Started By
Message

re: House Speaker admits to doctoring footage of Jan 6th

Posted on 12/5/23 at 7:47 pm to
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
58016 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 7:47 pm to
You either know good and well that it's nothing about any lack of "transparency" or you are such a dumbass that you didn't read the story you linked. From the story:

quote:

“We have to blur some of the faces of persons who participated in the events of that day because we don’t want them to be retaliated against and to be charged by the DOJ,” Johnson said.
Posted by TigerIn2023
Member since Apr 2023
308 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 7:47 pm to
quote:

You don’t know what doxxed means, apparently.
quote:

Doxxing, also spelled doxxing, is the act of publicly revealing private or identifying information about someone, especially online, without their consent. This information can include a person's real name, home address, phone number, email address, social media profiles, credit card information, or other personal details.
Posted by TigerIn2023
Member since Apr 2023
308 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 7:51 pm to
quote:

… and to be charged by the DOJ
The DOJ already has this footage.
Posted by Rebel
Graceland
Member since Jan 2005
141641 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 7:51 pm to
quote:

How is blurring faces not editing a video?


technically an "edit". but you said "doctoring". that is a totally different implication.

go be a dishonest a-hole on DU.
Posted by TigerIn2023
Member since Apr 2023
308 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 7:52 pm to
Why would he not release the unedited footage?
Posted by Rebel
Graceland
Member since Jan 2005
141641 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 7:53 pm to
quote:

Why would he not release the unedited footage?


did you read the article? to keep the gestapo from witch hunting citizens.

Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
125696 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 7:54 pm to
You’re so fricking stupid.

When the newspaper identifies anyone in a picture, are they doxxing them?
Posted by TigerIn2023
Member since Apr 2023
308 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 8:02 pm to
quote:

When the newspaper identifies anyone in a picture, are they doxxing them?
Yes
quote:

You don’t know what doxxed means, apparently.

Whether or not identifying someone in a picture is doxxing depends on the context. If the person is a public figure, such as a politician or celebrity, then identifying them in a picture is not typically considered doxxing. This is because public figures have a reduced expectation of privacy and their identities are already widely known.

However, if the person is a private individual, then identifying them in a picture without their consent could be considered doxxing. This is because private individuals have a greater expectation of privacy and their identities may not be widely known. Additionally, if the person is identified in a picture in a way that could put them at risk of harm, such as by revealing their home address, then this would be considered doxxing.
This post was edited on 12/5/23 at 8:04 pm
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
125696 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 8:03 pm to
Lol. I like when people double down on stupidity when they’re brought face to face with it.
Posted by TigerIn2023
Member since Apr 2023
308 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 8:05 pm to
quote:

to keep the gestapo from witch hunting citizens.
The DOJ already has this footage.
Posted by OceanMan
Member since Mar 2010
22822 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 8:47 pm to
quote:

How is blurring faces not editing a video? Why would he not release the undoctored footage?


This appears to be a bug in your programming
Posted by Adajax
Member since Nov 2015
8307 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 8:56 pm to
The left calls that redacting.
Posted by Juan Betanzos
New Orleans
Member since Nov 2005
3781 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 11:42 pm to
quote:

quote: Blurring out FBI, CIA agents Why is the GOP speaker of the house actively working to not expose the FBI or CIA agents?


My answer is —- until people are impeached or charged by this GOP Congress, I will stick w/ my gut feeling that “most” of them are in cahoots w/ the rest of The Beltway Club (I.e., the Swamp, the Deep State, etc.)
Posted by TexSolo
Member since Oct 2023
273 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 11:48 pm to
quote:

So much for transparency with the new guard.


Surely you can't be serious..
Posted by Azkiger
Member since Nov 2016
27031 posts
Posted on 12/5/23 at 11:54 pm to
quote:

So much for transparency with the new guard.


What's more transparent, not releasing the videos to the public, or releasing them with some faces blurred?

Seems like, objectively speaking, they're being more transparent than the previous House majority.
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
58016 posts
Posted on 12/6/23 at 6:20 am to
quote:

The DOJ already has this footage.


Again, read the quote. What Johnson was talking about was the call the DOJ had put out for people to report their friends, family and/or neighbors if they knew they had been in DC on J6. Now add into that the asshats who would spend hours pouring through video just to see if they could find someone they recognize just to report them.

This is like finding bugs in software in that the more people looking into it, the more which can be found. There are likely thousands upon thousands of people the DOJ haven't identified yet simply because they don't have the manpower. Not obscuring the faces would essentially give the DOJ unlimited manpower in identifying people in the videos.

On the flip side, this makes it more difficult for keyboard warriors to identify implanted FBI agents, but at that point it comes down to a specific viewer deciding what they consider more important: not being able to out agents or stymieing the DOJ in their efforts to intimidate people simply for being in DC on J6.
Posted by TigerBlazer
Member since Aug 2016
840 posts
Posted on 12/6/23 at 8:08 am to
Why is he blurring all the Antifs agents who staged the insurrection?
Posted by texas tortilla
houston
Member since Dec 2015
4079 posts
Posted on 12/6/23 at 8:18 am to
why does a cia/fbi agent need his face blurred out? is it so he can continue to infiltrate maga crowds and stir them up. it's not like an undercover nark who may wait a month to file charges on a drug buy he did so that the drug dealer won't know who the nark was. for him to do that job he must keep his identity secret. fbi/cia agents need to be outed to stop them from this behavior.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram