Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Democrats plot effort to counter Tucker Carlson on Jan. 6 narrative


OverSword

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Never as much as you.

 

 

 

Those were not real republicans.  There are RINOs.  The party is changing and RINOs are dying out.  Now, there were a few I was surprised at, especially one of them.  But he always has a different view point of things.  I’m holding my judgement until I hear his side.

 

 

 

You are free to believe the Left’s narrative, no matter how much it gets debunked.  As I’ve said, when one domino falls, they all fall.

 

 

 

Left's narrative? Not even Tucker believes in the shiat he sais. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

If this were true than they would no longer in 2023 be calling the election fake.

They are still calling it fraud in the 2020 election.  Most people have moved on, but that should not be read that there was no fraud in the first place.  It is just sitting there waiting for the right time to come back and that time is near.  Tucker releasing video that debunks the Left’s narrative is just more egg on the Left’s face.  The Left’s house of cards is collapsing.  The phony Russian collusion (where are the pee-pee tapes) has been debunked.  The ‘phone call’ has been debunked and it’s led to the laptop.  Hunter’s laptop being Russian disinformation has been shown wrong.  The twitter files have uncovered conspiracy between Big Tech and the FBI/CIA.  More documents are being found in Biden’s possession.  The video release has show the corruption and malfeasance of the Left, shredding the Constitution.  Fauci is about to get raked over the coals, when it is presented with the lab leak, that the masks didn’t work, and that the vaccines were far more deadly than the virus.  Do you see the pattern here?  The Left’s goal is to seize power in this country and it doesn’t matter how many lies they have to tell.  Don’t you think that after all these coverups are revealed, that we shouldn’t wonder about the validity of the election?

 

Quote

We’ve had countless trials and investigations at this point. It’s clear they would never accept the results.

I’ve already answered this, but I’ll reiterate that the investigations have produced a lot of evidence.  Much has been presented here.  And the trials never went anywhere because they were dismissed on procedural BS and not on the merits of the case (key point here).  If it wasn’t a coup, then how come some didn’t have the curiosity to look into the evidence?  Anyone with curiosity and common sense would want to see the evidence.  As least enough to investigate further.  But that didn’t happen.  It didn’t happen because the Left has to hide the truth and defend their narrative.  Why do you think the Left has become irrational twisting the twitter hearings?  Why do you think the Left is incensed by Tucker releasing full clips, showing the full truth?  It is only to get worse for the Left as this year progresses.  How much more absurdity are you going to take from the Left (and that includes RINOs)?

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Anyone with curiosity and common sense would want to see the evidence.  As least enough to investigate further. 

We've literally had republican controlled states hand pick who they want to do the fraud investigations and audits and yet nothing has came up. 

You're going off of what you want to believe and not off of the evidence (or in this case complete lack there of)

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Why were police overwhelmed? When the progressives stormed the Capitol in 2017 to stop Trump's inauguration there were THOUSANDS of police in riot gear, anti-riot shields, plastic bullets, tear gas and really the whole shebang. When the MAGA crowd arrived on January 6, there were a hundred security guards with batons. Did the people on January 6 somehow hide their intentions from the Capitol security? 

If the security was what it was in 2017, they would never have breached the doors and we would not be talking about January 6! 

Because the barriers were breached.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"But what was surprising is how they responded when they were caught lying. They exploded in rage." :yes:

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

They're also trained to ensure that their field of fire is clear to the target and beyond the target. There were LEO on the stairs behind Babbit.

The officer should've never fired, period and end of conversation.

What you had was a scared punk of a cop that should have his badge removed and his employment terminated.

I thought there were people trying to break into the Halls of Congress even after cries of "Hang Mike Pence" echoed through the halls. You let one breech, you let all breech.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, odas said:

Even real republicans called out 

It would take national geographic months to cull a herd of rhinos that quickly. Those guys aren't "real" Republicans. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

No.

That question comes up almost anytime there is a police shooting. 

Police are trained to aim for center mass. 

I know, I was pointing out that no progressives are saying "police should have aimed for the leg". Compare that to.... say, Ma'khia Bryant.... shoot a warning shot in the air, aim for the leg - source

Killing of Ma'Khia Bryant - Wikipedia

Keeping in mind, this was the situation at the time the officer shot her (note the unmistakable blade in Bryant's right hand). But for the progressive left, those pundits at MSNBC and those who tune in to get their "news" from this source, this was racism and they should have shot her in the leg or fired a warning shot in the air, or something....

I was also addressing this post to the conservatives who have been arguing that Babbitt's death was uncalled for, as I think those people are equally blind to the reality that if you play stupid games you should expect to win stupid prizes, and Babbitt definitely won the Big Stupid Booby Prize. Sad for her and her family, but it is what it is. I have more compassion for Ma'khia Bryant, because at the end of the day she was a young girl and Babbitt was an adult. But both of them played a stupid game and won a stupid prize, and now their families have lost a loved one for life because of it :cry:  

 

 

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, odas said:

You are trying to use an excuse for untrained police officers, or let's say, exuse for police officers that DO shoot black people without thinking.

No, Babbit did not deserve to die. Just like the thousands of black americans who were shot to death for less reasons by the police.

But that is a different story. If you train people only for a few months that is what you get.  Many times german, english, french...police officers were in the same position yet they were able to get the other person alive with non leathel wounds. That is real training that lasts for 3, 4, 5 years. You get what you pay for and, as I can notice here, some people are loving it, until it's one of their own.

The police who shot Ashlii Babbitt was following his training. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MGB said:

Because the barriers were breached.

If there were thousands of riot police in full tactical gear surrounding the Capitol the barriers wouldn't have been breached. 2017 demonstrates that the Capitol had the capacity to put such forces out on the street, as that's exactly what they did for a much smaller crowd.

If the best answer you have as to "why" is "because it happened", then suffice it to say that people like myself will not find that to be a satisfactory answer. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

So is Tucker done?  Is there more to come?

I was really hoping to see some footage of Babbit.  

You ever think maybe that's one thing that may have went down the way they said? Tucker only showed the things they lied about or hid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I know, I was pointing out that no progressives are saying "police should have aimed for the leg". Compare that to.... say, Ma'khia Bryant.... shoot a warning shot in the air, aim for the leg - source

Killing of Ma'Khia Bryant - Wikipedia

Keeping in mind, this was the situation at the time the officer shot her (note the unmistakable blade in Bryant's right hand). But for the progressive left, those pundits at MSNBC and those who tune in to get their "news" from this source, this was racism and they should have shot her in the leg or fired a warning shot in the air, or something....

I was also addressing this post to the conservatives who have been arguing that Babbitt's death was uncalled for, as I think those people are equally blind to the reality that if you play stupid games you should expect to win stupid prizes, and Babbitt definitely won the Big Stupid Booby Prize. Sad for her and her family, but it is what it is. I have more compassion for Ma'khia Bryant, because at the end of the day she was a young girl and Babbitt was an adult. But both of them played a stupid game and won a stupid prize, and now their families have lost a loved one for life because of it :cry:  

 

 

They aren't alike in any way. You make uneven comparisons a lot of late. 

Despite some saying shoot the leg or the air (also not a great idea as falling bullet's kill people) the main argument was a taser should have been used.

And that's about right. The main issue with the officer, who got off the charges we know, was no attempt at de-escalation or non deadly force. That option wasn't there with Babbitt and the activists with her. It had already been expended.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abc6onyourside.com/amp/news/local/questions-raised-over-police-officers-use-of-deadly-force-in-makhia-bryants-death

She was shot Tuesday in southeast Columbus. Since then, protesters have been pushing for transparency and asking why the officer shot Bryant before attempting to use a taser or another means of de-escalation.

 

 

And honestly, it's a darn good question. Still.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

They aren't alike in any way.

OK. I disagree,  but ok. Ma'khia Bryant got exactly what someone who attacks another person with a knife deserves,  and if I was the family of the lady in pink I'd be thanking that officer for saving my daughters life

Edited by Paranoid Android
Auto correct fail
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Paranoid Android said:

OK. I disagree,  but ok. 

Taser. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Taser. 

I edited my previous post, I still disagree.  When the life of another is at stake (the lady in pink) police training demands lethal force. You can disagree with police training,  but the officer did what he was trained to do,  and I think he did the right thing. 

If I was the family of the woman in pink I'd thank that officer for saving her life.  

Ps- why couldn't they use a Taser on Babbitt?

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I edited my previous post, I still disagree.  When the life of another is at stake (the lady in pink) police training demands lethal force. You can disagree with police training,  but the officer did what he was trained to do,  and I think he did the right thing. 

If I was the family of the woman in pink I'd thank that officer for saving her life.  

Yes, that's what I disagree with. Training. 

I see no reason whatsoever a taser couldn't have been used in that particular situation. He acted within his training which is why he is a free man. 

Even as the parent if the lady in pink, I would still ask why a taser wasn't used. Where death can be avoided should be. That was one such situation. 

23 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

OK. I disagree,  but ok. Ma'khia Bryant got exactly what someone who attacks another person with a knife deserves,  and if I was the family of the lady in pink I'd be thanking that officer for saving my daughters life

As you edited.

No. She didn't deserve to die. That you think you can make that call is wrong. If death can be avoided it should be. Yes I have little doubt the lady in pink was grateful. I bet she wouldn't wish death on Bryant though. That's what being human is all about. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Yes, that's what I disagree with. Training. 

I see no reason whatsoever a taser couldn't have been used in that particular situation. He acted within his training which is why he is a free man. 

Even as the parent if the lady in pink, I would still ask why a taser wasn't used. Where death can be avoided should be. That was one such situation. 

As you edited.

No. She didn't deserve to die. That you think you can make that call is wrong. If death can be avoided it should be. Yes I have little doubt the lady in pink was grateful. I bet she wouldn't wish death on Bryant though. That's what being human is all about. 

I'm comfortable with lethal force in both situations.  It's a tragedy,  but they both put others in danger and I'm ok with police shooting them.  

And despite your moral outrage,  I argue that if you try to murder someone (like say,  trying to stab them) your right to live is forfeit until the danger is over.  If you survive,  awesome,  but if you die you're just getting what you're actions deserve. It sucks for them,  but if you play stupid games,  don't complain if you win stupid prizes.  And Ashlii Babbitt and Ma'khia Bryant both played very stupid games!

Why couldn't a taser be used on Babbitt? As noted,  I don't think either situation warranted a taser, but I also think that if one were to use a taser in one of these instances it would be appropriate in the other context too. To argue otherwise is to simultaneously suggest that a woman who had a knife and was in the middle of stabbing another person with that knife, at close range and closing in,  should have been tasered,  but an unarmed woman climbing through a window was rightfully shot. 

Quote

No. She didn't deserve to die. That you think you can make that call is wrong

I didn't make the call,  I'm making an observation/ judgement call after the fact.  It was the police officers who followed their training and shot these individuals who made the decision, and subsequent investigations backed that action up. 

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Taser. 

With taser failures up to 40% of the time, that situation could have ended in pink lady's death, and then we would hear "police did nothing to stop perpetrator", "why they didn't shot her", etc...

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2023 at 4:29 PM, Paranoid Android said:

I'm comfortable with lethal force in both situations.  It's a tragedy,  but they both put others in danger and I'm ok with police shooting them.  

I'm uncomfortable with you so flippantly calling death shots. 

On 3/10/2023 at 4:29 PM, Paranoid Android said:

And despite your moral outrage, 

Outrage?

On 3/10/2023 at 4:29 PM, Paranoid Android said:

I argue that if you try to murder someone (like say,  trying to stab them) your right to live is forfeit until the danger is over.  If you survive,  awesome,  but if you die you're just getting what you're actions deserve. It sucks for them,  but if you play stupid games,  don't complain if you win stupid prizes.  And Ashlii Babbitt and Ma'khia Bryant both played very stupid games!

And you honestly don't think training should assist stupidity that ends lives?

Should we just take warning labels of everything and let things sort themselves out? 

You don't seem to be picking up.that I understand the actions police took. What I'm proposing is better training to minimise the use of lethal force. 

Why do you maintain that lethal force is the one and only answer? 

On 3/10/2023 at 4:29 PM, Paranoid Android said:

Why couldn't a taser be used on Babbitt?

Namely distance but also limited view created by hoards of more gutless people hiding behind and around her. 

You do remember she was halfway through a window? 

On 3/10/2023 at 4:29 PM, Paranoid Android said:

As noted,  I don't think either situation warranted a taser, but I also think that if one were to use a taser in one of these instances it would be appropriate in the other context too. To argue otherwise is to simultaneously suggest that a woman who had a knife and was in the middle of stabbing another person with that knife, at close range and closing in,  should have been tasered,  but an unarmed woman climbing through a window was rightfully shot. 

And your vast experience puts them on par how? 

On 3/10/2023 at 4:29 PM, Paranoid Android said:

I didn't make the call,  I'm making an observation/ judgement call after the fact.  It was the police officers who followed their training and shot these individuals who made the decision, and subsequent investigations backed that action up. 

And you also seem to be of the opinion that the current training is perfect and can't be improved. 

I disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2023 at 5:08 PM, bmk1245 said:

With taser failures up to 40% of the time, that situation could have ended in pink lady's death, and then we would hear "police did nothing to stop perpetrator", "why they didn't shot her", etc...

Then you heu should be perfected or removed from service completely shouldn't they? 

It could have also ended with everybody alive which would be the desired outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/9/2023 at 10:11 AM, and-then said:

Like the 930 or so who filed sworn affidavits about potential crimes in the 2020 election?  Like that?

Where are you getting that number from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2023 at 12:56 AM, Buzz_Light_Year said:

They're also trained to ensure that their field of fire is clear to the target and beyond the target. There were LEO on the stairs behind Babbit.

The officer should've never fired, period and end of conversation.

What you had was a scared punk of a cop that should have his badge removed and his employment terminated.

Don't they use ammunition that's otherwise banned under the Geneva convention? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/7/2023 at 2:11 PM, RavenHawk said:

The truth can be a b#tch can't it!  This just shows how the Left frames the narrative they want and they don't understand that most people don't buy into their lies.  The Marxists just let the TDS of minions carry that narrative.  This disgraces the Jan 6 un-select committee, especially Pelosi.

- Showing  Matt Gaetz running down the hall for his life (alone).  At least that is what the Left showed trying to put Gaetz in a bad light.  But the full clip shows perhaps a hundred Congressmen running for their lives, then you see Gaetz bringing up the rear.

- Sicknick is perhaps shown escorting people within the Capital, uninjured after he was supposedly killed.

- Epps is shown still in the crowd directing Antifa, 30 mins after he testified that he had left.

And those are just the highlights from yesterday.  Still don't know the names of the other 4 officers that were killed though??  How can anything a Democrat says be trusted anymore (if at all)?  When are people going to wake up and realize that the Marxists have weaponized this government against the people.  We are no different that any other tyranny on the planet.  And that is what the globalists want.

Josh Hawley was the runner not Gaetz.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2023 at 2:23 PM, Paranoid Android said:

I know, I was pointing out that no progressives are saying "police should have aimed for the leg". Compare that to.... say, Ma'khia Bryant.... shoot a warning shot in the air, aim for the leg - source

Killing of Ma'Khia Bryant - Wikipedia

Keeping in mind, this was the situation at the time the officer shot her (note the unmistakable blade in Bryant's right hand). But for the progressive left, those pundits at MSNBC and those who tune in to get their "news" from this source, this was racism and they should have shot her in the leg or fired a warning shot in the air, or something....

I was also addressing this post to the conservatives who have been arguing that Babbitt's death was uncalled for, as I think those people are equally blind to the reality that if you play stupid games you should expect to win stupid prizes, and Babbitt definitely won the Big Stupid Booby Prize. Sad for her and her family, but it is what it is. I have more compassion for Ma'khia Bryant, because at the end of the day she was a young girl and Babbitt was an adult. But both of them played a stupid game and won a stupid prize, and now their families have lost a loved one for life because of it :cry:  

 

 

Way to argue by false analogy?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.