News outlets demand access to Jan. 6 footage McCarthy gave to Tucker Carlson | The Hill
Category: News & PoliticsVia: jbb • one month ago • 104 comments
By: Jared Gans (The Hill)
by Jared Gans - 02/25/23 9:57 AM ET
A group of news outlets are demanding that they receive access to tens of thousands of hours of surveillance footage from the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) gave to Fox News host Tucker Carlson earlier this week.
Attorney Charles Tobin sent a letter on Thursday on behalf of 10 media organizations to congressional leadership to request all closed-circuit camera footage recorded inside the Capitol and on the grounds outside the building as was given to Carlson.
"The incredible public interest in understanding what transpired on January 6 crosses party lines," the letter states.
Tobin, who provided the letter to The Hill, noted comments that McCarthy has made saying that allowing the American public to review the tapes would let "everybody make their own judgment" on what happened and would be in the public's interest.
The outlets included in the coalition are Advance Publications, ABC, Axios, CNN, CBS, The E.W. Scripps Company, Gannett, the Los Angeles Times, Politico and ProPublica.
McCarthy has faced controversy over the past week for providing about 41,000 hours of the surveillance footage exclusively to Carlson and his team. Fox identifies Carlson's daily program as an opinion show, and Carlson has repeatedly questioned the significance of the attack and the conclusions from the House select committee investigating it.
McCarthy defended himself in a Wednesday interview with The New York Times on the disclosure, saying that he "promised" to release the footage.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has slammed McCarthy's decision, saying that he is "needlessly" exposing the Capitol to security risks in showing how it is protected and giving information to people who might want to attack the Capitol in the future.
Tobin said that the outlets agree with McCarthy that the public's interest is in the release of the footage and cited a federal appeals court case that found the government cannot selectively exclude certain outlets from information that is otherwise publicly available.
"Without full public access to the complete historical record, there is concern that an ideologically-based narrative of an already polarizing event will take hold in the public consciousness, with destabilizing risks to the legitimacy of Congress, the Capitol Police, and the various federal investigations and prosecutions of January 6 crimes," the letter states.
The letter was sent to McCarthy, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), Schumer and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
Tobin also sent an expedited request under the Freedom of Information Act on behalf of the 10 organizations, The Associated Press and The New York Times for the footage.
Who is online
They showed no interest in them during the J6 farce "investigation"..
They don't need them now.
Agreed, screw them.
The Democrats already presented their side in the Jan 6th investigation farce. Their media outlets aired their fucking BS and treated it as gospel w/o nary a questioning word.
Since McCarthy doesn't want the US tax payers to be footed for the bill for the Republican version he is allowing Tucker and Fox News to present it.
I am sure they will be as unbiased as the Jan 6th committee.
McCarthy was a fool to release these videos.
The public has a right to know exactly what happened that day. The Dems investigation of that fateful day can't be trusted..
Please tell us why the tapes shouldn't be released, Tig. Oh, and by the way....J6 was not an insurrection, no matter how many times that false narrative is repeated.
It was a peaceful protest that got out of hand because of the unlawful actions of a handful of idiots.
Did you not read the article? News agencies WANT the footage, Tucker Carlson, by FoxNews' own admission, is entertainment, not news.
Why didn't they want the footage during the J6 farce "investigation"?
Why do I have to explain the obvious to you? By releasing these videos, McCarthy has caused the government to no longer have control over the content. The content contains information about the layout and security of the Capitol building as well as security protocols. Further, by releasing the videos to a partisan stooge like Carlson —whose job is to feed red meat to his audience— legitimate organizations have a very good case to demand they too have access to same. So now we have a bruhaha instead of a controlled environment where only safe information is released.
A handful? How in hell can you blot out what you can see with your own eyes? Pay attention to what is actually taking place in reality.
Get a clue.
Open your eyes.
This is easily accessible yet you (and Ronin) choose to somehow believe an alternate reality of a "peaceful protest" and just a "handful of idiots".
In this case, denial is defense. Denying that this was an attempted insurrection is defense of the actions of the insurrectionists, by way of minimizing the severity of those actions.
It's also dishonest as hell.
Willful ignorance, gaslighting, and "alternate facts" are the peculiar social phenomena of our times. Disturbing to say the least.
It is so blatant, so obvious ... but nothing seems to get past deep partisan filters. Just pathetic that so many cannot escape partisan blindness and engage in at least a modicum of objective reasoning.
CNN sued to get access to the videos.
When did they do that?
You know this how? Were you given copies of the tapes?
Why do you think it is wrong that McCarthy gave them to a media source, but you don't mention anything about leftist media sources NOW demanding the tapes....not giving a crap about them during the J6 farce "investigation"?
But they did not make a stink about it when Ds had control of Congress and during the J6 farce.
Now that Rs have control of the House, they are publicly screaming like little leftist babies that they are not getting what they want.
That was a lawsuit for specific video used in a trial, not all of the security video.
It was a trump incited and failed insurrection/coup.
Are you saying the having the videos In Democrat hands insures their safety? Surely you jest.
The demonstration started peacefully and go out on hand. And it wasn't planned, nor was in an "insurrection". And you know it.
You're about as partisan as they come...and blind to the truth.
"It was a trump incited and failed insurrection/coup."
Yep, that's the allegation, now provide us with proof.
How did Trump incite this crowd of mostly peaceful protestors? He wasn't even there.
What were his exact words and actions that led to this demonstration degenerating into a spontaneous riot?
You are splitting hairs. The point Ozzwald made was that CNN, et. al., had to bring a lawsuit to get access to just a portion of the videos provided freely to Carlson.
The tapes given to Carlson are 41,000 hours of surveillance content. Surveillance is designed to cover a facility and thus yields a wealth of information about the structure, pathways, traffic, relative security and the actual movement inside the Capitol in response to an attack.
You would know this too if you simply took a moment to think this through.
There are lots of things I do not mention in a post. If you paid even the slightest attention to what I wrote, you would see that my position is that this information should not be released to ANY public outlet. That includes every media, 'leftist' or not:
That means it is wrong for the government to lost control over this content ... Carlson or anyone else in the media are equivalent here.
So by giving this to Carlson, McCarthy strengthens the case for EVERY media outlet to have access. Effectively an argument to make these videos public domain.
Thus McCarthy has compromised the controlled environment and has triggered others to seek to make this information public.
All you had to do was read what I wrote instead of pretending that my comments do not apply to all non-secure entities.
41,000 hours freely given to Carlson (Fox). You do not comprehend why all other media outlets are demanding the same???
It was indeed planned and incited by #45, some of the white supremacist scum 'protesters' there had T-shirts with the date of the planned/incited/failed insurrection/coup on them.
You seem unable to read words without twisting them into partisan nonsense. I stated the government, not the D party. I was talking of security, not political control. Stop viewing everything in purely partisan ways ... it distorts everything you consume.
Now you have changed your claim. You now claim it started peacefully and got out of hand. Yeah, Greg, that is what happened. But remember what you wrote:
It changed from peaceful into violent. And it was not a handful of idiots but a large mob who invaded the Capitol.
You were wrong and now you try to equivocate.
I did not claim it was planned (as in the entire thing was pre-orchestrated). I believe different (smaller) groups did indeed plan to act (bringing weapons and gear) but the insurrection itself seemed to be organic where the people kept working themselves up to the point where they went too far.
So you have now introduced a strawman. You clearly have no clue what you are talking about and are desperately trying to recover.
Of course he was inciting the insurrection for months after he lost and he said he would go with them to the Capitol.
You apparently do not understand what it means to be partisan. I am not surprised that you cannot comprehend political independence since you are clearly blindly partisan. But some of us can indeed objectively view reality and not always presume one party is 'right' and the other is 'wrong'.
If Pelosi had released these videos I would have made the exact same comment. It was wrong to release this sensitive information to a public entity and lose control over the content. This was a failure of security. It does not matter whether the agent has a D or R next to their name.
You disregard all the speeches Trump made prior to this event???
You disregard the fundamental reason why people attacked the Capitol: Trump (as sitting PotUS) was claiming that the election was stolen from him (and them) and that their votes were disenfranchised and that it is up to the people to fight for what is right.
You missed all of this??
Trump was not at the Capitol building with a megaphone urging his supporters to break and enter. But he sure as hell was the flame of this fire. Take off those partisan blinders and stop defending Trump at every turn. It is pathetic that anyone still does this.
Months? There were two months between the election and 6 Jan.
These tapes are not the surveillance you think they are. Every business has cameras installed around the facility so an incident can be reconstructed if needed. The cameras in HOR is no different and the J6 farce used them to what THEY needed and would not allow anything that would debunk their narrative.
Carlson has them and hopefully some light will be shined on what REALLY happened the day of the riot...yes, riot...not insurrection.
Like what was mentioned earlier, the media sued for video coverage from a specific case, not the entirety of the day. Why?
Because they did not give a crap about anything else. They wanted to show the world video of one of those mean little rioters and the bad, bad things that he or she may have done.
If it showed that this person would have been innocent, it can be guaranteed that, if they got that video, there is no way in hell they would show it.
But they aren't
They don't WANT to know the truth.
Let's look at a realistic scenario.
If the leftist media got hold of 41000 hours of video, and nothing showed that major crimes were committed and ESPECIALLY if Trump would be exonerated in whatever the loons on the left are accusing him of, not one single second of those videos would be shown so the leftist lemmings could be kept in the dark....where the media wants them to be.
No you wouldn't have.
Around the facility is not the same as INSIDE the facility.
You think Carlson is a source for the 'real' truth???
Who cares? Common sense suggests that they sued for access to the minimum the needed for coverage since it is more likely to prevail if the demands are lesser than greater.
You are all over the map. Yeah, bugsy, media outlets, etc. are biased. Presume bias. Most people already understand this.
Media organizations demand Jan. 6 videos McCarthy shared with Fox News' Tucker Carlson
And here you go again noting that bias exists in media. We know. You comment is extremely cynical but nowhere have I suggested there is no bias so why do you keep harping on this?
Just shows that you are totally clueless as to my positions. I know it makes it easier to apply your stereotype to people and make remarks as if your stereotype was accurate. But that just makes you look foolish as you trip over yourself.
You will never find any comment from me that is in support of Pelosi. But my position has nothing to do with Pelosi or party. Any Speaker of the House who released this information would be wrong.
Around means inside, outside, above, below and in all the nooks and crannies. Just because YOUR definition is biased to your narrative, it does not make you correct.
"You think Carlson is a source for the 'real' truth???"
Never said he was. Stop putting words into my post I did not make. You got a very biased version during the J6 farce, now you will get a biased version from Carlson. Straight thinking Americans will make their own judgements from them, not listening to some anonymous poster on a social site.
"Who cares? "
You apparently do because you yourself said the media sued for the exact same video coverage that was given to Carlson. Moving goal posts is not a good look.
"You are all over the map."
Nope, I am right over the target. Just because you do not like the target does not mean otherwise.
We don't have to see it. Every one of your posts are anti conservative.
We know where you stand on most subjects.
You don't hide it.
You are slipping again, TiG
Your original post stated the media sued for the same video. This link said they sent a letter to Congress.
My advice is to go to Google and look up the difference between "sued for" and "demanded through a letter"
Most of my posts today are opposing the nonsense spewed by people like you. That nonsense is typically the crap that comes from the Trump-inclined factions of conservatives (rather than the more traditional conservatives like Reagan conservatives). And I am indeed in opposition to those who constantly defend Trump and constantly defend anything that the Trump-influenced Rs state.
The reality is that most of the stupid crap posted lately is from select conservatives. That is your (et.al.) problem, not mine.
So, to make it real simple for you, when people make posts that attempt to defend Trump (directly or indirectly) I will oppose that. When people dream up ridiculous conspiracy theories, I will oppose that. When people make shit up from thin air, and play intellectually dishonest games when their poorly founded positions are exposed, I will oppose that.
In short, the nuttiness that I have seen for years now stems mostly from the conservative/R side than the liberal/progressive/D side. Do better. Your 'side' looks as though it has lost all touch with reality. (Case in point: refusing to acknowledge ANY wrongdoing by Trump)
A distinction without a difference in this context.
The point, which you refuse to acknowledge, is that the other media outlets want this material (this should be obvious to you) and that McCarthy has now made their case for demanding same much easier.
You get that, right?
But none of it has been proven wrong.
"That nonsense is typically the crap that comes from the Trump-inclined factions of conservatives (rather than the more traditional conservatives like Reagan conservatives). And I am indeed in opposition to those who constantly defend Trump and constantly defend anything that the Trump-influenced Rs state"
BS that comes across as narcissist. .
"The reality is that most of the stupid crap posted lately is from select conservatives. That is your (et.al.) problem, not mine."
No, the reality is you don't have to respond. That would be the recommended route.
"So, to make it real simple for you, when people make posts that attempt to defend Trump (directly or indirectly) I will oppose that. "
No on has done that and even more do not care that you "oppose" what is written.
"When people dream up ridiculous conspiracy theories, I will oppose that"
Nope...never saw you oppose the Russian collusion "hoax", so your pretense is wrong.
"In short, the nuttiness that I have seen for years now stems mostly from the conservative/R side than the liberal/progressive/D "
Well, when one tends to lean far left, with no indication of ever being unbiased, one tends to see things that way.
I'm doing fine, but thanks anyway".
No, in your case, it's trying to look as if you were right, but even the spin saw through your BS
It is pointless dealing with you, et. al. You deny everything and make stupid proclamations such as "none of it has been proven wrong".
No one has tried to defend Trump???? Just more demonstrable bullshit. Who do you think you are fooling?
I did not comment either way on that. I did not support nor deny because the data was not credible. Here you go again presuming that my silence on an issue means support. I am silent on many issues. Get a clue.
Far left? What is 'far left' in your partisan mind? Anything to your left? That is some wide territory.
What these people don't realize is he is kinda setting precedence. They are giving a green light for the other side of the isle to play these stupid partisan games.
I have heard several people say that they wouldn't care if the footage was released to only Rachel Maddow.
I call bullshit because they would be throwing a fit. We all know they would be.
We have top government officials giving credence and source material to a well known liar and conspiracy theorist who's employer even said in court no one should believe what he says as truth...
They just don't care. Their response is the typical cast blame in every other direction. Every one else is always at fault, always.
They care, but only enough to lie about it.
Exactly. How is it possible to not see that?
A few here just spout partisan crap without thinking it through. It is pathetic.
Their 'game' is simply to defend their faction and attack all who oppose their faction. Facts and logic can be collateral damage ... they do not care. I am continually amazed that some are perfectly comfortable looking like complete fools. What do they think that accomplishes other than getting an 'atta boy' from their kindred spirits who praise anyone who gets in the fight (even if their ass is handed to them)?
You are splitting hairs.
Not at all. CNN, to my knowledge, made no attempt to secure all of the video in order to fact check the J6 committee. They just wanted specific video of protesters punching cops. That's it.
Correct, they went after select video, not the entire corpus.
The point Ozzwald made was that CNN, et. al., had to bring a lawsuit to get access to just a portion of the videos provided freely to Carlson.
This is too easy...
"t is pointless dealing with you, et. al."
I made my recommendation to you concerning this already. The same goes for your own "et al"
"No one has tried to defend Trump???? "
That's right. No one is defending Trump. What is being done is conservatives calling out the bullshit the left spews each and every day, then when we prove them wrong, the idiots state "you're defending Trump"
"I did not comment either way on that. "
Didn't have to. Your positions on other issues show what your position was/still is.
"Far left? "
Yes, far left.
You cannot comprehend what it means to be politically independent due to your blind partisanship. If I do not see things your way you interpret that as "far left". Get a clue.
I have not commented on plenty of issues that go against the GOP; do you translate that into support of the GOP or an attack on the GOP — support for the Ds or an attack on the Ds? Your 'logic' is confused; your confirmation bias has clouded your vision. You interpret the lack of comment to fit your biased view of reality. It is pathetic.
I understand wholeheartedly what the term means. By your hisptory of posts, you certainly do not fit that definition.
The rest of your rant is just that. A rant.
You are blinded by your partisanship.
Meet a brick wall I was telling you about.
Known for many months.
Those that call others partisans are normally the partisans themselves, however, they refuse to see how they lean only one way and think it is everyone else that is doing it.
JBB when you are ready to debate something, just let me know. When I mean debate, I DON'T mean throwing out a bunch of stupid memes to help you make a point that is never made.
I have never lost to you in a debate, and I assure you I never will.
Me taking you once again will be YOUR brick wall....and it will be easy as hell.
A stupid 'rule' you just invented.
Partisans reveal themselves when they take the obviously wrong side of a position simply because it favors their party.
For example, the incessant and brain-dead stupid defense of Trump — especially regarding his post-election-loss con-job. This is so outrageous that it serves as an excellent litmus test for R partisans.
Tell it to a tourist. We know your MO here!
I made no "rule". This is well known in the circle of non partisans. Ironic that you claim to be non partisan but did not know this
"Partisans reveal themselves when they take the obviously wrong side of a position simply because it favors their party."
And as I have said several times today....You lean far left and obviously have your beliefs because you believe they will favor your party.
"For example, the incessant and brain-dead stupid defense of Trump"
For the millionth time...no one is defending Trump. We are pointing out the incessant whining of leftists like yourself each and every day, believing your opinion is fact, when normally, it is the opposite.
This proves you have no clue what you are talking about.
No, you are simply trolling. It is not going to work. All that will happen is that you will look foolish.
So, then he had two months to plan/incite, thanks for agreeing with me.
Why are the right wingers so unwilling to do any of the research for yourselves? I make a statement, and instead of you going to the internet looking to see if what I said is true or not, you go to the internet to question what I said.
Willful ignorance is a choice.
SO you can't back up your claim. No surprise.
Again...when you are ready...let me know., If never losing to a leftist is an MO, then I guess I do have an MO.
I've rarely been proven wrong on here. This is not one of those times.
"No, you are simply trolling. "
If keeping up with, and countering every one of your BS posts, then I guess you can call that trolling.
But in reality, only those that get called out out every turn use trolling as their excuse.
A definitive delusional declaration.
If you think that is agreeing, your welcome. What ever tickles your fancy.
It's a choice, YOUR choice.
Actually McCarthy was, is, and always will be a fool.
Why, because it will be proven just what a toxic piece of partisan BS that the Jan 6th committee was?
It will put Democrats (especially Pelosi and Schumer) in a bad light? It will make Garland's job that much harder as calls for his head will increase; as many charges he is pushing will proven to be bogus? The FBI will be forced to answer questions that Democrats refused to ask it during the Jan 6th committee?
Or that it will divide the country that much further and make it more difficult for Democrats to operate as they have for the last 7 years?
Who to believe? You, or our own lying eyes?
How can you possibly not comprehend what took place?? See @3.1.3
That's a picture of crowd of people near the Capitol Building. What's it supposed to tell us?
Yeah, it is a picture. Now, I gave you three videos @3.13 and the web has plenty more that you can easily find. There is no question of what those videos show. But you (partisan blindness) ignore the videos and leap to a single picture because it is an easier target.
Clearly you do not care about what actually took place ... just partisan spin.
I comprehend it completely. See the fucking "Summer of Love".
Same difference no matter how you spin it; except leftist morons want to try and differentiate between their extremist assholes entering and destroying federal property; assaulting federal officers; and attacking politicians- do you really need me to provide all of the damn proof. It happened on a much larger scale and far more damage was done. Leftists love their two tier justice system.
The Jan 6th committee was nothing more than a Pelosi hand pick TDS partisan POS that only presented evidence to further it's "get Trump at all costs" narrative.
Leftists can yell scream and cry all they want. Fuck all of them.
Your comments prove otherwise.
Sure, all of those Republican witnesses who compromised their political futures by testifying were all lying. Your ongoing defense of Trump against what he did after losing the election is disgusting.
he's trying to contaminate any jury pool on a national level with the false narrative tucker carlson will create.
So you're afraid of the real facts being revealed about the nefarious actions of the Dems J6 committee?
What nefarious actions do you have in mind? List them with specifics.
Do you think they created fake videos of Barr noting that he told Trump that his election fraud claims were bullshit?
Fake videos of Rusty Bowers testifying that Trump tried to coerce him into submitting fake electors after the fact?
Do you think all the testimonies under oath by Republican operatives who were compromising their future by testifying were all lies?
Do you think they had actors pretend to break and enter the Capitol to create bogus footage?
Did they force Ivanka Trump to state that she believed the election was NOT fraudulent and that she asked her dad to intervene to stop the insurrection?
All of this fake with nefarious intent??
What about all the video they didn't show?
Why was Pelosi off limits to the J6 committee?
What might have been said behind closed doors that was not classified yet was not included in public testimony?
Why was James Goldston hired to produce a for TV event?
Despite your one-sided questions, there are still questions that need answers. With all these unanswered questions, was the J6 Committee truly up-front and honest with the American people? If the J6 Committee was formed to investigate the what/why/how of the Jan 6th attack and present ways to prevent it in the future, why was part of the background deemed off-limits from the very start? What was there to hide?
Yeah, Snuffy, there are always questions (especially for cynical minds) that can be asked.
The point, however, is that these videos should NOT be made available to the public. They, like other confidential information that can compromise our national security, should be secured so that bad actors cannot take advantage of the information.
Your concerns about the Jan 6th committee do NOT justify releasing this video information to the public. The appropriate venue for this is a court of law ... not allowing this information to fall into malicious hands.
Do you even consider the possibility that the Jan 6th committee offered a largely accurate profile of what took place? You seem to hold the position that it was nothing but spin and that Trump really did not:
Why do you continue to defend Trump?
LOL... so you read my comment in 3.4.3 as another defense of Trump. You really should re-read it then with an open mind. Nowhere in there did I say anything about Trump, my comments were all about the J6 Committee itself and why some questions still remain because they were never even looked at by the Committee. Why was Pelosi declared off-limits to the committee from the beginning?
I'm not denying ANY of Trumps actions as you listed them above. And I'm also not saying that what the committee offered was not a largely accurate profile of what happened, but I do question that there was more to the day than just what was presented.
I'm asking why wasn't anything else also looked at. Why was Pelosi excused from questioning? Why when the Capital Police were given advance notice of the potential troubles that they did nothing to beef up what security they had? Why was the assistance of the National Guard declined before Jan 6th?
Why do you continue to excuse anything around that day except for Trump?
Yeah, you question everything about the Jan 6th committee who ... surprise ... have been delivering evidence of Trump's wrongdoing. That is defending Trump.
Given the above is a profile of what the Jan 6th committee offered, why are you trying to discredit the evidence they presented? Focus on what they delivered rather than dwell on the obvious fact that they are a partisan body.
You mean why she was not interviewed? Only idea I can offer (speculation) is that the committee focused on Republican witnesses. They (rightly) likely figured that any D witness would be immediately dismissed as biased.
Good question. A failure of the Chief of the Capitol Police (the top operational executive). What do you think is the reason and what evidence leads you to that?
I have no idea. Why do you think (what reason) it was declined and what evidence leads you to that conclusion?
What a stupid question; you just declare that I excuse "anything around that day except for Trump". Where have I made these excuses? More bullshit from you Snuffy in lieu of an actual argument based on facts.
I have not discredited the evidence they have presented, instead I am wondering why it was solely aimed at Trump. Trump was not the only cause of Jan 6th.
I don't buy that speculation. Pelosi has a lot of authority over the Sergeant at Arms for the House. Did you hear the reporting on what the Sergeant at Arms for the House and the Senate have said?
Read the official timeline from the Capital Police. Chief of the Capital Police Steven Sund requested on Jan 4th of the Sergeants at Arms to request National Guard support, that request was denied. This report doesn't state why it was denied or who denied it. There was early speculation that it was refused due to the "optics" of having the military at the Capital but I don't know if that is factual. What I do know is the Capital Police had advance warning and they did not get approval to prepare for it. Why was not not part of the Jan 6th presentations?
No more bullshit that you asking me why I continue to defend Trump. I'm asking the other questions around Jan 6th. Why don't you ever ask questions about anything else that might have helped Jan 6th to happen? Why are all of your comments dealing with Jan 6th only dealing with Trump? There's more to Jan 6th than just Trump, why isn't everybody asking more questions in order to find out everything that happened and to work to prevent it from happening again.
Trump is the 800lb gorilla in the room. A focus on Trump should not surprise you.
Then do not buy it. I did my best to come up with an answer to your question given we have nothing to go on.
When you have an answer, let us know.
Running interference for Trump is defending him. The Jan 6th committee has a ton of witnesses reporting on Trump's wrongdoing. You discredit the committee. You want to focus on individuals other than Trump. Trump is the main player in this saga.
Because Trump is the key here and it makes little sense to ask questions that cannot be answered. I do not care to hear speculation.
Because Trump is the 800 lb gorilla in the room. Hello?
The failures in security are troubling but the fact that a sitting PotUS was able to do what Trump did is far more disturbing. The security failures are far easier to address than the constitutional issues raised by Trump.
Why do you keep trying to deflect focus away from Trump and onto ancillary issues?
Why can't it be condemning Trump for his part AND asking questions about the ancillary issues? Why must be be only one or the other? Your refusal to talk about ANYTHING ELSE besides Trump shows how locked up you are on a single issue. So be it. Have a nice day/life. It's too bad you cannot talk about anything other than what you want it to be, you seem like an intelligent guy but not reasonable.
Well Snuffy look around. That usually does not happen. What typically happens on the R side is pure defense of Trump by dismissing everything produced by the Jan 6th committee under the excuse that the committee is partisan. Well, yeah, it is partisan. Try to put together a committee of politicians that is not partisan.
The fact that this was a D partisan committee is a factor. People should consider the factor while considering the testimonies, who testified, what they stated, etc. People should not simply toss out everything with the 'partisan committee' excuse.
Refusal? I attempted to answer your questions but note that we only have questions ... no answers. So what do you want me to do? I speculated and you disagreed with me. So where does that go? Do I keep speculating on no evidence until I find something you like? Not going to engage in idle speculation.
Trump is the 800lb gorilla so do not complain that the focus is on him. Deliver some evidence that enables meaningful discussion of other questions before complaining that the only thing discussed is that which has evidence --- Trump.
I guess transparency is a bad thing?
Just use your brain Jeremy. With that naïve 'logic' we should release all classified documents to the public. After all, that would be great transparency. Think.
"Classified documents"? That's hilarious. That would mean the J6 committee broadcast "classified documents" during their "investigation". But I guess you see no problem with this because of who broadcast them.
You do know you can get on youtube and watch HOURS of video from that protest right? Start with this:
I notice you didn't answer my question: Do you think transparency as a bad thing?
Amazing that you do not seem to care that you would have to be incapable of understanding my comment to write this.
The available videos give very little information on the layout of the Capitol building, etc. If you actually watched these you would see that they focus on the violence of the insurrectionists.
Transparency is a very good thing except when it compromises national security. Not everything that takes place in the government should be public domain. You do not appear to comprehend that.
You're right. I dont' care. You claimed it would be wrong to broadcast the video's because they are "classified documents". Then when provided video of the committee broadcasting them you get all pissy. Really sounds like you are just throwing another fit for the sake of throwing another fit.
So then why are you throwing a fit over these videos being released? We both know the "National Security" claim is a reach.
My argument is easy to understand. Releasing the entire corpus of surveillance videos to the public is irresponsible. If Pelosi had done this you would be all over it (as would I). But because it is an R Speaker you naturally engage in your pure partisan 'logic'.
Because it's an "R" Speaker is precisely why you and the rest of the left are throwing your fit. You were all good with the "D" Speaker keeping everybody in the dark. That supported the narrative. The release threatens that.
Wrong as usual. The problem with partisans like you is that you cannot even imagine that some of us do not care about political parties. As I have stated, it makes no difference to me if these videos were released by Pelosi or McCarthy. The reason it was wrong has nothing to do with political parties but everything to do with national security.
You have no argument so, as usual, you just invent your own facts. It is pathetic.
That would be the case if I agreed with you.
I could care less about the partisan shit you are pushing.
If it were really about national security, then the committee wouldn't have broadcast any video. Since they did, you're just pissing in the wind.
What 'partisan shit' are you referring to? (You have no clue ... you are just spewing.)
That is stupid. I am talking about the entirety of the surveillance vs. select excerpts.
So the left and Democrats are upset about transparency. The J6 Committee released it's findings. Now, we are seeing ALL the "evidence". Not just what Pelosi and her TDS Partisan clown show wanted people to see.
I'm all for the media having access after the findings are released. If other outlets want access to the videos then coordinate / request for access. Don't just throw a hissy fit.
As if that will make any difference in partisan minds. I predict that you will never acknowledge that Trump engaged in any wrongdoing in his post-election Big Lie con job.
It was the partisan "minds" that seem to keep these from being released.
Rehashing old shit again?
You are? Where? Has Tucker released the thousands of hours of video for everyone to see? Please provide the link to these videos.
Unless you can show the access to all the videos, you have a proven liar being the only person with access to video evidence, and no one else to dispute what he chooses to say about it.