Conspiracy Theories About Pelosi Attacker Debunked by Pelosi Attacker

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
So now that police have stated there's video of DePape breaking into the house and that DePape is the one that names himself in the 911 call and refers to himself as a friend, do you guys really have anything left.

Are you willing to admit to being horrible people for mocking the attempted murder of an 82 year old man?

So DePape called 911 on himself now ?
That's the best spin the SFPD, San Francisco Protect Democrats, can come up with ?


Totally ridiculous
If you can't see that, God help you.

a reply to: M5xaz

DePape and Pelosi called 911 together on speaker phone. It was like a Zoom Call.

originally posted by: InachMarbank
a reply to: M5xaz

DePape and Pelosi called 911 together on speaker phone. It was like a Zoom Call.

Yeah, yeah, that's it, that's the ticket
The FBI is channelling the SNL pathological liar skit...

a reply to: M5xaz

You could try reading the court filing I provided. It goes on to address most of the points you made and how they're wrong.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: tanstaafl

But you don't need to see any evidence supporting the claim that DePape was Pelosi's gay lover to believe that narrative?

Yes, we have hired the guy who chips those words in stone and he's almost done with the tablet. You are such a dERP you don't grasp what's going on. It's even been explained to you multiple times. Absent of the facts, the blank spots will be filled in. We have heard things through "news" and the initial police statement, and the rendition of the 911 call, all that led us to think something strange happened. Stranger than some nutter being a nutter. And to top if off YOU and the rest of the left is trying to make it look like this is "all Trump's fault", or "a vast right wing conspiracy" which is sofaking stupid, yet totally expected that you will see some push back on that level of ignorance.

So when and if the camera footage shows and sounds like what the official narrative claims, that will be the truth. But until it's showed, I for one damn sure won't be taking your laughable word for it. You do yourself a disservice by pretending to be offended. It just makes you more of "the" joke instead of just part of it.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

The court filing says they called 911 together on speaker phone,

that when officers arrived DePape swung a hammer at Pelosi,

that the room where this happened was dimly lit,

and that the officers did not shoot DePape as he stepped back to swing his hammer.

Make sense?

a reply to: network dude

The whole gay tryst narrative stems from a story published by a local Fox affiliate claiming DePape was in his underwear. That story was retracted within hours. Everything else is based on reckless supposition with the intent of creating a narrative that Paul somehow deserved to be attacked.

originally posted by: InachMarbank
a reply to: M5xaz

DePape and Pelosi called 911 together on speaker phone. It was like a Zoom Call.

Since they both weren't wearing pants...it was more like a CNN Zoom Call.

originally posted by: M5xaz

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
So now that police have stated there's video of DePape breaking into the house and that DePape is the one that names himself in the 911 call and refers to himself as a friend, do you guys really have anything left.

Are you willing to admit to being horrible people for mocking the attempted murder of an 82 year old man?

So DePape called 911 on himself now ?
That's the best spin the SFPD, San Francisco Protect Democrats, can come up with ?


Totally ridiculous
If you can't see that, God help you.

As a homeless, illegal, maybe DePape was actually looking for 3 meals and a bed in prison.

He may also have been tired of crapping in the street.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: network dude

The whole gay tryst narrative stems from a story published by a local Fox affiliate claiming DePape was in his underwear. That story was retracted within hours. Everything else is based on reckless supposition with the intent of creating a narrative that Paul somehow deserved to be attacked.

wow, just after the narrative was that Depepe was a right wing facist living in Berkley. I cannot possibly understand how those on the right could be irritated enough to fill in the blanks here with something derogatory to Pelosi. It's like that newton guy said for the third time. fool me once...shame on....don't get fooled again.

Don't worry Paul, when and if the body cam footage showing Pelosi answer the door, let the police in, then wrestle with David and get popped your story will be validated. Until it is, it isn't.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

you must have missed the narrative where they tried to pin it on him being an extreme right wing conservative spewing QAnon rhetoric on a website that was created the same night. lol

Truth is, we don't know what happened. But I do know the media is lying. They always lie.

a reply to: IAMTAT

If that were true he wouldn't have plead Not Guilty today.

It’s actually a good point that because it’s been acknowledged that video evidence exists, we’ll eventually see it and all our questions will be answered, Right ? Here’s the problem, if you listen carefully to the S.F. DA’s press conference, she actually states that it will become public IF it is used in court, lol, REALLY listen to the words she uses at about 7:30 min. Into the Q &A with reporters on the 2nd link below of the full exchange. The first link is what I found while looking for the whole press conference, they edit out the majority of the reporters questions and basically reinforce the narrative this was politically motivated. Below is a good example of how this story is being “managed”


Edited, spin version of press conference:

www.sfgate.com...

Full un-edited press conference: pay attention to her answer about the public seeing video evidence, very telling.

www.youtube.com...

The fact that she starts out by stating how important it is to use words wisely is quite ironic !

a reply to: MountainLaurel

The Feds have cited it in their charging documents. There's no way it doesn't get admitted as evidence in the actual case.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: MountainLaurel

The Feds have cited it in their charging documents. There's no way it doesn't get admitted as evidence in the actual case.

for Paul's manhood, it had better. He's already believed to be gay. What's more important, his manhood, or the narrative? time will tell.

originally posted by: jidnum
a reply to: IAMTAT

If that were true he wouldn't have plead Not Guilty today.

Funny you mention that. This David guy supposedly after being read his rights, waved his rights to remain silent and proceeded to explain in detail multiple felonies that he not only just committed, but future felonies that he was going to commit against the 3rd highest politician in the USA, THEN the following day plead NOT GUILTY?????????

Who smells a fish?

a reply to: panoz77

He has a free lawyer. Why would he not let the trial play out on the off-chance it gets tossed out?

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: M5xaz

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
So now that police have stated there's video of DePape breaking into the house and that DePape is the one that names himself in the 911 call and refers to himself as a friend, do you guys really have anything left.

Are you willing to admit to being horrible people for mocking the attempted murder of an 82 year old man?

So DePape called 911 on himself now ?
That's the best spin the SFPD, San Francisco Protect Democrats, can come up with ?


Totally ridiculous
If you can't see that, God help you.

As a homeless, illegal, maybe DePape was actually looking for 3 meals and a bed in prison.

He may also have been tired of crapping in the street.

He wants 3 squares and a dare 🦴🐇

a reply to: panoz77

and that has to do with what exactly? I was replying to the joke about him wanting to get off the streets. if he wanted to get off the streets he wouldn't have plead not guilty.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: MountainLaurel

The Feds have cited it in their charging documents. There's no way it doesn't get admitted as evidence in the actual case.

Time will tell if the video evidence from either the home surveillance or police cams is shown to the public ?