1) There's simply no rebutting the incredible torrent of bullshit the right spouts. It would take forever and accomplish nothing because it's a lot easier to create bullshit that prove that it's false.Can you cite? I haven't seen any footage of these things. Nor have I seen any counter narratives by liberal media.
Furthermore, why aren't these douchbags Schumer and McConnel saying anything about how wrong this looks or how out of context it was taken? No counter narratives given I am aware of.
For what?
Can you cite? I haven't seen any footage of these things. Nor have I seen any counter narratives by liberal media.
Furthermore, why aren't these douchbags Schumer and McConnel saying anything about how wrong this looks or how out of context it was taken? No counter narratives given I am aware of.
For what?
For what?
For doing RVonse's work for him.
Can you cite? I haven't seen any footage of these things. Nor have I seen any counter narratives by liberal media.
Furthermore, why aren't these douchbags Schumer and McConnel saying anything about how wrong this looks or how out of context it was taken? No counter narratives given I am aware of.
Which kinda speaks volumes about RVonse's taste in media that he was completely unaware that Jan6 was an armed insurrection. Or that he is unaware McConnell slammed Carlson's bullshit lies about Jan6 almost immediately after it aired.
So you are differentiating between the ignorant and the dangerously ignorant? That's fair enough. Both are dangerous but only one is directed to produce more of the same. It's like that response in A Few Good Men when the colonel is asked if Private Santiago was in "grave" danger. The colonel responded, "Is there any other kind?"At this point the people defending the insurrectionists fall into two basic categories. The genuinely ignorant, who even if you showed them this video would insist that it was a "hit piece" by the "liberal media" and that everyone involved were "crisis actors" or "Antifa plants" or such....and the people who know exactly what happened but continue to lie about it to support their agenda/side.
For what?
Really. You'd have to be living in a bubble or a cave to have not seen that stuff already.
For what?
Really. You'd have to be living in a bubble or a cave to have not seen that stuff already.
Remember when security in the chamber had guns drawn at the people on the outside trying to get in? Yeah... nothing to see here. It was a peaceful protest. I bet one can count with the fingers on a single hand the number of times what happened below has happened.
Trump Social Truth post said:THE FAR & AWAY LEADING REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE AND FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WILL BE ARRESTED ON TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!
For what?
Really. You'd have to be living in a bubble or a cave to have not seen that stuff already.
Remember when security in the chamber had guns drawn at the people on the outside trying to get in? Yeah... nothing to see here. It was a peaceful protest. I bet one can count with the fingers on a single hand the number of times what happened below has happened.
You are still not reading what I actually wrote in OP. Where did I say Jan 6 was not a peaceful protest?
Seriously... the narrative as it exists is that January 6th was a violent protest that got people killed and was instigated by Trump and his entourage. So, when someone says "what actually occurred", what they are implying is there is an alternative more truthful identification to the actions that day. So enough of your double talk. You aren't fooling anyone. People died protesting in support of a guy who was trying to steal an election.. That is fucked up.RVonse OP (myu emphasis) said:As far as I know there is no counter narrative to this video, I've not heard anyone claim any of this footage is fake or doctored video. Yes, there are a lot of politicians who did not want FOX to release what actually occurred Jan 6 (Schumer and McConnel) but if anyone knows a source this footage was fiction I would appreciate citing it here.
For what?
For doing RVonse's work for him.
Can you cite? I haven't seen any footage of these things. Nor have I seen any counter narratives by liberal media.
Furthermore, why aren't these douchbags Schumer and McConnel saying anything about how wrong this looks or how out of context it was taken? No counter narratives given I am aware of.
Which kinda speaks volumes about RVonse's taste in media that he was completely unaware that Jan6 was an armed insurrection. Or that he is unaware McConnell slammed Carlson's bullshit lies about Jan6 almost immediately after it aired.
Oh, I'd hazard a guess that RVonse is not completely unaware. Just like Tucker Carlson is well aware of the fact that rioters breached the Capitol that day.
At this point the people defending the insurrectionists fall into two basic categories. The genuinely ignorant, who even if you showed them this video would insist that it was a "hit piece" by the "liberal media" and that everyone involved were "crisis actors" or "Antifa plants" or such....and the people who know exactly what happened but continue to lie about it to support their agenda/side.
Where the double talk? There were a LOT of innocent people caught up in the Jan 6 incident. It is very very conceivable to me (even at this point in the thread) that Jacob might have been innocent and falsely doing jail time. That's all I focused on in the OP.Seriously... the narrative as it exists is that January 6th was a violent protest that got people killed and was instigated by Trump and his entourage. So, when someone says "what actually occurred", what they are implying is there is an alternative more truthful identification to the actions that day. So enough of your double talk. You aren't fooling anyone. People died protesting in support of a guy who was trying to steal an election.. That is fucked up.
Zero innocent people were netted up. If one was in the Capitol Building, they committed a crime.Where the double talk? There were a LOT of innocent people caught up in the Jan 6 incident.Seriously... the narrative as it exists is that January 6th was a violent protest that got people killed and was instigated by Trump and his entourage. So, when someone says "what actually occurred", what they are implying is there is an alternative more truthful identification to the actions that day. So enough of your double talk. You aren't fooling anyone. People died protesting in support of a guy who was trying to steal an election.. That is fucked up.
No it isn't. You said "what actually occurred" on January 6th, which again implies that what is being said happened is false.It is very very conceivable to me (even at this point in the thread) that Jacob might have been innocent and falsely doing jail time. That's all I focused on in the OP.
No, not alternative motive. Alternative interpretation. "What actually happened" on January 6th was as stain on our democracy. People showed up at a protest against the election results. Then they were riled into a further frenzy to take action at the Capitol. Had they just sat outside, it'd been one thing, but they needed to act to help save the Presidency for the guy who actually lost.I never said anything about implying an alternative motive on Jan 6. That is on you.
How do you know that? By examining the video footage your side says it does not have?Zero innocent people were netted up. If one was in the Capitol Building, they committed a crime.
She was attempting to, with a mob of people, trying to break through a door, a barrier which, unlike other parts of the building, was deemed a threshold that would not be crossed. The mob was lucky that the decision was made to cede plenty of ground without resorting to killing those in the mob.How do you know that? By examining the video footage your side says it does not have?Zero innocent people were netted up. If one was in the Capitol Building, they committed a crime.
Was the unarmed women shot by the police in the process of committing a violent crime deserving of the death penalty?
Well, you don't even seem capable of managing a consistent position or whether things were or weren't peaceful. Shifting double talk, to full blown conspiracy, back to I'm just curious is one or two innocents were caught in the net by accident. I'm not wrong, Congress was evacuated because a protest broke into the Capitol building. There is no gray area here.I could be just as wrong about this as I know you are.
Well, everyone else was being seditious...But it looked to me that this was not a planned event and that there were people of all flavors of violence in the crowd. Some would have never entered but for the fact that other's had already broken down the gates.
I know a bit more because I paid attention, watch the events as the occurred live... and then the several presentations by the commission on the events. You've just been plugging your ears and screaming "I don't hear sedition!!!"But I don't really know any more than you do...because I have not seen all of the video yet.
For reading my OP and providing a counter narrative.Thank you