Jump to content

Tucker Carlson


T&C

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, redtail hawk said:

And then they appropriately get arrested, prosecuted and jailed.

Few dispute that.  What is disputable is the hypocracy and selective enforcement where others attacking Federal facilities and officers, rioting, looting, destroying public and private property, and committing acts of violence against other citizens and law enforcement got a free pass from Democratic administration's throughout the country because the violence helped the party leading up to the 2020 election.  And by magic it all suddenly stopped when party leaders found it was counter-productive to the cause.

That's the problem most liberals turn a blind eye to and refuse to acknowledge.  That makes it comical when they cite the rule of law.  But only when it's convenient.

 

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Few dispute that.  What is disputable is the hypocracy and selective enforcement where others attacking Federal facilities and officers, rioting, looting, destroying public and private property, and committing acts of violence against other citizens and law enforcement got a free pass from Democratic administration's throughout the country because the violence helped the party leading up to the 2020 election.  And by magic it all suddenly stopped when party leaders found it was counter-productive to the cause.

That's the problem most liberals turn a blind eye to and refuse to acknowledge.  That makes it comical when they cite the rule of law.  But only when it's convenient.

 

 

 

Please give specific examples.  Many rioters that became thugs at the BLM protests were prosecuted and jailed.  Thugs are thugs.

 

I suspect that all the people listening to this song dispute that.  It would appear more than a few.

https://www.forbes.com/video/6323032955112/trump-hits-no-1-with-justice-for-all-song-made-with-jan-6-arrestees/?sh=4ffbec46153c

Edited by redtail hawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redtail hawk said:

Please give specific examples.  Many rioters that became thugs at the BLM protests were prosecuted and jailed.  Thugs are thugs.

 

I suspect that all the people listening to this song dispute that.  It would appear more than a few.

https://www.forbes.com/video/6323032955112/trump-hits-no-1-with-justice-for-all-song-made-with-jan-6-arrestees/?sh=4ffbec46153c

Where are the months and months of highly produced hearings for those who attacked the White House and physically assaulted the officers protecting it? I must have missed them while I was busy watching the government paint the street in their honor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

Where are the months and months of highly produced hearings for those who attacked the White House and physically assaulted the officers protecting it? I must have missed them while I was busy watching the government paint the street in their honor. 

Republicans control the House. They can have hearings on whatever they want. Go for it. Or shut up about it.

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Republicans control the House. They can have hearings on whatever they want. Go for it. Or shut up about it.

 

We know it's inconvenient for you to hear it, regardless of whether Repubs want to put on a dog and pony show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

We know it's inconvenient for you to hear it, regardless of whether Repubs want to put on a dog and pony show.

So ... there are two possible reasons for why the House isn't planning all those promised hearings.

1. They are afraid they'd backfire. Hearings would simply amplify the ultra-right voices in the House that are, quite frankly, an embarrassment to the party.

2. They really don't have any kind of smoking gun to present.

So ... yes, put up or shut up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Why not? What better time than when you control the House?

I have said that there ought to be Hunter Biden hearings. And I mean it. There is enough there to probe - publicly - what Joe knew and when he knew it.

What would the hearings be about? Is there some big dispute over what happened? No there isn’t. The J6 hearings were also about nothing and proved nothing. Im not arguing for MORE hearings. I’m arguing for LESS. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Is there some big dispute over what happened?

Of course there is!

Biden Crime Family proponents say he was getting a cut of Hunter's illicit deals. Biden supporters say there's no proof of any such thing. Put on your evidence!

And if Hunter's guilty plea is accepted (it will be), he presumably won't have a 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Let's get it on!

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Of course there is!

Biden Crime Family proponents say he was getting a cut of Hunter's illicit deals. Biden supporters say there's no proof of any such thing. Put on your evidence!

And if Hunter's guilty plea is accepted (it will be), he presumably won't have a 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Let's get it on!

You’ve lost me here. I was talking about holding hearings on the attack on the White House! You’re talking about the Biden Crime Syndicate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

What would the hearings be about? Is there some big dispute over what happened? No there isn’t. The J6 hearings were also about nothing and proved nothing. Im not arguing for MORE hearings. I’m arguing for LESS. 

 

Yeah, hearings are a colossal waste of time.  Nothing was done as a result of J6 and nothing would be done as a result of any hearing the Repubs would hold about what happened 3 years ago

Edited by Doc
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

What would the hearings be about? Is there some big dispute over what happened? No there isn’t. The J6 hearings were also about nothing and proved nothing. Im not arguing for MORE hearings. I’m arguing for LESS. 

 

"Where are the months and months of highly produced hearings for those who attacked the White House and physically assaulted the officers protecting it?"

Confused.  What were you asking for here?  I assumed you wanted the insurrectionists to have a public voice such as in a hearing.

43 minutes ago, SCBills said:

 

And they'll listen...Pence stopped their attempt to steal an election.  They're angry and resentful.  
Exactly the milieu that Ole Tuck works best in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

 

"Where are the months and months of highly produced hearings for those who attacked the White House and physically assaulted the officers protecting it?"

Confused.  What were you asking for here?  I assumed you wanted the insurrectionists to have a public voice such as in a hearing.

And they'll listen...Pence stopped their attempt to steal an election.  They're angry and resentful.  
Exactly the milieu that Ole Tuck works best in.


Pence did the right thing. 
 

I’ll still applaud Tucker for exposing neocons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redtail hawk said:

 

"Where are the months and months of highly produced hearings for those who attacked the White House and physically assaulted the officers protecting it?"

Confused.  What were you asking for here?  I assumed you wanted the insurrectionists to have a public voice such as in a hearing.

 

Ya see? I’m your mind nobody attacked the White House, nobody assaulted police officers, and nobody remembers the date. The DNC media machine did its job. History belongs to the ones with a keyboard and microphone.

  • Thank you (+1) 2
  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

What would the hearings be about? Is there some big dispute over what happened? No there isn’t. The J6 hearings were also about nothing and proved nothing. Im not arguing for MORE hearings. I’m arguing for LESS. 

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

^^^^^

 

Tucker lied about the election and promoted the big lie!!!

 

Amirite?

 

Tucker did no such thing, but useful idiots like @redtail hawk still have their usefulness...for now.

Yup.  he did.  You're following a group of trust fund brats who care nothing about you.  They're just profiting "ugely" on your unhappiness and frustration.  Too bad they didn't just invest their inheritances and lived quiet lives.

Edited by redtail hawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greenwald, again, systematically obliterates the liberal media false narrative that Tucker said one thing behind the scenes, but the opposite on his show.

 

Of course this will make zero difference to a useful idiot like @redtail hawk, because he actually relishes being lied to.

 

https://rumble.com/v2blt70-system-update-show-50.html

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

Greenwald, again, systematically obliterates the liberal media false narrative that Tucker said one thing behind the scenes, but the opposite on his show.

 

Of course this will make zero difference to a useful idiot like @redtail hawk, because he actually relishes being lied to.

 

https://rumble.com/v2blt70-system-update-show-50.html

I've never refused a gentle spanking but that's a different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
×
×
  • Create New...