The January 6th Committee is Hiding Vital Evidence

 

If the tale they’re spinning was true, they would want all the evidence to come out. They would release all of the roughly 14,000 hours of video from the Capitol and all of the emails to and from Pelosi between January 1st and January 7th. The fact that they’re only releasing selected tapes is similar to blocking the glass from people counting votes in Detroit on Election Day 2020. There’s no innocent explanation.

Also, they would want to find out who is behind Ray Epps and other provocateurs who suspiciously have not been arrested. Put Wray under oath and tell him if he must reveal the names all the law enforcement people who were in the crowd on January 6th. If he refuses to do this under pain of perjury, the FBI will be defunded. We also need a vigorous investigation of who planted the pipe bombs on January 5th. Was it an inside job by the Feds to push the insurrection theme? The lack of interest by the Feds in this crucial aspect of J6 is suspicious. And who approved the Whitmer fake plot which aided the Democrats. I thought the FBI was not supposed to get involved in politics. If Wray approved this, he should be impeached.

https://twitter.com/aka_realdirty/status/1546515497688211458?s=21&t=ZMxP79NIEoUiytcHTSEnwg

Published in Elections
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 19 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. WillowSpring Member
    WillowSpring
    @WillowSpring

    There was an insurrection.  The problem is that it happened way before Jan 6.

    • #1
  2. mildlyo Member
    mildlyo
    @mildlyo

    I’m not taking any hearings on the January 6th protests seriously until the video evidence bearing on Rosanne Boyland’s death is made public.

    I’m talking to you, Republicans. Come November your excuses are over.

    • #2
  3. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    The GOP will take the House and do none of this. 

    • #3
  4. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    So let’s say they put him under oath, and he lies — that is, commits perjury. Then what? How would we know? Who’s going to charge him? The DOJ? Ha ha ha.

    There is a problem when those who control the government are set against the truth.

    • #4
  5. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    Richard Easton:

    If the tale they’re spinning was true, they would want all the evidence to come out. 

    Finding out what happened on Jan 6th and why was never the point. The committee exists to try to stop and stop Trump from getting elected in 2024. That is its only purpose and every member is solely committed to that goal.

    There is more to the story that most of us would like to hear, but Congress won’t be telling us that story.

    • #5
  6. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Richard Easton:

    If the tale they’re spinning was true, they would want all the evidence to come out.

    Finding out what happened on Jan 6th and why was never the point. The committee exists to try to stop and stop Trump from getting elected in 2024. That is its only purpose and every member is solely committed to that goal.

    There is more to the story that most of us would like to hear, but Congress won’t be telling us that story.

    I only hope that someday we do learn of all the details, including the FBI involvement.

    • #6
  7. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Richard Easton:

    If the tale they’re spinning was true, they would want all the evidence to come out.

    Finding out what happened on Jan 6th and why was never the point. The committee exists to try to stop and stop Trump from getting elected in 2024. That is its only purpose and every member is solely committed to that goal.

    There is more to the story that most of us would like to hear, but Congress won’t be telling us that story.

    I only hope that someday we do learn of all the details, including the FBI involvement.

    Ironically, DJT may be the only serious Republican who can lose in 2024.  The committee May rue getting what they wish for.

    • #7
  8. Buckpasser Member
    Buckpasser
    @Buckpasser

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Richard Easton:

    If the tale they’re spinning was true, they would want all the evidence to come out.

    Finding out what happened on Jan 6th and why was never the point. The committee exists to try to stop and stop Trump from getting elected in 2024. That is its only purpose and every member is solely committed to that goal.

    There is more to the story that most of us would like to hear, but Congress won’t be telling us that story.

    Evidence is not allowed in any democratic endeavor.

    • #8
  9. Dr. Bastiat Member
    Dr. Bastiat
    @drbastiat

    Richard Easton: If Wray approved this, he should be impeached imprisoned.

    FIFY

    • #9
  10. Vince Guerra Member
    Vince Guerra
    @VinceGuerra

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Richard Easton: If Wray approved this, he should be impeached imprisoned regardless.

    FIFY

    FIFY even more accurately. 

    • #10
  11. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Richard Easton:

    If the tale they’re spinning was true, they would want all the evidence to come out.

    Finding out what happened on Jan 6th and why was never the point. The committee exists to try to stop and stop Trump from getting elected in 2024. That is its only purpose and every member is solely committed to that goal.

    There is more to the story that most of us would like to hear, but Congress won’t be telling us that story.

    I only hope that someday we do learn of all the details, including the FBI involvement.

    Ironically, DJT may be the only serious Republican who can lose in 2024. The committee May rue getting what they wish for.

    Remember, it was commonly understood that no serious Republican could lose in 2012, either.  And yet, look at 0bama’s win.

    • #11
  12. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Remember, it was commonly understood that no serious Republican could lose in 2012, either.

    Until they nominated Romney — against my recommendation!

    • #12
  13. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    So let’s say they put him under oath, and he lies — that is, commits perjury. Then what? How would we know? Who’s going to charge him? The DOJ? Ha ha ha.

    There is a problem when those who control the government are set against the truth.

    And the so-called Fourth Estate is in the pockets of the same government and become the PR department for the government to enable it to continue to hide the truth.

    • #13
  14. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Remember, it was commonly understood that no serious Republican could lose in 2012, either.

    Until they nominated Romney — against my recommendation!

    Yes, but Romney was a Republican — who lost.  He wasn’t a crackpot or an outsider, he could legitimately be called a politician and an experienced public servant.  And despite his self-serving political wobbliness he was qualified to be president.

    My point is that everyone can lose, even when an election is called unlosable.

    • #14
  15. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Remember, it was commonly understood that no serious Republican could lose in 2012, either.

    Until they nominated Romney — against my recommendation!

    Yes, but Romney was a Republican — who lost. He wasn’t a crackpot or an outsider, he could legitimately be called a politician and an experienced public servant. And despite his self-serving political wobbliness he was qualified to be president.

    My point is that everyone can lose, even when an election is called unlosable.

    I do not recall ’12 as being viewed as unlosable.  I remember “a decent chance against an incumbent.”

    • #15
  16. Bishop Wash Member
    Bishop Wash
    @BishopWash

    Columbo (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    So let’s say they put him under oath, and he lies — that is, commits perjury. Then what? How would we know? Who’s going to charge him? The DOJ? Ha ha ha.

    There is a problem when those who control the government are set against the truth.

    And the so-called Fourth Estate is in the pockets of the same government and become the PR department for the government to enable it to continue to hide the truth.

    Many years ago I saw, the Fourth Estate has become a Fifth Column. 

    • #16
  17. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Richard Easton:

    If the tale they’re spinning was true, they would want all the evidence to come out.

    Finding out what happened on Jan 6th and why was never the point. The committee exists to try to stop and stop Trump from getting elected in 2024. That is its only purpose and every member is solely committed to that goal.

    There is more to the story that most of us would like to hear, but Congress won’t be telling us that story.

    I only hope that someday we do learn of all the details, including the FBI involvement.

    Ironically, DJT may be the only serious Republican who can lose in 2024. The committee May rue getting what they wish for.

    Remember, it was commonly understood that no serious Republican could lose in 2012, either. And yet, look at 0bama’s win.

    The folks at PetSmart gave to the Obama campaign contact info of pet owners. This was used to amplify the message of Romney putting the dog carrier on the station wagons roof.  

    • #17
  18. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Richard Easton:

    If the tale they’re spinning was true, they would want all the evidence to come out.

    Finding out what happened on Jan 6th and why was never the point. The committee exists to try to stop and stop Trump from getting elected in 2024. That is its only purpose and every member is solely committed to that goal.

    There is more to the story that most of us would like to hear, but Congress won’t be telling us that story.

    I only hope that someday we do learn of all the details, including the FBI involvement.

    Ironically, DJT may be the only serious Republican who can lose in 2024. The committee May rue getting what they wish for.

    Remember, it was commonly understood that no serious Republican could lose in 2012, either. And yet, look at 0bama’s win.

    The folks at PetSmart gave to the Obama campaign contact info of pet owners. This was used to amplify the message of Romney putting the dog carrier on the station wagons roof.

    That doesn’t sound very ethical, exploiting innocent, unsuspecting dogs for partisan political purposes.  They better hope that PETA doesn’t find out.

    • #18
  19. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Remember, it was commonly understood that no serious Republican could lose in 2012, either.

    Until they nominated Romney — against my recommendation!

    Yes, but Romney was a Republican — who lost. He wasn’t a crackpot or an outsider, he could legitimately be called a politician and an experienced public servant. And despite his self-serving political wobbliness he was qualified to be president.

    My point is that everyone can lose, even when an election is called unlosable.

    I do not recall ’12 as being viewed as unlosable. I remember “a decent chance against an incumbent.”

    Well, maybe it was in the air.  Michele Bachmann nearly said it out loud and caught herself from finishing the sentence.

    • #19
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.