Stop trying to rewrite history!

@Metal-Brain said
This is meant for sonhouse.

https://wethepeopleconvention.org/articles/Police-Let-Protestors-Into-Capital

He wants to deny history to fit a false narrative, but the video evidence will not go away like he would like. The capitol police let protesters into the capitol building. It is a fact.

Good grief.

Dumb arse.

@wildgrass said
Because the police were supposed to be there on the other side of the barricade, protecting Congress.

Maybe you could argue they didn't do their job, but it is reasonable to think these guys were waaay overwhelmed, swarmed with people, and let them in because they didn't want to use lethal force to protect themselves. Isn't that what the testimony showed?

You're still ...[text shortened]... as an angry mob of thousands, vandalizing and terrorizing these police officers for hours and hours.

That is a lie. They were not overwhelmed at all. And you are talking about the barricade which was breached when Ray Epps told a protestor to breach it.

All the fake fact checkers are liars. Would you accept a bet? Yes or no?

@no1marauder said
Where is there anywhere in those videos showing the entry into the Capitol? Please provide approximate times in the videos as I did.

I refuse to accept "bets" from someone who insists on being the sole judge of who "wins". You've been told this dozens of times.

I've already linked to video showing the first breach and no one "let them do it". The one Capitol Police ...[text shortened]... lmost immediately and kicks it then is joined by another rioter and together they kick it in at :36.

"I refuse to accept "bets" from someone who insists on being the sole judge of who "wins". You've been told this dozens of times."

Sole judge? Ridiculous! The RHP community is the judge as we all know and you refuse to acknowledge. You are cowering from a bet because you do not want to be judged by the entire RHP community which you obviously fear.

Nobody on this forum is a sole judge. You are cowering from a bet as everyone here knows. You fear judgement from all, not one.

@sonhouse said
So why did Trump pardon 1500 of them eh? HE is the one starting that insurrection and BTW It WAS an insurrection, the aim to stop Biden from becoming POTUS and force Trump to be one instead AND there was more to it than 'Just" that. I guess you figure we will forget the fake elector scheme started by Trump or the FACT Trump and his allies badgered swing state IG's to PLEASE ...[text shortened]... es a rats ass.
You are a professional troll and that is ALL you ever were and all you ever WILL be.

The electors were alternate electors, not fake. If they were fake they would have no power to elect. False narrative.

@Metal-Brain said
"I refuse to accept "bets" from someone who insists on being the sole judge of who "wins". You've been told this dozens of times."

Sole judge? Ridiculous! The RHP community is the judge as we all know and you refuse to acknowledge. You are cowering from a bet because you do not want to be judged by the entire RHP community which you obviously fear.

Nobody on this f ...[text shortened]... ole judge. You are cowering from a bet as everyone here knows. You fear judgement from all, not one.

I bet a poster here that Biden would beat Trump in 2020. He paid to a charity I selected.

I'm almost completely sure you wouldn't have. Have you ever lost any of your bets here?

@Metal-Brain said
That is a lie. They were not overwhelmed at all. And you are talking about the barricade which was breached when Ray Epps told a protestor to breach it.

All the fake fact checkers are liars. Would you accept a bet? Yes or no?

Are you seriously offering a bet claiming that the rioters didn't violently breach the police lines on January 6, 2021? I mean you can't be that [expletive deleted] brainwashed, can you?

@Metal-Brain said
That is a lie. They were not overwhelmed at all. And you are talking about the barricade which was breached when Ray Epps told a protestor to breach it.

All the fake fact checkers are liars. Would you accept a bet? Yes or no?

In what world were they not overwhelmed? You see the footage?

@wildgrass said
Because the police were supposed to be there on the other side of the barricade, protecting Congress.

Maybe you could argue they didn't do their job, but it is reasonable to think these guys were waaay overwhelmed, swarmed with people, and let them in because they didn't want to use lethal force to protect themselves. Isn't that what the testimony showed?

You're still ...[text shortened]... as an angry mob of thousands, vandalizing and terrorizing these police officers for hours and hours.

Metal ADDLED brain is dead set on rewriting history according to Trump and Putin.
WE ALL saw it. That matters not at all to MB.

@wildgrass said
In what world were they not overwhelmed? You see the footage?

I saw the footage at both doors. Did you?

Common sense should tell you that shooting a small unarmed woman at one location while letting in protesters at another location makes no sense.....unless it was a setup.

Did you see the video footage of the CP allowing a protester to come from behind CP lines and attempt to break down one of the outside doors and let him go back behind police lines again instead of arresting him? He only stopped after Babbit was shot so he got scared and gathered his backpack up while talking to one of the CP men.

See the links I posted from the Sharyl Attkisson website with the video evidence. Stop ignoring the evidence.

https://sharylattkisson.com/2023/10/watch-january-6th-part-1/

https://sharylattkisson.com/2023/10/watch-january-6th-part-2/

You are cherry picking footage like the corporate news media did. Worse yet, you are defending the propaganda by omission that is not even your own. The propagandists don't even have to defend their propaganda because you, sonhouse and no1 are defending it for them.

It is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.
You won't even look at all of the video evidence. You don't want to know you have been fooled. no1 is cowering from a bet falsely claiming I would be the sole judge. Was I the sole judge when you created the thread "Metal Brain was right and I was wrong" after I proved 10 dead people voted in the election that Trump lost to Biden?

@no1marauder said
Are you seriously offering a bet claiming that the rioters didn't violently breach the police lines on January 6, 2021? I mean you can't be that [expletive deleted] brainwashed, can you?

That is not what I claimed as you well know. They killed Babbit at one location while letting protesters in at another door. Is that normal to you? And why did the CP let earmuff man attempt to break down a CB door and not arrest him on the spot?

https://sharylattkisson.com/2023/10/watch-january-6th-part-1/

https://sharylattkisson.com/2023/10/watch-january-6th-part-2/

Watch the video evidence. They could have easily arrested him after trying to break one of the CB doors. I found out his name and posted it on this forum long ago. He was arrested later, but much later than they could have. I forget his name because it was a while ago. Do you remember?

@no1marauder said
I bet a poster here that Biden would beat Trump in 2020. He paid to a charity I selected.

I'm almost completely sure you wouldn't have. Have you ever lost any of your bets here?

"Have you ever lost any of your bets here?"

Not yet. Are you claiming I did?
Have you lost any bets here? Be honest. Don't make me search for the thread.

How do you know this person you claim lost a bet to you donated money to a charity? Did you meet that poster in person to verify it?

@Metal-Brain said
"Have you ever lost any of your bets here?"

Not yet. Are you claiming I did?
Have you lost any bets here? Be honest. Don't make me search for the thread.

How do you know this person you claim lost a bet to you donated money to a charity? Did you meet that poster in person to verify it?

No, he had the charity send a receipt to my email. I've done the same when I've lost a bet here (most recently to sh76 on who would win Pennsylvania in 2024).

These are real bets based on official results not the whim of one of the bettors.

@no1marauder said
No, he had the charity send a receipt to my email. I've done the same when I've lost a bet here (most recently to sh76 on who would win Pennsylvania in 2024).

These are real bets based on official results not the whim of one of the bettors.

So you do trust posters on here to honor their bets.
I have never given you any reason to doubt I would honor a bet. You simply know from experience that I usually offer a bet when I am confident I can win it. Like the bet I won with wild grass. Nobody forced him to concede and post the thread admitting he lost the bet fair and square. I merely coerced him to do it by peer pressure. He knew others would call him out for dragging his feet despite the clear evidence.

You are afraid of the peer pressure. AJ and others would call you out if you tried to weasel out of the bet so you made up BS excuses to refuse a bet.

@Metal-Brain said
So you do trust posters on here to honor their bets.
I have never given you any reason to doubt I would honor a bet. You simply know from experience that I usually offer a bet when I am confident I can win it. Like the bet I won with wild grass. Nobody forced him to concede and post the thread admitting he lost the bet fair and square. I merely coerced him to do it by pe ...[text shortened]... would call you out if you tried to weasel out of the bet so you made up BS excuses to refuse a bet.

"Trust but verify".

I don't trust you specifically. I note you've never addressed on whether you would have honored a bet on the results of the 2020 election.

You think most posters here give the tiniest s++T about such matters? You have delusions of grandeur.

@no1marauder said
"Trust but verify".

I don't trust you specifically. I note you've never addressed on whether you would have honored a bet on the results of the 2020 election.

You think most posters here give the tiniest s++T about such matters? You have delusions of grandeur.

"I note you've never addressed on whether you would have honored a bet on the results of the 2020 election"

What are you talking about? A bet that was never agreed to? Only bets that are made are relevant. Are you claiming I refused to address a hypothetical question about a non existent bet? Are you referring to another bet offer you refused?

Can you prove that I said whatever you are claiming I said? I am not even sure what you are referring to. Are you making up BS lies or something? Because that is what it looks like to me.