Gateway Pundit Exposes Edited Evidence From Jan 6 Video

I haven’t written on the 1/6 events much. It’s not because I’m not paying attention but this actually used to be a climate blog. The problem with global warming, is that the corruption of our government has become more important than climate. Several people died on 1/6 and none of them were police – despite what we were told.

Gateway did an excellent write up to which I can only add a bit of technical review and summary, in case you live under a rock or get your news from MSNBC. In a nutshell, on Jan 6, the FIB, a branch of the DOJ and leftist DC Swamp rats used implanted agents to coerce patriots into the capitol and then destroy their lives and organizations. Nancy held back the police presence requested by Trump, the FIB sent agents into the crowd in Trump gear who continually encouraged the young in the crowd to break down police walls walk past bike racks. It has been gradually exposed that the whole thing was planned by the swamp, including the low security levels AND embedded fake news reporters who pretended that Nancy was doing her job during the fake “insurrection”.

When it wasn’t working and people would not properly riot, the FIB did it themselves. They even posed as security to open the magnetic locks on the capitol building. Why would they open the magnetic locks on the building? That is also on camera. The real insurrection was the government sanctioned vote fraud in our cities where Bill Barr didn’t even find it useful to investigate actively blocked investigation of a FULL truck of hundreds of thousands of unexplained, filled-out Pennsylvania ballots coming from ….. New York??

The actual citizens entrapped by the Department Of Justice have been repeatedly abused, have been denied proper defense and are being convicted in fake courts that would make Kim Jung Un blush. Of note, the man in the link above lost his eyesight at the hands of the abusive gulag style prison in AMERICA. That does not happen in normal American prisons kids!! Gosh, it’s odd that you leftist cooks are wrong again, so unusual.

This is an image of the video the ‘prosecution’ allowed the defendants to have for defense, at the moment the second barrier was broken. The actual video now-leaked below that, is what the constitution REQUIRES be disclosed.

Below is an unmodified video of about the same moment. Ray Epps is leading the group through the barrier that Ray Epps was hollering for others to rip down.

Altering video to hide events as though it were just bad data would be evidence tampering and an actual criminal act. This particular moment is supposed to be the key crime committed by Ryan Samsel. But now we find the full video exists and the full video shows un-prosecuted Ray Epps inciting and then passing the barrier with nobody in between himself and the police, and a small crowd of actual protestors following behind him.

Samsel pushed the flimsy bike racks and stormed the US Capitol after Ray Epps was filmed whispering in his ear. According to court documents, Samsel allegedly injured a female police officer.

But you can see from the video that Ray Epps was involved in this first breach of bike rack barriers after Ray Epps whispered in his ear. You can also see that Ryan actually helped the female police officer that day.

Gateway Pundit

And maybe the money quote:

So, Ray Epps was involved in BOTH the first and second breaches of barriers outside the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. Why is this man allowed to run free?

I think we all know the answer to that.

Gateway Pundit

I think we do.

On the edit of video where an error is introduced. Simple version, sorry non-math guys:

Video compression algorithms are often Fourier transforms with key frames that have full information. Pixels in frames are represented as changes from nearby and previous frame pixels and the nature of image consistency (autocorrelation) results in massive compression potential. Each time a key frame is passed as the video plays, the full image is represented at that moment, and after that only changes from the key frame are displayed. This process results in amazing levels of compression. If you damage an ordinary frame of the video, nothing is likely to be visible during play. If you damage a key frame, you cause artifacts that look very much like the damaged video in the first image. Damage of data happens all the time, and the government knows that.

This particular problem, and its perfection of location and timing, very much appears to have exploited that knowledge to convict a man of a crime. If the FIB software crew used proper not-lazy techniques, the intentional damage will have been done throughout the video and the change would not be statistically differentiable from a noisy save. My guess is that the FIB is not good enough to use proper data-damage techniques because they assume nobody can figure this out. Before and after subtraction of two full-resolution copies might just bust them good. The problem the FIB has is that while the noisy save can happen with cheap security cameras (also unlikely that this insane resolution camera is cheap), the noisy copy literally cannot happen after that.

Data errors in video are the result of electrical issues that are ongoing. Poor signal is common in consumer video transmission. Have you ever seen digital satellite during rain? You should know that simple software can create things that look like data damage, we did some of that during the early climate phase of this blog. If someone were to look at the raw original video and find that the bad data started and existed ONLY on the key frame, that would be smoking gun proof of edit. I just need two perfect copies of the original and damaged data and we can subtract them to find out whether the DOJ is 100% guilty of doctoring evidence in order to convict someone of a crime. Good luck getting that information tho.

Also, good luck convincing those same chickens who think a vote that has a p value 1e114 off the bell curve “might be normal”, that it is statistically impossible to only have damage on the key frame. However, those of us with math backgrounds would know just fine.

In my opinion, seeing damage at just the right vertical level of the frame at just the right moment to hide Epps actions from the jury, is statistically very, very, very unlikely. Only three verys so I’m not 100%. That it covers the bottom of the frame is part of the compression technique and an expected result of data loss and plausible. That it covers just the right amount of the frame is very lucky.

There are numerous data validation techniques in computerized stored data transmission. One place this data loss doesn’t happen naturally is between stored images on the hard drive and copy as evidence. Unlike satellite Direct TV, there are two-way transmission protocols in place for copying data from a computer to prevent errors during copy, and that is the BIG problem with this revelation. The copy from the computer to the evidence folder is NOT where damage can occur naturally.

That the video was now found undamaged, is spectacularly unlikely to have occurred naturally.

Verdict — I have to say … busted.

8 thoughts on “Gateway Pundit Exposes Edited Evidence From Jan 6 Video

  1. There was some weirdness about digital imagery provided by the prosecution to the defense in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. The defense tried to establish that the police really had no idea about how their own software worked, or its limitations.

    To be fair, MOST of us have no idea how our daily, vital, often-used tech works, or its limitations.

    My first inclination is to attribute problems to incompetence rather than malice. But there’s a dimension of hubris and excessive certainty involved, where experience shows humility and the “benefit-of-the-doubt” more reasonably applies.

    1. Well, like I wrote, only 3 verys so I’m not 100% but I have to tell you that copying the original would not make those errors easily. The checksums and repeats were created during early disk usage and you wouldn’t be able to download huge video games without proper checks.

      In my business, we have about 20Terabytes on enterprise solid states. The drives guarantee errors at something like 2 trillion bits which is much lower than 20 trillion bytes. For that reason, data is copied in packets and use things like checksums to make sure that the copy is perfect before the packets are accepted.

      Basically, the errors are known to happen and yet we have 100 percent bit-perfect copies.

      This same process likely exists in high end video systems. Again, our cheap ass 70K system doesn’t have a single error that I’ve ever seen.

      This is faked in my opinion.

      1. I handle video for a living.
        Like everything else related to computers, it’s just “1’s” and “0’s”, lot-o-weird thing can happen without reason.
        Yes, I would suggest that the corrupted was shown on purpose

  2. … this actually used to be a climate blog. The problem with global warming, is that the
    corruption of our government has become more important than climate.


    The research into Verra, the world’s leading carbon standard for the rapidly growing $2bn (£1.6bn) voluntary offsets market, has found that, based on analysis of a significant percentage of the projects, more than 90% of their rainforest offset credits – among the most commonly used by companies – are likely to be “phantom credits” and do not represent genuine carbon reductions.

    Verra, which is based in Washington DC, operates a number of leading environmental standards for climate action and sustainable development, including its verified carbon standard (VCS) that has issued more than 1bn carbon credits.

    The studies used different methods and time periods, looked at different ranges of projects, and the researchers said no modelling approach is ever perfect, acknowledging limitations in each study. However, the data showed broad agreement on the lack of effectiveness of the projects compared with the Verra-approved predictions.

    Two of the studies have passed the peer review process and another has been released as a preprint.

  3. More magic from the Australian Met Bureau

    First there was this

    “Jolly Odd what: Sydney Observatory record cold spell broken with help from AWOL solar panel?”

    “Golly but, that’s a strange spot to leave a solar panel…

    Sydney reached the longest cold streak for 140 years, and it looked like it might become the longest ever. But then a few days ago, after 331 days of cool weather, temperatures reached the magic 30.2C* at Observatory Hill Sydney ending the newsworthy cold run.

    Back in 1883 Sydney had 339 days in-a-row where the thermometer didn’t make it up to 30C (86F). Since then, five million people arrived, along with the Cahill Expressway, skyscrapers, and 100,000 cars a day, but even that, apparently, wasn’t enough artificial urban warming to reach temperatures of 140 years ago.

    More at

    Now the update

    “Just like that: the suspicious solar panel disappears. The Bureau of Met experts at work?”

    Doing their best to help Al Gore boil the oceans

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s