An attorney for one of the defendants charged with infiltrating the U.S. Capitol building on January 6th alleged that his client and others are being brutally tortured “five miles from the White House” in an awkward interview on CNN Tuesday.
Joseph McBride was asked for comments relating to the eight month prison sentence given to Paul Hodgkins for merely walking into the building and sitting at Nancy Pelosi’s desk.
McBride, who represents another of the accused told CNN host John Avlon that “there are people who showed up to attack the Capitol, there are people who showed up to protest, and there are people who showed up to protest that got involved with the greater events of that day. And it is very important not to lump everybody in, not to define every protester that showed up that day as an insurrectionist — which, by the way, no one has been charged with.”
Avlon then asked McBride about a comparison he made between the conditions the suspects are being held in and Nazi gulags, pouring scorn on the notion.
McBride urged that “People are being tortured. Tortured!” asking Avlon “Are you OK with people being tortured five miles from the White House?”
Avlon responded by saying that the claim was “an extraordinary statement that would seem to be utterly un-based in fact.”
McBride shot back yelling “Torture is never OK! TORTURE! TORTURE! TORTURE! TORTURE! TORTURE!” prompting Avlon to end the interview
“Keep yelling torture. We’ll stick with the facts,” he said.
“The facts are torture!” the attorney yelled back.
Watch:
It isn’t the first time that the claims of torture have arisen in regards to the Capitol ‘rioters’ who have been held for months without trial.
The inmates and some of their lawyers have alleged that they are being held in solitary confinement and have been subject to beatings, threats and...
Read More HERE
Is is just me or does that alvon have a smug, meat gazing smirk? Another poster boy for abortion... Keep wacking the bear.
ReplyDeleteNotice that when the attorney speaks to the CNN broadcaster that (at :36 time stamp) the broadcaster immediately acknowledges the attorney. My point is any other time when a delay is noted, it is assumed there is a delay in transmission. That assumption would be incorrect, certainly as evidenced here.
ReplyDeleteWhy is that particular point important, I will leave it to the viewer. Except to say that most likely any delay is probably the responder being rehearsed through an ear piece. Oy tut tut. Well, how much do you trust any 'news' organization? If you do trust, you are daft or willfully ignorant.
ReplyDelete