2 posts were split to a new topic: One Year Anniversary of 'Mocracy Armageddon
read it again
It is easier if you tell me.
Easier for who? Pete’s sake, it says incitement not indictment.
Sorry… I misread. My apologies.
Yeah… Ray Epps inciting people does not mean that he is secretly FBI.
That is a leap in logic that has no basis.
That’s what investigations as opposed to kangaroo congressional courts are for.
1 Like
You really have to work very hard to pretend there were no feds in attendance. Ludicrously hard.
1 Like
How are investigations into conspiracy theories not the same thing as kangaroo congressional courts?
Nothing in the least conspiratorial in the fact that he was there and inciting people to enter the building. That warrants investigation whether or not he is a fed.
1 Like
We don’t know the extent of any criminal investigation into Ray Epps.
We may never know unless they bring charges against him or someone else because of information that he provided.
None of that means that he is a key figure and it especially does not prove that he is FBI.
Just because Congress isn’t concerned with your exact concerns does not make the process illegitimate nor does it confirm the conspiracy that Revolver is trying to push.
Where is the proof?
Why would an FBI controlled by Trump incite a riot on the Capitol?
It seems that that conspiracy works against Trump… not for him.
Done discussing it with you, your willful obtuseness is tiresome. If you can read that piece and not want those guys investigated, whether or not they turn out to be feds, there is no hope.
1 Like
Yes sure, you missed all the ways the intel community was going after Trump with their leaks, didn’t see nuffin’ ma.
1 Like
You are asking them to prove that they weren’t feds. You want an investigation into proving a negative. It’s actually hope because almost every time these issues come up you guys scream “plant”.
No, I want them to investigate to determine who if anyone they were working with and to see if they had plotted in advance. The chips can fall where they may from there. I also want the DOJ and FBI to answer the question of whether they had people there and if so, who they were and what they did.
1 Like
I get that Congress can investigate anything they want but what you are seeking is an investigation to prove a negative. Yes you are may be ok if they fail to prove the negative but that’s what it is.
Epps is the king of the lizards and i want Congress to at least prove to me that he is not.
No, I want them to determine if they were working with anyone, no matter who it was, up to and including people in government.
1 Like
It’s not “proving a negative”.
Based on what?
An investigation is not proving a negative.
Hearings to disprove conspiracy theories is trying to prove a negative. Calling it an investigation is just an attempt to obfuscate the obvious. Yea again Congress has done this tons of times.
