The Paul Pelosi Attacker

[sturg33]

Oh... Some new details here.

Pelosi opened the door for police. Then retreated away from them to go back to depape.

Why they refuse to release the footage makes zero sense to me

[thethe]

As everything else over time the idiot leftists will stop posting when they are shown to be hilariously wrong.

[cajunrevenge]

As everything else over time the idiot leftists will stop posting when they are shown to be hilariously wrong.

Omg, gonna have to call in the roflcopter for this one.

[Tapate50]

Seems dramatic.

Also- HRC doing the media blitz blaming a berkely canadian immigrant assaulting Paul Pelosi as MAGA blowback.

She has apparently ceased to try and be a serious person.

[msstate7]

Probably one of his gay lovers that did it. So not politically motivated. But seriously though, he probably did it himself for attention.

Nice haha

[sturg33]

Right are you starting to see why the initial reporting raised a lot of questions?

Paul called the police and described him as his friend.

The police initially said that a third person opened the door for them

They later qualified there was no third person

I'm not familiar with how they got in now. Did they barge in?

If so, how the heck was it originally claimed that they were let in?

If they were let in, and there was no third person, who the heck let them in? Am I supposed to believe Paul opened the door and then walked back to attacker to start getting assaulted?

Why do message board posters have to ask this rather than the media?

NBC reported today that the bolded sentence above is in fact what happened

im not sure how any clear minded individual could believe that makes any sense

[nsacpi]

Isn't NBC part of the MSM. This might be worth discussing if say Alex Jones or cerno were reporting it. But NBC. How low we stoop these days.

[nsacpi]

I just want it entered into the record that if Paul Pelosi had not been so eager to return to the embrace of his gay lover he would never have been in close enough proximity to have his skull cracked with a hammer.

Pro tip: best to respect the personal space of your gay lovers.

[sturg33]

I understand your desire for snark. It's really how you can do these days

but please tell me why a person would call the cops on someone threatening him... and when the cops show up, return to the assailant who is holding a weapon in his hand

the best defense at this point would be senility

[cajunrevenge]

Well cops did shoot a child running to them to escape her kidnapper recently.



Why cant we just wait for the investigation to be finished instead of arguing over media reports based on speculation and "sources".

[mqt]

I understand your desire for snark. It's really how you can do these days

but please tell me why a person would call the cops on someone threatening him... and when the cops show up, return to the assailant who is holding a weapon in his hand

the best defense at this point would be senility

I don’t see how this even remotely works for you on any level. If this were a premeditated stunt, why would Pelosi go back to get his head bashed in with a hammer?

[sturg33]

I don’t see how this even remotely works for you on any level. If this were a premeditated stunt, why would Pelosi go back to get his head bashed in with a hammer?

I do not believe pelosi planned to have his head bashed in, if you were confused about my position

[mqt]

I do not believe pelosi planned to have his head bashed in, if you were confused about my position

Then is your position that he didn’t think he’d get his head bashed in with a hammer, but the person he planned this with went rogue and did it anyway so that he could go to prison forever? Or that he just either hired or slept with a ****ing homeless lunatic and didn’t think he’d bash his head in with a hammer? Explain to me like I’m 5 how the conspiracy theories make any more sense than the official story based on Pelosi walking several feet back into the house.

[Garmel]

Wut?

[thethe]

As everything else over time the idiot leftists will stop posting when they are shown to be hilariously wrong.

The story has changed several times now and no body cam footage to be provided.

This is just going how every other big story has gone the last 8 years.

[mqt]

The story has changed several times now and no body cam footage to be provided.

This is just going how every other big story has gone the last 8 years.

But not in any way that should cast doubt on what happened. They’re very minor corrections or clarifications that are being overanalyzed to death to fit your narrative.

[thethe]

But not in any way that should cast doubt on what happened. They’re very minor corrections or clarifications that are being overanalyzed to death to fit your narrative.

'minor' corrections can actually be a key to re-constructing what actually happened.

The thing about lies is that you have to consistently tell lies to keep up with changing facts or questions.

But when you're upfront and honest you never have to change the story.

[sturg33]

But not in any way that should cast doubt on what happened. They’re very minor corrections or clarifications that are being overanalyzed to death to fit your narrative.

Can we agree on these events?

1. Crazy lunatic somehow bypasses Pelosi security (or there was zero security) and breaks into Pelosi house

2. Crazy lunatic explains he wants to kill Nancy and threatens to tie up Paul until she returns

3. Paul convinces crazy lunatic to let him make a call or be excused to the bathroom (I'm not sure what the latest is here)

4. Crazy lunatic obliges

5. Cops come and knock on the door.

6. Crazy lunatic - holding a hammer - allows Paul to go answer the door during his crime/kidnap

7. Paul opens the door to great relief that the cops came to help him. Rather than tell the cops where the crazy guy is and stand behind them... He... Goes back to the crazy lunatic holding the hammer threatening to kill his wife

8. Crazy lunatic hammers his skull in

9. Cops tackle the crazy lunatic.

Can we agree on those events?

[mqt]

'minor' corrections can actually be a key to re-constructing what actually happened.

The thing about lies is that you have to consistently tell lies to keep up with changing facts or questions.

But when you're upfront and honest you never have to change the story.

Tell me more about how it was a gay lover due to them being in their underwear then. If you (a general you) need to change your conspiracy, are you being honest?

[mqt]

Can we agree on these events?

1. Crazy lunatic somehow bypasses Pelosi security (or there was zero security) and breaks into Pelosi house

2. Crazy lunatic explains he wants to kill Nancy and threatens to tie up Paul until she returns

3. Paul convinces crazy lunatic to let him make a call or be excused to the bathroom (I'm not sure what the latest is here)

4. Crazy lunatic obliges

5. Cops come and knock on the door.

6. Crazy lunatic - holding a hammer - allows Paul to go answer the door during his crime/kidnap

7. Paul opens the door to great relief that the cops came to help him. Rather than tell the cops where the crazy guy is and stand behind them... He... Goes back to the crazy lunatic holding the hammer threatening to kill his wife

8. Crazy lunatic hammers his skull in

9. Cops tackle the crazy lunatic.

Can we agree on those events?

Yes, those appear to be the facts. However, I don’t find that Pelosi and the lunatic acting irrationally in this very intense and fast paced situation implies there’s more to the story. People act irrationally all the time in far less extreme circumstances.