Chief Twit

[DefTrap]

Personally, I can't really conceive how much effort it must've taken to avoid seeing that,

That.
It's taken years to find footage and edit together a story that sort of fits this really unlikely sequence of events and conspiracy.

[irie]

The whole thing stinks and if you can't see that, then you're the one who is deluded, not me.

Is it possible that you are wrong and therefore yourself deluded?

[Screwdriver]

This is why identity politics is being shoved down our throats when the vast majority of normal folk could not care less if some bloke wants to wear a dress or how dark your skin is. But dare to speak out against the narrativ or just accidentally say the wrong word and you can be branded "extreme right wing". "racist", "homophobic", "transphobic" and therefore a "terrorist". An authoritarian state can then come down on you like a ton of bricks.

Elon Musk is one of very few individuals with any clout who can do anything to stop it. If this nonsense is not stopped, were are heading straight into the world of "1984". It might even already be too late.

I don't make that connection mate, I just see political groups that get funded by people with more money than understanding, and they manage to influence media. I don't see a cohesive master-government or illuminati type group running things.

It also doesn't worry me too much, these people spouting pseudo-Marxist ideology or calling people Nazis rarely understand what they're saying, they're the exact mirror image of the divvies guarding statues in the other political groups and they don't worry me, I stride over these people like ants.

It vexes me that ordinary working people are suffering because of politics, but I can't change it, perhaps it's even human nature, so what to do.

It's me clutching at straws trying to work out why so much time, effort and money is being spent trying to persuade me that men can be women, George Floyd was a hero and all the other patent nonsense being rammed down our throats. When was the last time "woman of the year" was a real woman??

The propaganda surrounding Jan 6th is understandable. One side wants to paint the other in the darkest light possible, that is of course human nature.

So I **think** the obsession with identity politics is so that transgressions can be weaponised. Effectively redefine what terrorism is so that you can brand the competition (or anyone you so choose from the general populace) a "terrorist" and apply whatever penalties may apply. The other aspect of identity politics is "divide and conquer". Keep the population battling among themselves so that they are distracted from seeing what these politicians are really doing (lining their own pockets mostly) and do not unite to form a cohesive opposition.

For example, our hero QAnon Shamen was charged under domestic terrorism laws, all of the potentially exculpatory evidence from cctv footage was withheld (illegally even in America where they have laws on disclosure) and pleaded guilty under those circumstances.

I am not suggesting they were anything other than a mob illegally storming a building but they still deserve due process under the law, not the politically motivated sham exclusively reserved to punish Trump supporters. Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson have stuck their heads above the parapet to loudly expose the unfairness (and illegality) of the state persecution of those rioters. They may have to pay for that...

[Slenver]

For example, our hero QAnon Shamen was charged under domestic terrorism laws

No he wasn't

all of the potentially exculpatory evidence from cctv footage was withheld

No it wasn't

And pleaded guilty under those circumstances.

No he didn't

This is just the response to one sentence, because there's not the time to correct the torrent of bullshit in your posts. Why do you do this? Can't you use google and just prefer to copy/paste from far-right 'news' websites?

[Screwdriver]

For example, our hero QAnon Shamen was charged under domestic terrorism laws

No he wasn't

all of the potentially exculpatory evidence from cctv footage was withheld

No it wasn't

And pleaded guilty under those circumstances.

No he didn't

This is just the response to one sentence, because there's not the time to correct the torrent of bullshit in your posts. Why do you do this? Can't you use google and just prefer to copy/paste from far-right 'news' websites?

Obstruction of proceedings from here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505

"Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both."

All of the cctv footage was withheld until the Democrats lost control of the house and 40,000 hours were released. They were released recently, more than a year after Jake Angeli pleaded guilty, despite his lawyer requesting disclosure.

Is this another example of you misunderstanding tense? One thing happening before another hence it "was withheld". What evidence do you have to suggest all of this footage was actually available to these defendants before or during the trial?

[Slenver]

Obstruction of proceedings from here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505

"Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both."

So? He was imprisoned for 3.5 years. I've not followed his case but there's no mention of 'domestic terrorism' in the attorney files and your quote that indicates it would need domestic terrorism to be more than 5 years doesn't appear to come into it. Pretty sure that 3.5 is less than 5.

All of the cctv footage was withheld until the Democrats lost control of the house and 40,000 hours were released. They were released recently, more than a year after Jake Angeli pleaded guilty, despite his lawyer requesting disclosure.

ALL of the CCTV footage was withheld?? On what are you basing this on exactly? What's all the footage that I've seen over the last few years then? What about all the footage that shows each of his charges being corroborated that even I've seen over the last few years? Genuinely struggle to see whatever point it is you're trying to make.

Is this another example of you misunderstanding tense?

Misunderstanding dense, I think.

[Screwdriver]

We can agree to disagree. Naturally I am aware of the point you raise regarding the link I posted, however, the trial was conducted under these auspices: https://www.congress.gov/event/117th-co ... 65965/text

You say the trail was fair an not influenced by these newfound domestic terrorism charges, I say it was not fair and was prosecuted as domestic terrorism. I accept my statement is not technically correct but like the current US administration, I'm not going to let pesky facts get in the way of my opinions.

Pretty sure that 3.5 is less than 5.

Indeed but the actual premise is "not more than 5 years" and I am pretty sure 3.5 is not more than 5.

I am basing my comment that all of the footage was withheld after seeing the interview with the lawyer for the accused and the comments made by Elon Musk which corroborate that statement. Clearly there is also a shit ton of evidence from recent news articles which admit this footage has only just been released.

Oh, I know dense when I see it but there's really no need to go down that road. Can we keep this on topic?

[Slenver]

I am basing my comment that all of the footage was withheld after seeing the interview with the lawyer for the accused and the comments made by Elon Musk which corroborate that statement. Clearly there is also a shit ton of evidence from recent news articles which admit this footage has only just been released.

My point here is that there is clearly a vast amount of footage. A large pile was leaked to Fox recently, for spurious political reasons, but from what I've seen, this was the uninteresting stuff. Obviously Fox had to make a big deal and spin some bizarre narrative along the lines that the boring, non-violent bits somehow 'proved' the whole thing was boring and non-violent, and that we should all erase the violent stuff we've already seen, which even the more normal Republicans said was dangerous rhetoric.

But, none of this really affects your specific example of Chansley, who was charged and jailed for doing all the things that everyone saw in the more interesting portions of footage which everyone saw at the time and during his trial. Whether the dull stuff was 'kept secret' or just not publicised, isn't really that material. It doesn't in any way negate the actions he was tried for.

It's very much like someone being sent down for burgling a house on the basis of clear CCTV footage. 2 years later, someone produces footage of the guy walking casually down the street on the way to the crime and tries to frame this as sensational withheld footage that somehow affects the sentence. It doesn't, it's just vaguely interesting without being in any way pertinent, and just designed to whip up those with an agenda that didn't think he should've been convicted in the first place, for whatever personal reaons.

[Screwdriver]

The footage was withheld despite numerous attempts to have it released. Why?

It was not "leaked" to Fox. Due to Nasty Pelosi losing her control of the senate, the new Republican speaker allowed this footage to be made public. Yes they deliberately gave the footage to Fox because that is currently the only mainstream media channel which is not an extreme left wing mouthpiece for the Democrat party.

Yes it was boring. The most boring violent insurrection ever. That is the entire point here, it really shows the truth about what actually happened inside the building. For the last two years all we have heard is hyperbole from those with a vested interest in claiming it was a LOT more violent than it actually was.

Yes there is one 1 second clip of QAnaon Shamen howling inside the senate (he is a registered nut job incidentally, hard to tell but the costume is a big clue). All that clip proves is that the powers that be did have access to the footage and that is all they could find that didn't look like a coach trip tour of the capital building.

No. There wasn't even any burglary so far as I am aware. Very little damage (compared to what BLM/Antifa did a few years prior) and a better "analogy" would be someone sent down for "leading" a violent insurrection, being prosecuted for running rampage through a building and years later discovering he was being escorted quietly by officers before thanking them for letting them in.

[DefTrap]

Obviously outnumbered plod tried to make a violent situation somewhat less.

[Horse]

All of the cctv footage was withheld until the Democrats lost control of the house and 40,000 hours were released.

Serious question: 40,000 hours of CCTV recording?

Just for easier math, if the incident lasted 10 hours, that's 4,000 cameras. That doesn't sound feasible.

[Mr. Dazzle]

They probably released a couple of days worth to be fair...or even just a 24hr block. Plus, it's a pretty big (set of) buildings!

It has a secret underground train too. So secret that it's on YouTube and everyone uses it to get into the office

[DefTrap]

Serious question: 40,000 hours of CCTV recording?

Just for easier math, if the incident lasted 10 hours, that's 4,000 cameras. That doesn't sound feasible.

Given what we know about Fox blatantly making up stories about vote-rigging, this feels like they're doubling down on the horseshit.

[Horse]

They probably released a couple of days worth to be fair...or even just a 24hr block. Plus, it's a pretty big (set of) buildings!

Even in 24hr blocks, thats 1,600+ cameras!

[Mr. Dazzle]

Google reckons it's got >500 rooms though, plus of course you've got all the corridors and outer grounds etc. As I said, there's also another set of tacked on offices a few hundred metres down the street with a link tunnel.

So I wouldn't immediately cry bullshit on the number is all I'm saying.

[crust]

Come on Screwd, you've worked in the media, you don't think that Tucker Carlson and Fox news might have edited the 40,000 hours of footage (that only he has had access to) to show his point of view and has conveniently ignored the violence?

Or is that an alternative conspiracy thoery?

Why not release the footage to all the news agencies?

Yes, considering the piece is about 5 minutes long, I do have a sneaking suspicion they may have left a bit out of the 40,000 hours the Biden has been hiding all these years. I don't know why or even if Fox are hanging onto it. I assume some sort of deal has been made. It was only released since the Democratic part lost control of the house. Until now it has been withheld for, err, for why I wonder...

Anyhow, which violence have they left out? Genuine question. Was there any actual violence during this protest?

I assume there will be plenty of clips to choose from, I mean the MSM went on and on about it for years. All I have seen is plenty of dramatic overly colour corrected footage of tear gas (fired by the state police), some carefully chosen clips of people running complete with shaky footage and err, I think someone threw a fire extinguisher (or maybe they were just swinging it??). In all honesty, I really haven't seen anything I would consider violence.

Please though, if anyone is tempted to just dismiss my alleged ignorance with "omg open your eyes" or "you won't listen anyway" etc. please do me a favour and show me a clip so I can see what I must have missed.

Google "Jan 6th violence" and fill your boots, there's numerous videos from different sources. Did you not watch any news when it was occuring?

[demographic]

Jan the 6th violence?
I didn't see any.

[Horse]

Google reckons it's got >500 rooms though, plus of course you've got all the corridors and outer grounds etc. As I said, there's also another set of tacked on offices a few hundred metres down the street with a link tunnel.

So I wouldn't immediately cry bullshit on the number is all I'm saying.

To be fair, I queried it rather than immediately dissing it. A bit of Googling finds:

The Command Center has access to roughly 1,800 cameras

So 1,660 cameras, 24 hours recording each.

Wikipedia timeline for attack is 12.30 - 20.00, a load of irrelevant video provided, let alone 24 hrs recordings from cameras in areas where nothing happened.

[Screwdriver]

Google "Jan 6th violence" and fill your boots, there's numerous videos from different sources. Did you not watch any news when it was occuring?

OK fuck it. I can't bleive you're making me do this but I will try. I expect to get through 3-4 of the "top ten" before the commentary bias sends me off the rails..



Telegraph: "New footage reveals how violent Capitol rioters overwhelmed police."

Starts with a view from behind police lines. Police are spraying the crowd with tear gas/mace (?) as the crowd surges to the barrier. They push through the standard freestanding bariers. No violence yet (except from the police!)

A traffic cone is thrown through the air and lands among the same crowd that threw it.

The crowd pours through an open door, a window is violently smashed. Wide angle shot of a crowd filling up the entrance hall, clearly the sound track has been edited with clip from outside where they had been chanting.

Outside and back to the same shot of the same cameraman (police bodycam?) where an officer has his hands on another and appears to push him over, or the guy trips. It's dramatic wobble vision but yes, a police officer falls over.

Police officer is smashing the shit out of random crowd member who violently grabs his baton.

Next shot, more police batons being used to control the crowd. I **think** some batons are beng thrown back at the police, presumably those having been wrenched out of their hands and people realising they don't want to be caught carrying them into the building. This is the first real violence from the crowd in the video yet.

Oh. Fuck. That was it....

Next hit:



PBS: Newshour

Starts with a warning about violence (this should be good then! )


Shots of the crowd "marching. Shot of Trump. More crowd movement towards the senate.

Oh and we're back to the same shot behind the police line, police are spraying some gas into the crowd. Same shot of the barriers being pushed aside. Back to wobble cam behind police lines (nothing happens).

Bloke smashes a window with a stolen police shield. Tight next to an open door. Not the smartest bunch I give you, plus that is the very first violent incident from the crowd (in this video).

Same shot of police officer smacking the shit out of a crowd member who violently grabs it, presumably to stop said officer from bashing the shit out of him. "resisting arrest" no doubt...

Officer backs away and violently trips over a curb.

Roller shutter door is opened and the first new footage (to me) of actual criminal violence. Bin gets thrown at <someone inside> another chap sprays foam (?). That group looks like proper thugs. We don't see what happens next or even where that footage is from??

More generic crowd shots. Different shot of the same officer falling over but from a falling over view. He is wrestling with a man grabbing the baton which is being aimed at his head.

Violent shot finally: someone is stabbing at something with a crutch! Looks like he's trying to get through a barrage of police batons. Indefensible, criminal behaviour yes. A violent insurrection comparable to the civil war??

Video 3 on my list:

"The big lie" regarding the manipulation fo the voting process. PBS Newshour

Breaking through barricades (well, they pushed them aside).

"They assaulted police" Jump cut to almost a flash frame of the incident where an officer falls over when trying to smack that bloke over the head (that part is edited out, we just see him fall).

Some discussion about Anitfa infiltrators running a false flag operation. There definitely were embedded FBI officers in the crowd, many of whom were caught trying to incite the crowd to chants of "Fed, Fed. Fed but obviously not in this video!

The rest of the video is just people talking about how bad it was.

In which case I reckon I can do one more...

Doh! PBH Newshour again! Well I can't start 'editing' my search results:

Shot of a crowd, barriers being pushed over.

We're behind police lines again No! Wait a minute, that's a crowd member spraying into the police! We have a winner!

Same shot of window being smashed. The police/security inside are overwhelmed by weight of numbers. There is no real violence (other than that they should not be there!).

Cut to shot of a large group of well aremd officers hiding in a basement. For all I can tell, it looks like someone dropped a tear gas canister.

An officer gets trapped in a door (that is fucking horrific) due to the pressure of the crowd. The whole crowd are therefore guilty in my book.

Someone in the crowd shouting "hang Mike Pence". Gallows are set up. I wouldn't hang a salami off the construction but its a bit weird some people turned up with the woodwork! That is violent yes. Though no one was hanged. (Pence famously ratified the election results despite the obvious signs the counting had been rigged.)

Well that was it. That's all the violence from the first for videos. If there's any more, I'm all ears.

The violence does not correspond to the rhetoric. QAnon Shamen is strangely absent form this first batch. I'm sure someone will be along to show me where the real violence is. Or maybe I missed something in the above precis? Meanwhile, I still remain skeptical.

[ZRX61]

I don't make that connection mate, I just see political groups that get funded by people with more money than understanding, and they manage to influence media. I don't see a cohesive master-government or illuminati type group running things.

It also doesn't worry me too much, these people spouting pseudo-Marxist ideology or calling people Nazis rarely understand what they're saying, they're the exact mirror image of the divvies guarding statues in the other political groups and they don't worry me, I stride over these people like ants.

It vexes me that ordinary working people are suffering because of politics, but I can't change it, perhaps it's even human nature, so what to do.

You'll like this: In California, environmental groups whose sole purpose is to sue the California State Government, are funded by the California State Government. New groups spring up all the time after applying for a grant from the State & immediately start filing lawsuits.