As expected from a corrupt Kangaroo Court: Lies, Omission, obfuscation, and spliced edits... propaganda at its best... lying passed by our "ruling elite" as truth. (i.e. January 6th commission)

in Deep Dives6 months ago (edited)

If you've been researching and following news about January 6th from the day in question onward you likely know a lot of details. If you are like me knowing those things only makes what the sham January 6th Committee is pushing out as enraging. It isn't as if these are just "so-called journalists" that are doing the norm of the day of fabricating lies as truth, and presenting information out of context. No, these people are supposed to be your elected representatives. You are supposed to blindly trust the authority of these charlatans.

If this committee is speaking at this point you can pretty much guarantee it is carefully crafted propaganda and lies. They will show you snippets here and there and tell you what those snippets are supposed to mean in their nightmare fantasy they are fabricating. They of course won't let you see enough of the clips or know anything about the actual events to know what truly happened.

They looked for little things they could show.

For example they went after Enrique Tarrio who is the half-black, half cuban person who happened to be the president of the "Proud Boys" on January 6th. He is also a member of Latinos for Trump.

The committee trotted out videos of Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes and Enrique Tarrio and said it was proof of collusion. This is an example of them showing something without actually showing what happened. They show still pictures and then they tell you the narrative they want those pictures to represent to provide foundation for their propaganda.

Problem... Enrique Tarrio wasn't in Washington D.C. on January 6th. He had been told he could not be for the "crime" of burning a Black Lives Matter flag earlier. A half-black man burning a BLM flag getting harsh treatment when burning the United States flag doesn't get much of anything these days.

Well Stewart Rhodes spoke up about that meeting. He was security for an attorney with Latinos for Trump that went to meet Tarrio. Stewart and Enrique shook hands and exchanged greetings. That is it.

No collusion. Also remember Tarrio was not even in Washington D.C. on the day of the so-called insurrection. Really it was a day of entrapment and fabricated narratives. It was something they could spin to attack Trump and those who would support him. It in reality was a facet of the actual insurrection which had been unfolding for years.

image.png
EXCLUSIVE: From His Prison Cell Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes Tells REAL STORY behind Meeting with Enrique Tarrio in DC Garage — JAN 6 COMMITTEE LIED (Audio)

Audio from Rumble of the conversation is embedded in that article above.


Yet the committee continues just outright lying...

image.png
Jan. 6 Hearing Liz Cheney Says “2000 Mules” Was Debunked — Bill Barr Laughs at Movie During Questioning — Wireless Services CEO Sets Barr Straight (Video)

It was not remotely debunked. Yet this is the authoritarian tactic they have been using for some time now. They call whatever they want debunked without doing any actual debunking.

2000 Mules is only one facet of the election fraud but it is extremely damning and they were even reserved in coming up with that 2000 mules. It was far worse than that.

The criteria for those 2000 mules is that they had to visit specific non-profits AND more than 10 ballot drop boxes by the same person. That is extreme. When they dropped it to 5 drop boxes it was more than 10x that number. What if they had done just 2 drop boxes, or 3? People should only be visiting a drop box once. They also shouldn't be offloading a ton of ballots. There is also no reason for them to take pictures of the drop boxes after dropping off things at each one.

2000 mules is just one of many smoking guns. NOTHING about it has been debunked.


The January 6th Committee is a fraud and I consider it a bunch of criminals telling you that other people committed crimes to conceal the crimes they themselves are complicit in.

image.png
“SHELOB” SPINS HER WEB OF LIES

image.png
'Reminder': Jan. 6 panel 'has altered evidence and lied about it'


The following was not specifically about the January 6th committee but I do think what it is discussing is completely relevant to this situation as well.

image.png
Just like the Ministry of Truth, Big Tech is seizing control over HISTORY and rewriting it to suit current regime

image.png
Literally political theater: Pelosi’s hand-picked J6 Committee hired TV exec to produce “prime-time” hearings

image.png
FBI Had Evidence Of ANTIFA Involvement Of Ashli Babbitt’s Murder Since January 11th – Rudy Giuliani [VIDEO]


Lastly - I share what I've shared before...

image.png
The Truth About January 6th Documentary


image.png
Hey, Bill Barr!… BREAKING: Surveillance Video Shows Man Wearing Street Clothes Exiting Passenger Seat of Post Office Truck In Detroit…Dumps Stack of Ballots In Dropbox TWICE! [VIDEO]

Sort:  

Thanks for this.

I hope you get a chance to watch the Hearing committee footage from today. I think you'll be extremely interested in the answers from the Trump campaign staff.

I think everyone is aware Enrique Tarrio wasn't in Washington on January 6th... the indictment against him is that he was organizing beforehand (ie, Jan 3rd) and was in contact with people at the Capitol on Jan 6th via messaging apps. I'll link the source below, Tarrio was involved even though he wasn't there.

image.png
Source

Yeah they showed still images of Tarrio and Rhodes together. There were attorneys present. There apparently is video of the meeting which they are not showing just the still images.. The problem is that January 6th wasn't an insurrection of the crowd. I say you could call it an insurrection yet the people that committed it are those on that committee and many people that colluded with them months and even years before January 6th.

Showing me anything from them will I admit be met with extreme bias on my part. Especially if it is snips, clips, and still images.

Keep in mind Adam Schiff who is gleefully there has already been lying for years about evidence he claims to have seen. Yet the evidence it turns out never existed. That means he lied.

Why should I suddenly trust any of these crooks?

I personally think the more important information is what the people under oath are saying in response to the Committee's questions. At this point, what's said under oath is the only thing that's important... and if people are lying under oath then they should absolutely be charged with perjury.

I say you could call it an insurrection yet the people that committed it are those on that committee and many people that colluded with them months and even years before January 6th.

The members of the committee committed a violent uprising against the government of the United States?

The members of the committee committed a violent uprising against the government of the United States?

They have incited it. Just like they claim others have. They have FORCEFULLY incarcerated people for in some cases more than a year without due process. Yet those that they agree with often burn, loot, and yes kill people and are in some cases not pursued at all, in other cases given almost no charges.

It is a very different reaction in U.S. Justice system depending upon you political leanings.

EVERY SINGLE member of that committee has lied and been corrupt in the past in some cases many times. I truly don't care much what show they put on. It is meaningless without full context and they will not give you that.

Hard agree that the U.S. Justice system treats people very differently depending on race, wealth, etc. I think we can both agree that we'd love to see people treated the same regardless of who they are. The U.S honestly has so much work to do in this arena.

What evidence would convince you that the 2020 US election was legitimate?

If you haven't seen it by the way. The evidence presented in 2000 Mules is extremely damning and they haven't done anything to debunk it.

A lot that was found in Arizona was damning. They just ignore it.

Video evidence that we've had since a day or two after the election is damning. Nothing happened to the people on the video and most networks ignore it.

I do see a lot of "it's debunked" without any actual debunking occurring.

It is also usually said by people that are guilty of lying and fabricating for some time now. Expecting me to trust someone who I know lies just because they say "it is debunked" isn't going to work.

I mentioned before that the Hearing from today would be very interesting to you. Former AG Barr talks at length, under oath, about the 2000 Mules film by Dinesh D'Souza. I think you should watch all of today's hearing, but you'll definitely get a lot of out of specifically that bit.

What evidence would convince you that the 2020 US election was legitimate?

Unrestricted access to information. OPEN investigations in every state where the data is available to everyone.

If they provided that and it showed it was legitimate I suspect most people except a very small minority would believe it.

Instead the investigations that happen find things. Yet we'll have people like Cheney call it debunked when they do absolutely nothing to debunk it. Sorry Liz Cheney... saying "it's debunked" isn't how you debunk something.

I'm not 100% on this, but I assume they can't release all the information until everyone involved is sentenced or acquitted? Hopefully afterwards they release it all to the public so we can see.

If Trump admitted that the 2020 election was legitimate, would that move the needle for you at all?