BREAKING: Nancy's Commission EDITED The Video Evidence To Support Her Claims! EVIL.

a reply to: jidnum

I really don't get this. They are lying how? Those people did not do what they did on video? Those deposed are lying under oath? The text messages obtained are fake but people like Hannity are just being quiet about it?

If you don't believe those videos, go to ProPublica's site and watch all the videos uploaded by Parler members that day that they compiled, pick a few individuals names and go through their social media, quite a few middle aged people and couples posted videos of how they fought police. Read or watch the Patriots own words in law enforcement interviews or in their court cases and interviews. Watch the video taken by individuals of a mob beating and tasing Officer Fannone.

The only gaslighting is people claiming, lies and absolutely refusing to watch or research anything.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: jidnum

I really don't get this. They are lying how? Those people did not do what they did on video? Those deposed are lying under oath? The text messages obtained are fake but people like Hannity are just being quiet about it?

If you don't believe those videos, go to ProPublica's site and watch all the videos uploaded by Parler members that day that they compiled, pick a few individuals names and go through their social media, quite a few middle aged people and couples posted videos of how they fought police. Read or watch the Patriots own words in law enforcement interviews or in their court cases and interviews. Watch the video taken by individuals of a mob beating and tasing Officer Fannone.

The only gaslighting is people claiming, lies and absolutely refusing to watch or research anything.

If you don't get it, read it again, I'm not repeating my self.

a reply to: jidnum

There is no proof of lying in your post. Your refusal to watch or investigate or believe does not constitute proof. So you saw a quarter of a picture. When the picture is put together you can't say it's a lie because let's say you saw blue and think it's sky, when the complete picture is the sea.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: jidnum

There is no proof of lying in your post. Your refusal to watch or investigate or believe does not constitute proof. So you saw a quarter of a picture. When the picture is put together you can't say it's a lie because let's say you saw blue and think it's sky, when the complete picture is the sea.

lol what are you even talking about? I never presented any sort of "evidence" nor did I claim to be posting any evidence in my post. I'm merely stating why I'm not going it watch it. They lie, they lie all the time. But if you really want to know what they lied about......here is a few things.

They claim a bunch of cops died AT THE Capitol. They didn't.
They claim they breached the fencing and doors. They didn't, they were let in.
They claim trump incited violence. He didn't, the people who walked into the capitol didn't even attend the rally.
They claim there were text messages talking about all of this, there wasn't they were fabricated.
They claim to not know Ray Epps even though he was the one ON VIDEO actually telling people TO GO INTO THE CAPITOL he now resides on a multi acre ranch worth millions while driving around on a 6 seater golf cart.

if you deny any of what I said above (which is all 100% true), then it seems as though you are the one not doing any research.

FYI before you start thinking I'm some right winger, I don't claim any party, I dont care about politics, its all a sham. I just go by what the truth is and that's the truth. like it or not, it is.

a reply to: jidnum

Ok where to even start. There is plenty of video showing them breaching multiple areas, windows, breaking through the police lines, etc. Some cops did back away from the crowd letting them breach. I believe there's been explainations for that tactic from others as well as myself providing links to cops who were charged for being complicit in their involvement

Who's claiming a bunch of police died at the Capitol? We do know one died after the event who was injured but then had a stroke, we do know multiple cops who responded committed suicide in the days after the event.

Ray Epps was interviewed by the FBI and gave testimony to the committee. Who is denying he exists?

How can you claim my denying the information in your post is not doing any research? I have done the research, I've provided links,multiple and numerous many, many times.

a reply to: frogs453


I never said he they said Ray didn't exist. read it again.

I'm sorry but I'm done here, I don't think you're even reading or comprehending what I'm saying at this point.
You claim to do research but can't even repeat what i said correctly so I'm sorry if I don't trust YOUR research when you claim i said something i didn't.

This falls right into place with what I said about liars. when people lie too much, you tend not to trust anything they say any more, and with you not being able to even quote me correctly shows that I can't trust your research either.

good day and enjoy your scripted tv show "hearing" which really means nothing. Just a bunch of people talking so you can "hear" it.

a reply to: jidnum

You state "They claim to not know Ray Epps even though he was the one ON VIDEO actually telling people TO GO INTO THE CAPITOL"

So what are you saying then? Who claims
"They claim to not know Ray Epps...". The J6 Committee does, the feds do, they both interviewed him.


Look I would be more than happy to review any links you have that prove the people on video really didn't attack the officers, break windows, etc. I would be happy to review links that state all the testimony, the recorded interviews, the emails, the social media posts, the text messages, the court testimony is all fake.

I would be happy to review links that cops were not arrested and charged for being complicit that day.

You just have to provide them.

FWIW

a reply to: putnam6

Hmm, so you're implying her son in law in a q anon supporter, or ? He was there working.

Vos was reporting on the insurrection for the Dutch television channel RTL 4’s talk show Jinek. During the phone interview, Vos said that Pelosi, his wife and son had to take shelter inside the building, while he reported from outside the building. He said he lost contact with his family for a few hours. 

AP News

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: putnam6

Hmm, so you're implying her son in law in a q anon supporter, or ? He was there working.

Vos was reporting on the insurrection for the Dutch television channel RTL 4’s talk show Jinek. During the phone interview, Vos said that Pelosi, his wife and son had to take shelter inside the building, while he reported from outside the building. He said he lost contact with his family for a few hours. 

AP News

Im not implying anything Im am more putting it here as it's usually the easiest way to debunk something or at least gather more insight.

but generally, one is concerned when one making decisions also has relatives on the ground FWIW wasn't somebody else inside the Capitol filming and it made you wonder why they were there as well.

besides if that were a Trump relative they would have been grilled by this congressional committee

originally posted by: argentus
a reply to: everyone

I figured out the primary difference between a "hearing" and a "trial"; a hearing has only a prosecution, and no defense. Also, ANYthing can be said -- there is no rule of order, no voir dire, no evidentiary procedure, because it's all just a performance.

Or propaganda, the hour-long projection of "they are the bad guys" replacing the horrible economic news currently worth reporting. Kills 2 birds with 1 stone. Clever but insidious as hell. We are at the lowest point ever in America 'representative" government, including the Civil War. Today's rhetoric makes that sound like a picnic squabble over the last of the potato salad.

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: putnam6

Hmm, so you're implying her son in law in a q anon supporter, or ? He was there working.

Vos was reporting on the insurrection for the Dutch television channel RTL 4’s talk show Jinek. During the phone interview, Vos said that Pelosi, his wife and son had to take shelter inside the building, while he reported from outside the building. He said he lost contact with his family for a few hours. 

AP News

Im not implying anything Im am more putting it here as it's usually the easiest way to debunk something or at least gather more insight.

but generally, one is concerned when one making decisions also has relatives on the ground FWIW wasn't somebody else inside the Capitol filming and it made you wonder why they were there as well.

besides if that were a Trump relative they would have been grilled by this congressional committee

Maybe he should have been. He was photographed with Rudy Guiliani and an OANN news host in Nov 2020. Maybe he put him on the "Shaman" route/ plan.

The link includes photos and his tweet about it along with a Stop The Steal tagline.

Link

a reply to: frogs453

How could he have been reporting on the insurrection when at the time, the insurrection was not determined yet? 🤣🤣🤣

a reply to: xuenchen

Sigh, reporting on the rally which turned into an insurrection. That better?

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: xuenchen

Sigh, reporting on the rally which turned into an insurrection. That better?

That's not what the Democrat article said 🤣

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: putnam6

Hmm, so you're implying her son in law in a q anon supporter, or ? He was there working.

Vos was reporting on the insurrection for the Dutch television channel RTL 4’s talk show Jinek. During the phone interview, Vos said that Pelosi, his wife and son had to take shelter inside the building, while he reported from outside the building. He said he lost contact with his family for a few hours. 

AP News

Here you are being purposefully obtuse. The sign of a dishonest person being dishonest in a argument.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: frogs453

How could he have been reporting on the insurrection when at the time, the insurrection was not determined yet? 🤣🤣🤣

edit on Jun-12-2022 by xuenchen because: DryCobbed rotate bzzzzzzzzzz 👁️🚬

Much like the CNN reporter being present with the antifa guy pretending to be Jan 6 protestors.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: everyone

Think about the facts:

They hired James Goldston who was a longtime producer at ABC News and then its president for seven years to produce a made for TV like reality show.

There are no cross examinations or rebuttal witnesses because this is a propaganda production made for TV drama.

The committee hired a TV executive to produce the hearings for maximum impact.

www.nytimes.com...

Now this is something i was not aware of and it very mind-blowing. Thank you for the heads up on this.

originally posted by: everyone

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: everyone

Think about the facts:

They hired James Goldston who was a longtime producer at ABC News and then its president for seven years to produce a made for TV like reality show.

There are no cross examinations or rebuttal witnesses because this is a propaganda production made for TV drama.

The committee hired a TV executive to produce the hearings for maximum impact.

www.nytimes.com...

Now this is something i was not aware of and it very mind-blowing. Thank you for the heads up on this.

After three failed impeachment attempts the Democrats weren't going to leave anything to chance this time.

originally posted by: dandandat2

originally posted by: everyone

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: everyone

Think about the facts:

They hired James Goldston who was a longtime producer at ABC News and then its president for seven years to produce a made for TV like reality show.

There are no cross examinations or rebuttal witnesses because this is a propaganda production made for TV drama.

The committee hired a TV executive to produce the hearings for maximum impact.

www.nytimes.com...

Now this is something i was not aware of and it very mind-blowing. Thank you for the heads up on this.

After three failed impeachment attempts the Democrats weren't going to leave anything to chance this time.

Well unfortunate for them if this is taken to court the contradictory evidence will prolly result in mistrial or dismissal for malicious prosecution.