Here is the Ray Epps Footage and J6 Testimony You WON"T See on 60 Minutes Tomorrow, as They Try to Paint Him as the Victim

[Skylar]

Actually Epps appears (BIA) to be 2nd in command.

Says who?

Scaffold guy appears to be the actual trigger.

Again, says who?

 

[Billiejeens]

Says who?


Again, says who?

The evidence

 

[Skylar]

The evidence

Then show us the evidence, rather than quoting yourself.

 

[Billiejeens]

10 people were standing together.
9 of the 10 were arrested.

The 1 of course was ?

 

[Skylar]

10 people were standing together.
9 of the 10 were arrested.

The 1 of course was ?

That's not evidence. That's just you typing shit.

So where's the evidence that Ray Epps is a fed?

Where's the evidence that Ray Epps started the attack on the capitol? Or that he was '2nd in command'.

What crime could Ray Epps even be plausible charged

 

[The Duke]

Its linked to the image, brah. Just click it.

Can you provide a direct link?

That's not evidence. That's just you typing shit.

So where's the evidence that Ray Epps is a fed?

Where's the evidence that Ray Epps started the attack on the capitol? Or that he was '2nd in command'.

What crime could Ray Epps even be plausible charged

Why are you defending him so? Wow! Fuckin' aye! You just derailed my train of thought because I

had to wonder; Why the fuck you're so far up Ray Epp's ass you know things his proctologist has never seen?

Are You Ray Epps and have you given yourself a colonoscopy?

 

[Skylar]

Can you provide a direct link

You bet:

https://propublica-data-j6cases-videos.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/1875a1e018d0013a36652cde48001122.mp4

As you can see, Ray Epps walked up and down the crowd, gently coaxing folks AWAY from the police line. And putting his body between the cops and the protestors.

That's hardly inciting a riot. Quite the opposite.

Why are you defending him so?

I'm just asking a few questions.

What is the evidence that Ray Epps is a fed?

What's the evidence that Ray Epps started the attack on the capitol?

What crime could Ray Epps even plausibly be charged with?

Apparently these questions are sporting butcher knives and hockey masks. Because everyone is running from them.

 

[The Duke]

You bet:

https://propublica-data-j6cases-videos.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/1875a1e018d0013a36652cde48001122.mp4

As you can see, Ray Epps walked up and down the crowd, gently coaxing folks AWAY from the police line. And putting his body between the cops and the protestors.

That's hardly inciting a riot. Quite the opposite.




I'm just asking a few questions.

What is the evidence that Ray Epps is a fed?

What's the evidence that Ray Epps started the attack on the capitol?

What crime could Ray Epps even plausibly be charged with?

Apparently these questions are sporting butcher knives and hockey masks. Because everyone is running from them.

Okay, is Ray Epps the individual just to the right of the guy with the flag?

That one seems to be working in coordination with megaphone guy.

 

[Skylar]

Okay, is Ray Epps the individual just to the right of the guy with the flag

Ray Epps is this dude:

Ray Epps incites nothing. He advocates no violence. He hits no one. He encourages no violence. He breaks no law.

But instead, gently touches the shoulders and backs of angry men and coaxes them down the stairs and away from the police. Then puts his body between the cops and the protestors.

That's not incitement. That's not any crime.

 

[The Duke]

Ray Epps is this dude:

View attachment 779419

Ray Epps incites nothing. He advocates no violence. He hits no one. He encourages no violence. He breaks no law.

But instead, gently touches the shoulders and backs of angry men and coaxes them down the stairs and away from the police. Then puts his body between the cops and the protestors.

That's not incitement. That's not any crime.

Yehbut; That's not what was on 60 Minutes, now is it?

 

[Skylar]

Yehbut; That's not what was on 60 Minutes, now is it?

Nope. But then neither is any video of Ray Epps hurting anyone or violating any law.

There's none here either.

What there is.....is video of Ray trying to calm a crowd and putting himself between angry protestors and cops. Which seems pretty laudable to me.

 

[The Duke]

Nope. But then neither is any video of Ray Epps hurting anyone or violating any law.

There's none here either.

What there is.....is video of Ray trying to calm a crowd and putting himself between angry protestors and cops. Which seems pretty laudable to me.

So laudable:



You gotta has some some kinda ulterior motive, bro, you're not for real.

 

[Skylar]

So laudable:



You gotta has some some kinda ulterior motive, bro, you're not for real.

That's January 5th. You can tell because the sky is dark. Ray was definitely gungho the night before about going into the capitol. But he never advocates riots, storming anything, hurting anyone, or attacking cops.

And saying he's going into the capitol isn't a crime. Suggesting that others go into the capitol isn't a crime. Both instances lack advocacy of imminent lawless action, the standard the USSC has set for protected 1st amendment speech.

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)

In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the Court ruled that speech advocating illegal conduct is protected by the First Amendment unless it is likely to incite “imminent lawless action.”

mtsu.edu

So there's no crime that Ray Epps committed. Nor any evidence that he's working for the feds. Nor any evidence that he started the attack on the capitol.

Its a story, backed by exactly nothing. Worse than nothing

There's actually excellent video of Ray Epps trying to calm a crowd. And puting himself between cops and angry protestors. The literally opposite of incitement.

 

[The Duke]

That's January 5th. You can tell because the sky is dark. Ray was definitely gungho the night before about going into the capitol. But he never advocates riots, storming anything, hurting anyone, or attacking cops.

And saying he's going into the capitol isn't a crime. Suggesting that others go into the capitol isn't a crime. Both instances lack advocacy of imminent lawless action, the standard the USSC has set for protected 1st amendment speech.

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)

In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the Court ruled that speech advocating illegal conduct is protected by the First Amendment unless it is likely to incite “imminent lawless action.”

mtsu.edu

So there's no crime that Ray Epps committed. Nor any evidence that he's working for the feds. Nor any evidence that he started the attack on the capitol.

Its a story, backed by exactly nothing. Worse than nothing

There's actually excellent video of Ray Epps trying to calm a crowd. And puting himself between cops and angry protestors. The literally opposite of incitement.

Yeah, no.

 

[Skylar]

Yeah, no.

Um, I don't know what to tell you. No evidence is no evidence.

There's no evidence that Ray Epps works for the FBI.

There's no evidence that Ray Epps started the attack on the Capitol.

And there's no crime Ray Epps could plausible be charged with.

 

[The Duke]

Um, I don't know what to tell you. No evidence is no evidence.

There's no evidence that Ray Epps works for the FBI.

There's no evidence that Ray Epps started the attack on the Capitol.

And there's no crime Ray Epps could plausible be charged with.

There's enough evidence to where I believe You and Ray Epps work for the FBI, dude.

And the crime you're looking to commit is called "entrapment".

 

[Skylar]

There's enough evidence to where I believe You and Ray Epps work for the FBI, dude.

And what evidence would that be?

 

[The Duke]

And what evidence would that be?

How you are up his ass so. Derp!

Ya done gave yourself away. Nobody in their right mind with no agenda would do that.
You're with whatever Ray Epps was with, and out to cover your tracks.

 

[Skylar]

How you are up his ass so. Derp!

Ya done gave yourself away.

Laughing....you mean I'm asking for evidence of any crime rather than just doing the ol' echo-chamber nod.

I'm happy to disappoint you.

 

[The Duke]

Laughing....you mean I'm asking for evidence of any crime rather than just doing the ol' echo-chamber nod.

I'm happy to disappoint you.

You ain't gettin' off that easy. You deny the "Ray Epps" thing way too much to be rational.

You're a shill-and-a-half.
You're not even a cheap propaganda shill. You're a government Fed shill.
That's pretty fucked up. I never anticipated seeing that here. Allow me to collect my thoughts.