Link for your partisan accusations WB
FACTS are not "partisan". They are the FACTS.
As one example, read any Julie Kelly column for American Greatness over the last 3 years.
Or her book on the subject.
In the January 6th topics, I've already provided dozens of links over the las 3 years. Asked and answered, abundantly.
However, other evidence omitted by Carlson shows that Chansley entered the Capitol without permission, was repeatedly asked to leave the building, and was not accompanied by cops at all times.
For instance, a statement signed by signed by Chansley and his attorney contradicts the suggestion that he was 'escorted' by cops throughout the riot.
The statement admits that Chansley entered the Capitol through a broken door as part of a crowd that 'was not lawfully authorized to enter or remain in the building' and that he was one of the first 30 rioters inside.
That is again carefully worded deception. It is A FACT that video shows Chansle being escorted around the Capitol by at least 9 Capitol police officers. He was not rioting, he did not smash windows, he did not commit violence or threaen anyone. At most, Chansley was guilty of trespassing. That's it. Several of the 9 officers even opened doors for Chansley, far from restraining him or him offering any forcible entry.
It also notes that although officers asked Chansley and others multiple times to leave the Capitol, he did not comply and actively urged on his fellow rioters.
If that were true and not total B.S. disproven by the surveillance video, Chansley would not have been released a few days after Tucker Carlson aired he video footage in April 2023.
That is another carefully worded deception that attempts to lyingly circumnavigate the facts. There is clear video released by Tucker Carlson that shows other Trump supporters in the Senate chamber, and an officer follows Chansley as he enter the room others were already in, and after Chansley growls a friendly hippie-ish "Heeeeeeeeeyyy" to the others already in the room, the officer tells all of them to be careful and not damage anything because this room is, like, the most sacred place in the building. But clearly they were NOT damaging anything, because the officer would be telling them to stop if hey were already doing so. The officer just passively stood there, and made no effort to either restrain them, or make them leave.
The Democrat narrative about January 6th as a terror threat or "insurrection" is completely disproven by the surveillance video.
And the smashed windows, I would lay money that was by undercover federal agents or DC Metro officers (DISGUISED AS Trump protesters) who smashed those windows, to allow people to passively walk in. As evidenced by the desperation of FBI to blur the faces in the video when released, to prevent FBI from being embarassed by the crimes committed by their own officers.
AGAIN: That we know of
so far, from their own admission, there were "at least 20" undercover FBI agents disguised as Trump supporters, at least 20 DHS agents (by DHS' own admission) undercover disguised as Trump supporters, a least 10 undercover DC Metro officers (by DC Matro's own admission) disguised as Trump supporters, and at least 20 Antifa led by John Earle Sullivan (and I've posted the video of them gloating about i repeatedly) DISGUISED as Trump supporters .
And those are the ones
that we know of, that they admit, so far. That's 70 fake Trump supporters, of the 600 "protesters" who entered the Capitol building that day. What are the odds (70 non-Trump disguised agents, vs. 60 total incidents of vandalism or violence) that most or all of the crimes alleged were by them, and not by ACTUAL Trump supporters ?
What sickens me is Trump trying to protect not just all the rioters but even the ones that were beating on law enforcement. His special people. Johnson specifically states why republicans are blurring the faces so they won’t get charged.
"We have to blur some of the faces of persons who participated in the events of that day because we don't want them to be retaliated against and to be charged by the DOJ and to have other concerns and problems," Johnson said at a press conference.
What sickens me is your still reaching for and selling a false narrative, despite all that has been revealed that this was a complete FBI / DOJ/ DHS, and DC Metro false-flag set-up. The four officers in their house hearings testimony were clearly reading scripts, and could not even pronounce the words that were scripted for them to read !!!!!
Your vicious Democrat-Bolshevik party has already shredded 40% of the Democrat "House Select Committee on January 6th" depositions and records, because it was clearly self-incriminatingly falsified evidence, and Committee Democrats shredded it so that it could not benefit he Republicans when hey took over the House majority in Jan 2023.
The four officers are clearly Democrat partisans.
Michael Fanone (after saying in an interview that Republicans are ":a cancer that needs to be cut out"), became a pundit on CNN. Gee, what a surprise.
Officer Harry Dunne turns out to be a Black Lives Matter advocate, who has a long history before Jan 6th of posting vitriolic stuff about Donald Trump and his supporters on social media
long before January 6 2021.
I posted about all these 4 officers and their ridiculous Soviet style show trial testimony when they appeared in propaganda House committee hearings:
https://www.rkmbs.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1234993#Post1234993 Pelosi Exposed: House Sergeant at Arms Accused of ‘Covering for Her’ on Capitol Riots Security by Kyle Becker, 2-28-2021
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has carefully tried to stage-manage the fallout of the Capitol riots. She has proposed a 9/11-style commission, headed by a blatantly partisan general, in order to purportedly get to the bottom of what really happened on January 6th.
The decision came on the same day she was served notice by high-ranking Republicans that she herself has many serious questions to answer regarding the Capitol attacks.
The questions include what she knew about reports of a planned attack on the Capitol building; why security requests from the former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund was turned down by the House and Senate Sergeant at Arms six times; and why the Capitol security was so woeful that police officers even held the doors open for rioters and gawked as unarmed miscreants took over the Senate chamber.
Speaker Pelosi is now being accused of having weakened security before and during the Capitol riots due to “optics.” A report from the Daily Caller citing multiple anonymous sources say the former House Sergeant at Arms is “covering for her.”
The Daily Caller provides a timeline that exposes the problematic timing of Irving reportedly being contacted on the request.
The New York Times previously reported that the Speaker’s office confirmed that the National Guard was approved around 1:43 pm. Sund said he sent a request for help from the National Guard to Irving around 1:09 p.m, according to CNN. Irving said he was contacted about the matter after 2:00 pm, Axios reported. Sources questioned how Irving got the request after 2 pm but Pelosi approved the request at 1:43 pm.
“If you believe Irving’s timeline that he testified under oath to, how could he ask for permission from the Speaker 20 minutes before he got the request?” one of the sources told the Daily Caller.
“Also if you believe his sworn testimony that he never had to run the request up the chain, why did the Speaker’s office confirm he did just that?” the same source continued.
“Irving is covering for Pelosi. There’s no doubt,” another said.
The Daily Caller explained why the sources are not currently public.
“The three sources who confirmed the discussion to the Daily Caller did so under the condition of anonymity, citing the fear of putting a chill on further witnesses to how the security situation unfolded Jan. 6,” the DC stated. “The discussion, if accurate, raises questions as to what role Pelosi’s office had in the security failures that resulted in the resignations of both Irving and former Chief of Capitol Police Steven Sund. Pelosi’s Deputy Chief of Staff Drew Hammill did not deny the allegations in a statement to the Daily Caller.”
The National Pulse reported that not only was there a delay getting approval, but that it took hours for more National Guard to be on the scene, despite supposedly being on ‘stand by.’
At 1:09pm, still before the President had finished speaking, Sund called the Sergeants-at-arms of the House and Senate. He told them it was time to call in the National Guard. He even said he wanted an emergency declaration. Both, however, said they would “run it up the chain” and get back to him.
At 1:50pm the Capitol itself was breached. Still before most Trump speech attendees could have arrived.
What happened after this point was a back and forth over hours between D.C. officials, Army officials, and Capitol police.
Eventually – at past 5pm – the National Guard arrived.
It is important to note that the questions are not merely about what happened during the confusion of the Capitol riots, but in the days prior.
Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund told the Congress six times there was a high risk of rioting days before the building assault. After Speaker Pelosi forced Sund to resign following the riot, he wrote her a letter explaining exactly what went wrong. The House and Sergeant at arms were forced to resign.
“Sund told the Post that House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving was concerned with the ‘optics’ of declaring an emergency ahead of the protests and rejected a National Guard presence,” NPR reported. “He says Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger recommended that he informally request the Guard to be ready in case it was needed to maintain security.”
His requests for additional National Guard troops would be turned down.
“Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said he requested that the National Guard be placed on standby in the days before the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol, but House and Senate security officials turned him down,” the USA Today reported.
The risk of a violent riot breaking out at the January 6th Electoral College session of Congress, following a contested election that would see Donald Trump purportedly “incite” a protest, was anticipated in detail as early as last March.
This was revealed in a Time piece that exposes a full-out effort by radical groups, powerful corporations, and labor unions to “fortify” the U.S. election and keep it from being won by Donald Trump. The Time article also reveals coordination among these influential left-wing groups and radical activists to keep a low-profile at the riots.
Testimony was also entered into the Senate record today from J. Michael Waller, who attested that ‘agents provocateurs’ had infiltrated and agitated the Capitol Riots crowd.
Furthermore, concrete intelligence from early December suggesting foreign influence in the origins of the planned Capitol Building assault has since been reported by CBS News’ Catherine Herridge.
Everyone in D.C. had to have known it would be a powderkeg; just like it was following Donald Trump’s election and his inauguration in 2017, which also saw violent and destructive rioting.
In mid-November, Speaker Pelosi was asked about the propensity of Trump supporters for violence as long as the election objections continued.
Pelosi responded that the words of the president of the United States “weigh a ton,” and while President Trump did not create the problem of (right-wing) violence, “I think he fans the flames.”
“His words weigh a ton. They weigh a ton,” she said. “And people hear things in a way that could encourage some unfortunate situations, as they have done in the State of Michigan.” Pelosi was referring to a plot against Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.
“There is this element in our country — I don’t think Donald Trump created it, but I think he fans the flames,” he added. “And I think that’s a dangerous situation.”
Earlier, on June 2, 2020, Pelosi called Trump a “fanner of the flames” after police had cleared protesters from outside the White House a day before.
Nancy Pelosi therefore knew and even spoke about the threat from extremists before the Capitol riots.
Despite Speaker Pelosi’s paranoia about Trump supporters and her track record of blaming them for violence, there was a glaring lack of security prior to the extremists’ planned attack on the Capitol building.
Why?
The four police officers who tesitified on Tuesday, July 27 2021 in front of Nancy Pelosi's partisan House hearing committee...
- Aquelino Gonnell, Capitol Police Sergeant
Michael Fanone, DC Metro Police officer
Daniel Hodges, DC Metro Police officer
Harry Dunn, U S Capitol Police officer
...have all been revealed to be hyper-partisan Democrats in previous interviews and in their own social media posts. They are rabidly anti-Trump, and were so long before Jan 6 2021.
And they were clearly reading partisan statements written for them, not in their own words. There was a uniformity to the fluffy language used in what they read. In the opening statement by Aquelino Gonnell in particular, this guy comes across as a semi-literate, and CLEARLY did not write some of the metaphorical flourishes tossed in his written statement someone else clearly wrote for him. They were clearly not his own vocabulary, and he stumbled to even read the script in front of him, stumbling on what were for him almost unpronounceable words in almost every sentence. It was unintentional comedy to watch.
This turned out to be pretty accurate:
https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/07/26/what-to-expect-from-houses-partisan-probe-of-capitol-riot/McCarthy countered that Pelosi had named lawmakers who share her preconceived narrative of what happened that day while Trump was finishing a speech on the Ellipse not far from the Capitol.
“The speaker has structured this select committee to satisfy her political objectives,” McCarthy said in a public statement. “She had months to work with Republicans on a reasonable and fair approach to get answers on the events and security failures surrounding Jan. 6.”
Two other members of the select committee are widely known for their roles in Trump’s two impeachments by Pelosi’s House.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He also led the team of House impeachment managers in the 2020 Senate impeachment trial of Trump. In that case, the Senate acquitted the 45th president on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
Another select committee member, Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., led the team of impeachment managers in Trump’s second Senate trial early this year, when the Senate acquitted him on the charge of inciting an insurrection.
The other Democrats on the select committee are Reps. Zoe Lofgren and Pete Aguilar, both of California; Stephanie Murphy of Florida; and Elaine Luria of Virginia.
It's a partisan show-hearing, where no facts are gathered, just a pre-conceived Trump-hating narrative, where no facts are gathered to objectively challenge that thesis, just presenting opinionated propaganda from 4 Democrat- partisan officers to conform to that narrative. There are many other officers who could be called to challenge that narrative. There was no cross-examination of their stories, everything they said was taken at face value, and the only two Republicans on the committee (Rep Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney) were basically excommunicated from the party because these RINO "bipartisan Republican committee members" are basically Democrat agents who daily act to undermine their own party. And what they learn in private Republican meetings, they report back to Nancy Pelosi. They undermine their own party at every turn.
https://dailycaller.com/2021/07/26/kevin-mccarthy-pelosi-cheney-kinzinger-jan-6-committee-congress/https://dailycaller.com/2021/07/21/...ittee-jim-jordan-jim-banks-capitol-riot/Michael Fanone is a Democrat fanatic, who said on video (I think for 60 Minutes) that the Republican party should be "carved out like a cancer". This jerk is another love-child of MSNBC and CNN, their biggest star since Stormy Daniels' creepy porn lawyer Michael Avenatti. He's a star on those networks only because he props up their lying narrative.
Harry Dunn over several years of social media posts describes Trump as "the racist in chief", with a Twitter hashtag by that name, among many other ultra-left partisan Democrat-Left posts. He has facebook posts of himself in Black Lives Matter clothing, expressing his support of BLM. I wonder how his fellow officers feel about that. He is anything but neutral or "just a cop doing [his] job.." He is a poisonous ideologue, hiding behind a veil of police "neutrality" that he clearly has never had. On Jan 6th, or at any time prior. And his allegations of taunts of "nigger" from the Jan 6th Capitol crowd (not one person, but by his account, the entire crowd was shouting epithets at him that day!) also rings false, and is just disgusting in its incendiary exploitation. I'm absolutely certain that the camera footage inside the Capitol that day, and the body-camera footage of himself and other officers does not verify that absurd allegation.
Likewise Daniel Hodges.
They all are clearly Democrats, and speak and act as Democrat agents, propping up the Democrat narrative. They didn't give objective reports in their House committee testimony, it was emotionally charged narrative, all using the same buzzwords like "terrorists", in statements they clearly did not write themselves.
Their testimony was fake propaganda then.
It's still fake propaganda now.
And there's a 40% chance the Democrat "Select Committee on January 6th" has already shredded it.
