Speaker Johnson is an accessory to crime?

In an impeachment...which is a POLITICAL process...not a legal one.

In a LEGAL process the facts are the only consideration. In an impeachment the political party of the person being impeached is apparently the most important factor. Whether or not they actually did what they are accused of doing is besides the point.

 

My post above had to do with Jan 6 footage, as his claim was about the Jan 6 footage. You should quit while you're behind.

 

Only according to Da Silva.

 

Was Hillary locked up?

 

Your claim had to do with your fake outrage over accusations of liberals and their media smearing people.
And we settled that. Didn't we.

 

Nope. As usual you have no idea what you're talking about. But that's what happens when you jump into the middle of a conversation. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Eager to maintain the support of the far right of the House GOP caucus Speaker Mike Johnson recently ordered the release of internal House footage of the various rioters who stormed the Capitol complex on January 6th 2021 in an effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. But his transparency train hit a speed bump when he decided to blur the faces of the rioters and criminals who stormed the capitol in order to prevent their being, in Johnson’s words, “retaliated against and charged by the DOJ and have other concerns and problems.”

So Johnson says quite clearly and publicly that his office is obscuring the faces of Jan. 6th rioters in order to prevent law enforcement from holding them accountable for their crimes.

But Johnson wasn’t always so pro-January 6th rioter, or at least he hasn’t been consistently. He called the feral Trumpers who stormed the capitol shameless criminals, in fact.

Back in June 2022, Johnson denounced “the chaos going on outside the capitol grounds” and the “chaos and destruction that ensued” after they stormed the capitol complex. He said in no uncertain terms that “all conscientious Americans have and should condemn in clear terms the terrible violence of January 6th. The criminals who participated in the storming of the capitol shamed our nation and its traditions and there’s no way around that.”
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblo...ful-criminals-before-protecting-them-from-doj

Someone lost the debate. To identify that person just look in the mirror, unless you can't see because it is blurred.

 

For what??

 

So you admit you even ignore your own media when it comes to smearing innocent people and jeopardizing their lives.
Sounds about right

 

Now you're resorting to strawman arguments. Sounds about right.

 

You should learn the meaning of words before you attempt to use them.
You stated
faces need to be blurred due possibly being unfairly targeted by liberal media and liberals in general was bullcrap.
I showed you where the media and Liberals do that very thing
Then you argued, But not the J6ers
And again I provided you information where they did it to J6ers
So explain your use of a Strawman

 

Who specifically from Jan 6 was completely innocent but targeted unfairly by liberal media and liberals in general?
Even Oldyougin agreed no one from Jan 6 was unfairly targeted.

 

Oh, so now you want to move the goal post to completely innocent?
Who are you to decide at the time they are guilty or innocent?
So you think its ok to berate someone in the media based on the fact that later on, they were charged with something?
You would be singing a different tune if it was you.

 

If they are on the video then they are guilty, at an absolute bare minimum, of trespassing.
So there are no innocent people on those videos.

 

Let me say it a different way so even you can understand. Was anyone, who was standing outside away from the Capitol minding their own business, unfairly targeted? No. The people "targeted" were those rioting. "Targeting" rioters was not unfair.
And no, if I were one of the animals who rioted and was caught doing so on camera, I would not think it unfair that I was "targeted". It would be my OWN fault for putting myself in that position.

 

Yep.

The ironic part is he will destroy their dictatorship and free all the political prisoners.

 

CRIMINAL trespass.

 

Hopefully not you because you keep spouting MAGA propaganda about Hunter Biden. You remind me of radical anti-war types 50 years ago who made up crap and attacked anyone who disagreed with their lies. I remember this one woman at a campus demonstration who kept screaming about our guys "killing babies." Over snd over again.

 

What are you threatening to do?

 

Yes, I'm pretty good at spotting them

 

For the stated purpose of preventing or discouraging recognition by the FBI fits the accessory definition perfectly. the definition of which was included in the OP.

 

Nothing insane about putting criminals in jails it's what they're supposed to do

 

Yeah, there's nothing more authoritarian than trying to attack the capital and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power

Got it.

 

But we're not talking about criminals we're talking about people who were protesting.

The criminal act you are accusing them of and of course the corrupted doj is disagreeing with establishment this is fundamentally fascism.

Keeping political prisoners and you thinking that the criminals are not having the right politics is the definition of fascism.

 

The FBI gets help from the public recognizing faces that are published. It's still accessory