(Article by Tyler Durden republished from ZeroHedge.com)
Leftists were not able to describe how, exactly, surveillance footage from the capitol is rigged to depict events that did not happen, but their reactionary behavior indicates a number of inconvenient truths:
First, leftists went on the attack before the footage was ever received by Tucker Carlson. They didn't want him to have it. The Democrats at least believed that unreleased footage might show evidence contrary to their carefully crafted narrative of an “insurrection.” Or, they knew that it would debunk their narrative. Either way, they preemptively accused Carlson of mishandling the footage as it was made available to him.
If the public can be convinced that certain information is a lie before they ever see the information, then the release of those facts becomes irrelevant. The populace has been strategically infected with bias, so they will not see what is right in front of their eyes.
Second, Democrats and some GOP NeoCons have shown once again that they think the public should not be allowed to determine the meaning of data and evidence for themselves. In fact, one might suspect that establishment elites have something to hide as they rage indignantly about the mere release of video surveillance. Why are they so opposed to the public viewing the information unless that information threatens to expose establishment lies?
Third, much like the release of the Twitter Files, it is actually a majority of the corporate media that is seeking to misrepresent the evidence being revealed as rigged, incomplete or not important. Their goal is to suppress new information, and if they can't do that they will try to undermine it by sowing false seeds of doubt.
Numerous Democrat leaders and some NeoCon politicians, without taking time to acknowledge the implications of the surveillance being presented by Tucker Carlson, have immediately denounced the footage as “lies” and “sleight of hand.” Senator Chuck Schumer was quick to go on the attack, calling Carlson's recent segment on J6 a “perversion” of the truth. Not only that, but Schumer openly called for Rupert Murdoch to stop Carlson and remove him.
Why? Because “our democracy depends on” the censorship of such materials.
NeoCon Mitch McConnell went even further, stating:
"It was a mistake, in my view, for Fox News to depict this in a way that's completely at variance with what our chief law enforcement official here at the Capitol thinks.”
In other words, the mainstream news should be taking its cues from government officials and repeating exactly what THEY say, rather than reporting on the evidence as it exists. In their view, the narrative of the government supersedes the determinations of the public.
This is the exact sentiment that was expressed by U.S. Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger, who argued that Carlson's conclusions were “offensive and misleading.” Manger claimed that:
"TV commentary will not record the truth for our history books...The justice system will. The truth and justice are on our side."
Again, they believe that they write the truth. They write history, and history is whatever they say it is. The J6 Committee had one job, which was to perpetuate the historical narrative of an insurrection by conservatives on the steps of the Capitol Building. They were not interested in the truth, which is why over 40,000 hours of surveillance footage was never released to the public. They showed us what they wanted us to see, not the full reality.
Beyond the numerous videos showing police opening the doors and inviting protesters inside (which the media continues to lie about), there is also the question of intent which the J6 Committee was never able to prove.
The FBI found no evidence that the Trump Administration had anything to do with the Capitol protesters and scant evidence of any form of organization or coordination that would be required for an insurrection. Where were the plans for takeover? Who intended to run the government after the supposed coup? Where was the army that was going to secure the capitol after the insurrection's success? None of these things existed.
In fact, none of the protesters on J6 were even armed and the only person killed when the protests turned violent was Ashli Babbitt, a protester. It's pretty difficult to pull off an insurrection without weapons, without organization and without a plan. In other words, there was no insurrection. The claim is an erroneous lie, and always has been. The establishment has tried to reinvent a protest that turned aggressive into an act of war against “democracy” itself.
Tucker Carlson's footage shows what most of us already knew – That the media and elements of the government have completely overblown the events of January 6th for political gain The footage also reconfirms that no police were killed by protesters, and yet the media continue to perpetuate that disinformation. It is likely that Carlson will be releasing new footage for many months to come which runs contrary to the official version of events, which is why Democrats are calling for him to be taken off the air.
There is far more proven organization during the BLM and Antifa riots across the US for the past few years. Just this week Antifa engaged in a highly organized direct attack on a police training center site near Atlanta, Georgia. But the media doesn't want to talk about that, or how leftist groups represent a danger to our constitutional freedoms. And it is this double standard that is only making half the country more inclined to not care about such notions.
If our system is so corrupt that the release of hard video evidence “threatens our democracy,” then maybe our democracy isn't worth saving.
Read more at: ZeroHedge.com