Today Dan Bongino discussed the DNC's video surveillance of their
January 6 pipe bomber.
The video was recorded at approximately 1.2 frames per second, which is
an extremely rare, outdated, and inefficient frame rate. He said that cameras that record in that quality are used approximately 0% of the
time.
As you can see in the footage, you can't see the suspect's face at all. It's blockier than an ansi drawing.
Haven't the DNC learned anything since the 1972 break-in? Do they need
me to donate them $50 so they can buy a better camera?
The point is that the DNC, the FBI, or both, purposefully (or very stupidly from a security point of view) covered tracks for this
"bomber." But why? Don't we want to see those "conservative activists" behind bars??
Revolver also said that there's a 0% chance that this video wasn't modified.
The DNC's footage of the pipe bomber is not the only footage available. Dan Bongino is misleading you.
Nevertheless, if the cameras picked up motion at a given time, other cameras in the area can be checked to see if they captured the pipe
bomber approacing or leaving the scene. There were indeed such nearby cameras.
There is other footage available.
I'm personally glad that they're spending donor money on candidates instead of themselves.
Who else would pipe-bomb the DNC? Oh, wait, this is another unfounded conspiracy theory, isn't it?
In what way was it modified? What's the point in modifying an already-low-res image? Unless you have evidence, this is more unfounded nonsense.
Revolver is rated right-biased and questionable because of poor sourcing techniques and a complete lack of transparency, by the way. You may want to find a more reliable news source.
Hwre is additional footage of the pipe-bomber: https://tinyurl.com/yjtyr3rh
I have nearly 50x the quality of the DNC's camera in my home; was Watergate no
as big a deal as dogs taking s**** on my lawn?
The DNC's footage of the pipe bomber is not the only footage availabl Dan Bongino is misleading you.This is the footage of the "bomb" being "planted" by a "conservative" lunatic.
It was forwarded from the DNC to the FBI. For the DNC to be recording
with cameras of that quality, and then to say "we hope to catch this person" is insane.
I have nearly 50x the quality of the DNC's camera in my home; was Watergate not as big a deal as dogs taking shits on my lawn?
Nevertheless, if the cameras picked up motion at a given time, other cameras in the area can be checked to see if they captured the pipe bomber approacing or leaving the scene. There were indeed such nearby cameras.But what about when the thing was actually planted?
There is other footage available.But no suspect yet.
I'm personally glad that they're spending donor money on candidates instead of themselves.Me too. I hope the loopholes in their security destroy them.
Who else would pipe-bomb the DNC? Oh, wait, this is another unfounded conspiracy theory, isn't it?It's actually a founded one.
In what way was it modified? What's the point in modifying an already-low-res image? Unless you have evidence, this is more unfound nonsense.It was modified in a way so that the person in the video planting the
bomb can not be identified, alternatively, a real security camera was switched with an antique one for the occasion.
Revolver is rated right-biased and questionable because of poor sourc techniques and a complete lack of transparency, by the way. You may w to find a more reliable news source.It's not Revolver's reputation that is relevant; it's their observation that the DNC can't legitimately defend the quality of their
"surveillance" camera in the footage that involved the suspect planting the bomb.
Hwre is additional footage of the pipe-bomber: https://tinyurl.com/yjtyr3rhThanks. Already seen it before posting this message.
Who else would pipe-bomb the DNC? Oh, wait, this is another unfo conspiracy theory, isn't it?It's actually a founded one.
Based on what evidence?
If you had any actual evidence of the footage being modified, you'd know which of those two it was. "Alternatively," you have no evidence.
Actually, you cited Revolver as saying that there was an 80% chance that the video was modified. So indeed it is their reputation that is
relevant.
Then you should have already known that higher-quality footage of the
pipe bomber existed before you posted this tripe.
You can prove that the person was on the conservative side when theyBased on what evidence?Who else would pipe-bomb the DNC? Oh, wait, this is another conspiracy theory, isn't it?It's actually a founded one.
catch the suspect. But for the time being, neither of us know whether it was a rioter or a Democrat/media special op.
If you had any actual evidence of the footage being modified, you'd k which of those two it was. "Alternatively," you have no evidence.The evidence is that a 1.2 frame rate surveillance camera was used at
the DNC at the scene of the crime while everyplace else they have 4K
ultra HD cams.
Actually, you cited Revolver as saying that there was an 80% chance t the video was modified. So indeed it is their reputation that is relevant.I don't believe their statistics necessarily, but I believe what they've said about the DNC using a bogus camera at the right place and at the right time.
Then you should have already known that higher-quality footage of the pipe bomber existed before you posted this tripe.The low quality footage gives the suspect a chance to say "that's not
me. try zooming in on my face."
The suspect can say that all they want; they were captured on other cameras.
The suspect can say that all they want; they were captured on other cameras.If it were my party's HQ, I would be angry about the camera footage.
Understand that it's all a battle for power. The party's campaign strategists need privacy, are they getting it? They're serving an important role.
Plus where's the missing security guard that Dan said
was "usually posted right there near the bench." Smart security guards will notice a dangerous device being planted when they're standing
nearby some white supremacist nutjob.
There's more to this than just the camera trick itself.
Indeed it is a battle for power. Throughout the nation's history, tha battle has been mostly non-violent. Conservatives are making it violent now.
I wouldn't believe a word Dan says. There was also no one in the
building. And why would one need HD surveillance footage if there was a security guard present at all times? Your stories have holes.
There's more to this than just the camera trick itself.
And what's your evidence of a "camera trick?"
Indeed it is a battle for power. Throughout the nation's history, tha battle has been mostly non-violent. Conservatives are making it viole now.Joe's campaign was incredibly deadly with 19 killed. How many people
will BLM need to kill in order for Joe to win again in 2024?
I wouldn't believe a word Dan says. There was also no one in the building. And why would one need HD surveillance footage if there was security guard present at all times? Your stories have holes.Eye witness accounts don't hold up in court as well as video footage
does. Plus, as I've mentioned, the security guard was absent from his
post that day.
1.2 frames per second *is* a camera trick. Show me where I can buy a camera of that quality.There's more to this than just the camera trick itself.And what's your evidence of a "camera trick?"
Joe's campaign was incredibly deadly with 19 killed. How many people will BLM need to kill in order for Joe to win again in 2024?
The Biden campaign didn't kill anyone. As far as I know, BLM didn't kill anyone, either.
So why is the security guard even important? Cameras capture images, but don't actively do anything to stop crimes.
Perhaps it's old, or in some strange storage-saving mode.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Jeff Thiele <=-
There's more to this than just the camera trick itself.
And what's your evidence of a "camera trick?"
1.2 frames per second *is* a camera trick. Show me where I can buy a camera of that quality.
1.2 frames per second *is* a camera trick. Show me where I can buy a camera of that quality.
Pretty much everywhere. Axis and Vivitek are the ones that come to mind.
But here's the kicker, if you want 1.2 FPS, you have to configure the camera for that. It doesn't come out of the box that low.
But here's the kicker, if you want 1.2 FPS, you have to configure the camera for that. It doesn't come out of the box that low.Jeff explained it all: maybe they (security dept at DNC HQ) set that camera to 1.2 fps to save HD space. HD space is super expensive in the
DC area, perhaps, and all the Soros bucks in the world couldn't buy them
a bigger HD.
Wasn't a pipe bomb also placed at the RNC by the same person? Where's
that footage?
Wasn't a pipe bomb also placed at the RNC by the same person? Where's that footage?That's like me saying "I know that my party is bad so let's talk about yours instead."
Wasn't a pipe bomb also placed at the RNC by the same person? Wh that footage?That's like me saying "I know that my party is bad so let's talk abou yours instead."
Nah. What kind of camera did the RNC have?
The FBI has not released that footage yet. Do you think the RNC has a horrible surveillance system also? Hold that BS! Let's see if they ever release the RNC's footage..Nah. What kind of camera did the RNC have?Wasn't a pipe bomb also placed at the RNC by the same perso that footage?That's like me saying "I know that my party is bad so let's talk yours instead."
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
Jeff explained it all: maybe they (security dept at DNC HQ) set that camera to 1.2 fps to save HD space. HD space is super expensive in the
DC area, perhaps, and all the Soros bucks in the world couldn't buy
them a bigger HD.
| Sysop: | Xerxes |
|---|---|
| Location: | Azle, Texas |
| Users: | 119 |
| Nodes: | 10 (1 / 9) |
| Uptime: | 137:20:57 |
| Calls: | 3,028 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 156 |
| U/L today: |
0 files (0K bytes) |
| D/L today: |
0 files (0K bytes) |
| Messages: | 294,140 |
| Posted today: | 0 |