Before I waste time on this and I assumed you watched it, does it show the police moving the barricades back early on when protestors began arriving?

Does it show the FBI agents and informants who were embedded?

Does it show the vast majority posing for photos of themselves inside the Capitol who had no intention of doing anything worse than trespassing?

What it shows me, will be very different than what it shows you, I'm sure.
...but I think it's worth watching.

It was violent, it was an insurrection and it was predicated on a lie that the election was stolen.

Anyone who believes otherwise is an ignorant a$$hole.

T And T Garage wrote on 07/01/21 at 11:40:25:


Anyone who blindly believes what he’s told by authorities despite genuine questions is an emasculated pu$$y.

That's why I gleen my information from several sources.

Sure you do.

You don’t.
Here’s the thing: since leftist domination the news and entertainment industries, I can’t escape them. And unless you’re in parts of Texas, you’re never going to run into Fox News on an airport TV. So you get all your news and info from a single point of view while I by default, get both sides.

And that allegation you made has been dealt with and disproven.

 I can't believe with the amount of video and audio footage of people throwing objects, spraying chemical, punching etc. that anyone can say this was exclusively a group of people walking in unobstructed taking selfies.

The radio communications alone show there was a degree of organization among some, and only some, exclusively the word "some" and definitely NOT the word "all".  I can not stress enough that only a portion of the people were organized and to describe a limited number I use the word "some".

 Police did pull back some barriers.  Again only the word "some" in exclusivity, with the exemption of all other known words.  

 There were 8 breaches.  This idea that police let people in at all 8 locations is inaccurate - there is ample video proof of this.    

 Now I look at the people there and see everything from an older guy in a blue jacket and jeans to a group of men in riot style gear, paramilitary garb carrying objects like bats and bear spray.  These men if they broke into your home would be considered armed, but for some yet undefined reason they are considered not armed only in this one location at this one time.

 I don't think the guy in the blue jacket was an insurrectionist.  I think the guy in paramilitary gear spraying police with bear spray is.  Not exclusively based off that action, but the postings where he says they are going to "stop the vote" is indicative of one trying to alter who is in charge of the Nation.  

 So I stand by my assessment.  Some people were protesters.  Some people were violent and assaulted the police.  Trying to say all those people are armed insurrectionists is wrong.  Saying they all went in after the police pulled back barricades and took selfies an committed no assaults is wrong.

 Why exactly should the guy swinging the hockey stick at police be absolved from an assault charge?  An argument besides saying ANTIFA gets away with it would be nice because we all know that is wrong too.