Chronicles of a Stillborn Zombie Coup

[Cunt]

None of that is evidence the government hid anything. Do you even know what words mean?

The government hid a bunch of the evidence, and told stories that you FIRMLY believe. (see how many people use the word 'insurrection' though it isn't the word the courts use)

Then the government released a bunch more evidence.

Do you think the video at https://t.me/PepeMatter/17718 showing the cops uncuffing and fistbumping their buddy is 'evidence the government hid anything'?

The mainstream media wants the sheep to believe that January 6th was worse than 9/11 and they needed video footage like this to be completely censored and kept away from the masses minds. The fact that what footage we have seems to gentle and casual as cops fist bump so called insurrectionists shows you how many lies have been carefully crafted about that day.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
I just hope anons get every hour of this footage.
We will do what the mainstream media refuses to.
No one should listen to these people ever again.
We are the news!

Or are you sticking to your guns regardless of the fresh evidence?

What fresh evidence? You haven't provided any evidence the government hid anything. Assertions aren't evidence.

Yes, of course. The newly released videos (linked above) don't count to you because...um...they disagree with the narrative offered by your favourite 3-letter agency?

[rasetsu]

None of that is evidence the government hid anything. Do you even know what words mean?

The government hid a bunch of the evidence, and told stories that you FIRMLY believe. (see how many people use the word 'insurrection' though it isn't the word the courts use)

Then the government released a bunch more evidence.

Do you think the video at https://t.me/PepeMatter/17718 showing the cops uncuffing and fistbumping their buddy is 'evidence the government hid anything'?

The mainstream media wants the sheep to believe that January 6th was worse than 9/11 and they needed video footage like this to be completely censored and kept away from the masses minds. The fact that what footage we have seems to gentle and casual as cops fist bump so called insurrectionists shows you how many lies have been carefully crafted about that day.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
I just hope anons get every hour of this footage.
We will do what the mainstream media refuses to.
No one should listen to these people ever again.
We are the news!

Or are you sticking to your guns regardless of the fresh evidence?

What fresh evidence? You haven't provided any evidence the government hid anything. Assertions aren't evidence.

Yes, of course. The newly released videos (linked above) don't count to you because...um...they disagree with the narrative offered by your favourite 3-letter agency?

Not relevant, moron. Do you even have a clue?

[Cunt]

Not relevant, moron. Do you even have a clue?

You are banned for the rest of the day. If you figure out why, I might lift the ban early.

[rasetsu]

Not relevant, moron. Do you even have a clue?

You are banned for the rest of the day. If you figure out why, I might lift the ban early.

Ask me if I care.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Trumpists are happy with the result in the Colorado decision because the judge ruled that he could remain on the ballot. What they are unlikely to note is that the judge determined that 'Trump incited an insurrection on January 6, 2021 and therefore “engaged” in insurrection within the meaning of Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment' (see #288).

Oh dear. So much for 'no insurrection.'

The part of the decision about remaining on the ballot is based on a particular (and arguably incorrect) interpretation of the meaning of the term 'officer (military of civil) of the United States.' Will go to a higher court on appeal. Expect it to get to the Supreme Court, where Trump will almost certainly prevail under the dubious claim that the president is not included in the category 'officer of the United States.'

[Brian Peacock]

Commander in Chief. Just saying'

[L'Emmerdeur]

* Should be 'military or civil.' I mistyped.

---

Yeah, the judge did the heavy lifting of determining that the former president did as a matter of fact engage in insurrection, but backed away from following through via a bit of strained reasoning supplied by Trump's advocates. The facts of the case have been adjudicated and a higher court can make the final decision on how the Constitution should be interpreted.

[Joe]

Trumpists are happy with the result in the Colorado decision because the judge ruled that he could remain on the ballot. What they are unlikely to note is that the judge determined that 'Trump incited an insurrection on January 6, 2021 and therefore “engaged” in insurrection within the meaning of Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment' (see #288).

Oh dear. So much for 'no insurrection.'

The part of the decision about remaining on the ballot is based on a particular (and arguably incorrect) interpretation of the meaning of the term 'officer (military of civil) of the United States.' Will go to a higher court on appeal. Expect it to get to the Supreme Court, where Trump will almost certainly prevail under the dubious claim that the president is not included in the category 'officer of the United States.'

Something else Trump's supporters might miss.

The remainder of her decision contained large swaths rebutting Trump’s attempt to discredit the report of the congressional committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack. The committee, composed of seven Democratic and two Republican members, found Trump bore responsibility for the insurrection. Trump’s lawyers maintained the committee members were biased toward that conclusion from the outset, and their report was not reliable.

Any “perceived animus of the committee members towards Trump did not taint the conclusions of the Jan. 6 Report in such a way that would render them unreliable,” Wallace responded. “No evidence was presented at the (disqualification) hearing that the Jan. 6 Committee or its staff coerced witness testimony, refused to hear testimony they did not want to hear, or disregarded credible exculpatory evidence.”

The courts haven't been kind to their talking points.

[Cunt]

You guys checked out the new footage? Or is your opinion so calcified that it doesn't get adjusted with new information?

The Establishment deliberately hid most of the footage, and screamed a story out while censoring those who disagreed. There must be at least one of you who was curious enough to go review some of the new evidence?

Does it matter? Or does it only matter if it supports the Establishment narrative about The InsurrectionTM?

https://nypost.com/2023/09/19/fbi-lost- ... -official/

Jordan has asked Wray to provide a “substantive briefing” on how the FBI used paid informants on Jan. 6, 2021, and “any specific guidelines or admonishments that were provided to FBI CHSs prior to deploying.”

Wray has also been asked to provide all debriefing documents received from Capitol riot informants.

Jordan also wants source reporting documentation relating to former British spy Christopher Steele, who was responsible for a now-notorious “dossier of false allegations about the Trump-Russia hoax.”

The number of FBI informants present during the Capitol riot has long been a controversial topic at trials of the hundreds of defendants apprehended since that day.[

[Cunt]

https://t.me/MattWalshShow/7427

When you watch the footage of J6 protesters milling casually about in the Capitol while police officers stand there apathetically and everyone looks kind of bored, remember that the media and the Left claimed the whole event was so...

I'm surprised the left doesn't still need counselling to recover from the cherry-picked videos they've been shown for a year or two.

[Brian Peacock]

"cherry-picked" eh?

[Cunt]

"cherry-picked" eh?

Well, I use that as shorthand for 'let selected bits of video be released to support their narrative, while hiding MUCH more of the videos which may not.

Your definitions may be different.

[L'Emmerdeur]

...

[rasetsu]

"cherry-picked" eh?

Well, I use that as shorthand for 'let selected bits of video be released to support their narrative, while hiding MUCH more of the videos which may not.

Your definitions may be different.

Nice backpedal.

[JimC]

If parts of the video (plus eyewitness accounts) support a narrative of dangerous violence, then it doesn't matter if other sections happen to show times when the pace was slower. It's hard to be frenzied lunatics all the time...