are insane

 

[Rand]

The Supreme Court rules on the merit of the lower court, not the mental heath of the plaintiff. Since no lower court ruled on that, the Supreme Court won't. Also, the SCOTUS rules on the appeals presented to them. They don't just invent their own reasons to reverse a lower court, and the question E. Jean Carroll's mental health is not among Trump's appeals.

I don't mean to be insulting, but your view on what the function is of the Supreme Court is very naive.

I didn't say that E Jean's mental status was a factor in the appeal.

 

[Robert W]

That is the critical element establishing Trump's complicity with J6 violence, and thats aside from the fact that he pardoned all of these cop beaters as soon as he got back into power.

You can't aknowledge that obvious point because you are emotionally invested in blatant denials, not sober assessment.

If you visited the capitol, as those did on J6, and you heard flash bangs back of you and cops shooting bullets at visitors, would you hang around or get pretty excited? Trump was 2 miles away. Could not control what the cops did to the visitors.
The reason the crowd got excited was the cops fired flash bangs and shot innocent visitors with rubber bullets.

Executive Summary

The available reporting and Department of Justice updates show that a clear majority of January 6 defendants who pleaded guilty were convicted of misdemeanor offenses, while a substantial minority pleaded or were charged with felony counts; published tallies vary by date and scope but cluster around roughly one-third felony pleas and two-thirds misdemeanor pleas among resolved cases. Different snapshots — early DOJ tallies, one-year and multi-year reviews, and press analyses — use different denominators (arrests, charges filed, and guilty pleas), producing divergent headline numbers that require careful comparison to reconcile <a href="The High-Water Mark of the Jan. 6 Prosecutions" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">[1]</a> <a href="A Demographic and Legal Profile of January 6 Prosecutions" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">[2]</a> <a href="January 6 arrests by Biden-Harris DOJ soared in 2024 despite looming election | Blaze Media" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">[3]</a>. This analysis extracts the key claims, cites the most recent available figures in the packet, and explains why counts differ based on timing, case status, and charge definitions.

 

[Robert W]

You are insane

Quoting Lesh, "you lying piece of shit."

 

[Rand]

Yes absolutely you are denying that Trump's refusal to condemn that violent attack, refusal to tell his supporters to stop the break in as it was happening, clearly shows his complicity. Instead, you post wishy-washy bullshit about how it is all just a matter of perspective.

So you are down to pathetic denials of denial now.

I really don't get how you Trumpy fools can post this garbage and keep a straight face when you look in the mirror.

False. I'll add that emotionally ruled diatribes don't contribute to the discussion, nor give an appearance of objectivity, nor make the point you hope it does.

 

[Lesh]

Quoting Lesh, "you lying piece of shit."

I have documented every claim I made

**** off

 

[AntonToo]

False.

If you are saying that you are not denying Trump's complicity with J6er break in into Capitol then go ahead and clearly admit that.

Let's go bub - time to stop the bs and put up.

 

[Political-Junkie]

McCarthy and Trump have a history of problems. The point being that here again, it's all subject to opinion and interpretation. Not a smoking gun. Trump denies he said it. Even the NBC commentator said that McCarthy was "making sure that his Speakership ambitions are secure" (around 3:30).

There were tens of thousands of hours of Cap Bldg security footage. The footage House Democrats released to the media was selective and fit the narrative they desired. The footage later released by force contradicted the narrative. Yes, the riots we see looping on Lib media wee accurate, but were selected based on how they could profit the anti-Trump narrative.

Here is some of that footage. Yes, it's Tucker, but the footage speaks for itself. Besides, since Tucker revolted against Trump and Maga, it shouldn't present the problem for Liberals it might have in the past.

Democrat media glossed over it, claiming it 'sugarcoated' the event. Wrong. It merely presents the realities the Democrats tried to keep hidden, as it didn't serve their objectives and Narrative.

First, a link to the entire Jan 6 security cam archive:

CHA Subcommittee Reading Room

U.S. House of Representatives Committee on House Administration

cha.house.gov

Please watch the below in entirety. Ignore the source and focus on the video and facts.

Again, I'm not denying that some Trump supporters rioted and were subject to the full extent of the law.

But that's not the whole story by a long shot.

Tucker's selective clips don't erase Democrats' selective clips. All Tucker did was try to make it appear like January 6th was no big deal. His goal, supported by some others, is to bring us to where we are today, which is with many on the right denying what actually happened that day and why it happened that day. Both, insanely egregious. Even worse, now as a result of this revisionism, we see out right lies, persistent even when destroyed with the truth. Lies like the FBI instigated it or Antifa instigated it, it was no big deal, Trump offered 10K troops to Pelosi but she turned him down, or Ashli Babbit and Roseland Boyland were murdered by police, among many other lies.

 

[Political-Junkie]

An opinion you're entitled to, but doesn't constitute evidence.

The protesters speak for me.

 

[Political-Junkie]

1 Cop does not make a riot.

True, it's the hundreds of people outside that tunnel, crushing him as they tried forcing there way in, that makes a riot.

 

[WEATHER53]

Protest vigorously but peacefully was exactly what he said. They did until they heard the ruckus inside instigated by the Pelosi pksbtsv

The lib nit wits can’t explain how things went quietly for almost two hours, then people were let in and the doors closed, then the orchestrated ruckus was started inside, they heard it and tried to get in.

 

[Rand]

If you are saying that you are not denying Trump's complicity with J6er break in into Capitol then go ahead and clearly admit that.

I haven't said one way or the other, merely that the Left's "evidence" is vague and could be taken either way. What I will say is that I don't believe it, but I haven't stated it as a fact.

Let's go bub - time to stop the bs and put up.

I hope the above will clarify my stance. However, you do seem to be willfully ignoring any mention the discrepancy in the Lib media video loops of J6 and the contradicting footage later released.

 

[Political-Junkie]

I'm not blaming him.

That's exactly my point. The HSA reports to the House Speaker, that's 1 vote. The SSA reports to the Senate Majority Leader, that's also 1 vote. So why do you blame one but not the other. Both sides carry equal weight.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Commies love that the FBI helped the breach with agent provocateurs.

 

[Delldude]

I have documented every claim I made

**** off

Just in this thread.....