This is the source of the article, but not the source of the underlying claims. Where's the actual DOJ memo/email/press release? I ask because morons online won't even look at something that isn't seen as "authoritative".
It's not a game. There is so much bullshit information floating around everywhere that this is what we need to do. When MSM sources are openly making shit up, promoting third-party BS sites that do the same isn't winning the narrative. So post something from a real source, not "anonymous" sources or GTFO.
When making a post such as OP's, the burden of providing legitimate sources of the information provided falls on the poster, not the readers.
It is quite reasonable and even encouraged in that place we call reality (I know that's a foreign land to you) to respectfully request sources which lend credence to any claims made.
"And the Politifact sourcing army appears to have upvoted you" ah yes, that secret army of Democrat infiltrators and FBI spies has once again conspired to upvote someone a whole 9 fucking times.
Are there Dems under your bed and in your closet as well?
Looks like I offended the FBI demoralization team. I even got exactly 6 downvotes deep in a thread. I'm shocked!
When making a post such as OP's, the burden of providing legitimate sources of the information provided falls on the poster, not the readers.
No, when posting here there's typically zero burden whatsoever.
The "burden" you speak of is entirely imagined, created via wholly imagined social pressures. If any social burden does exist though it is certainly that non lazy people on the right have the mental capacity to follow sourcing to its natural conclusion.
That's the difference here. There's no leftists around to claim victimhood because I didn't do their research job for them.
Except for yourself apparently.
Furthermore the initial source was provided here multiple times. Did that stop you and your friends from demanding additional (fucking direct, no less) sources which were impossible to provide? No, of course not. Because as I correctly stated initially, this is an influence game you're attempting to play.
You're not looking for sources, which are typically provided thoroughly and quickly. You're looking to question legitimate information you already know to be correct.
It is quite reasonable and even encouraged in that place we call reality (I know that's a foreign land to you) to respectfully request sources which lend credence to any claims made.
It's also quite reasonable to explain yourself or defend yourself when legitimate claims are made of obvious repeated destructive behavior. But you'd rather namecall instead. Because THAT screams "reasonable and respectful".
Great job holding that moral high ground position. You're so much better than me!
Go ahead and reply again. I cherish another opportunity like the last one you provided.
Do you have the source? I want to share this with less based individuals.
https://www.lawofficer.com/doj-quietly-acknowledges-there-was-no-sedition-at-the-us-capitol/
Now we got a list of motherfuckers who we know are down, thank you DOJ
This is the source of the article, but not the source of the underlying claims. Where's the actual DOJ memo/email/press release? I ask because morons online won't even look at something that isn't seen as "authoritative".
as good as you're gonna get, seems the info is coming from casual interviews, not DoJ directly
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-capitol-arrests-justice/amid-setbacks-prosecutors-abandon-some-claims-in-u-s-capitol-riot-cases-idUSKBN2BG30C
Edit. Actually this is pretty good guys. Upvote this one.
Here's the FBI site listing the Capital Breach cases: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
No.
Every single person here has the internet and the capability to research this background personally.
There’s no Reddit army here claiming that personally provided direct and named sources are the only way to be correct.
The original link was provided. The only reason to cry about this this is to undermine claims you find problematic.
And the Politifact sourcing army appears to have upvoted you with their usual 6-10 quick hits to give you visibility.
It’s the same game here over and over.
It's not a game. There is so much bullshit information floating around everywhere that this is what we need to do. When MSM sources are openly making shit up, promoting third-party BS sites that do the same isn't winning the narrative. So post something from a real source, not "anonymous" sources or GTFO.
Spoken like a foreigner interfering in American politics.
Learn to read, faggot
Pardon me, but you appear to be an insane person.
When making a post such as OP's, the burden of providing legitimate sources of the information provided falls on the poster, not the readers.
It is quite reasonable and even encouraged in that place we call reality (I know that's a foreign land to you) to respectfully request sources which lend credence to any claims made.
"And the Politifact sourcing army appears to have upvoted you" ah yes, that secret army of Democrat infiltrators and FBI spies has once again conspired to upvote someone a whole 9 fucking times.
Are there Dems under your bed and in your closet as well?
Looks like I offended the FBI demoralization team. I even got exactly 6 downvotes deep in a thread. I'm shocked!
No, when posting here there's typically zero burden whatsoever.
The "burden" you speak of is entirely imagined, created via wholly imagined social pressures. If any social burden does exist though it is certainly that non lazy people on the right have the mental capacity to follow sourcing to its natural conclusion.
That's the difference here. There's no leftists around to claim victimhood because I didn't do their research job for them.
Except for yourself apparently.
Furthermore the initial source was provided here multiple times. Did that stop you and your friends from demanding additional (fucking direct, no less) sources which were impossible to provide? No, of course not. Because as I correctly stated initially, this is an influence game you're attempting to play.
You're not looking for sources, which are typically provided thoroughly and quickly. You're looking to question legitimate information you already know to be correct.
It's also quite reasonable to explain yourself or defend yourself when legitimate claims are made of obvious repeated destructive behavior. But you'd rather namecall instead. Because THAT screams "reasonable and respectful".
Great job holding that moral high ground position. You're so much better than me!
Go ahead and reply again. I cherish another opportunity like the last one you provided.
https://www.lawofficer.com/doj-quietly-acknowledges-there-was-no-sedition-at-the-us-capitol/