Once we saw from the tweet that this was an analysis from the Washington Post, we knew right away that it must be Philip Bump, and indeed it is. We’re honestly sorry for what happened to Paul Pelosi … whatever that was. We have a police report in which an obviously insane David DePape confesses to the attack, but we’re not going to forget being scolded by Politico for spreading “baseless claims” about a third party being in the house — just hours after Politico reported that an unidentified third-party opened the door to the police.
Conservatives want to know what happened, but apparently asking questions isn’t allowed: They’re still building the narrative and don’t want any interruptions. And so Bump claims that calls to release security video of the attack “is mostly a way to extend the conspiracy theory.” What conspiracy theory? Just tell us what happened — you’re the journalist.
‘Release the video’ is mostly a way to extend the conspiracy theory https://t.co/q7vl2a6WRs
— Post Politics (@postpolitics) November 2, 2022
Bump writes:
What makes conspiracy theories so powerful, though, is information. They aren’t simply invented out of thin air. They’re cobbled together piecemeal from people looking for patterns that don’t exist. When movies show deranged people drawing colored string between points on a corkboard, they aren’t threading together empty spots. They’re connecting random things that have no actual connection, picking out faces in clouds.
…
On Tuesday evening, The Washington Post reported that the Capitol Police had a live feed of the Pelosi couple’s San Francisco house during the attack but that no one was monitoring the feed. In short order, a new demand emerged: Release that video! Release the video of the responding police officers! What are you hiding?! Because this is how the conspiracy theory continues to ooze forward. There’s always some information out there being suspiciously hidden that will prove the conspiracy theory correct. If that information is suppressed, it reinforces the conspiracy theory. If it is released, it becomes evidence that contributes to the conspiracy theory — colored yarn is pinned to it — or attention just turns to some other just-out-of-sight information.
Recommended
So … if we’re following, it’s the media’s job to pick which information to suppress to keep people from asking questions.
Yeah, no.
Does this theory apply to releasing all video, such as body cam footage in cases alleging police brutality, or just in cases where the video would contradict the official narrative?
— Aldous Huxley's Ghost™ (@AF632) November 2, 2022
So the evidence is that damning, huh?
— Tony Kinnett (@TheTonus) November 2, 2022
If the video supported the official narrative it would have been "leaked" within hours.
— Batwing🦇🦇 (@Hexakitty666) November 2, 2022
When journalists actively campaign *against* transparency, you know they are worried about risk that the narrative they set within 12 hours of the incident will blow up.
— Shaner (@shaner5000) November 2, 2022
'Journalist' arguing for less transparency
— ille sine nomine (@Humilia_Homini) November 2, 2022
"Democracy Dies in Darkness"
— Cliff (@msmanntx) November 2, 2022
Actually, if the video is consistent with the account by the FBI, it ends the conspiracy theory.
— Righteous Despicable (formerly Deplorable) Llama (@LlamaRighteous) November 2, 2022
I enjoy journalists who prefer not knowing what actually happened. For too long journalists have insisted on details, and primary sources, when really we should just uncritically take at face value whatever politicians say happened. Gulf of Tonkin, WMDs, NSA mass surveillance…
— LastKingofScotland (@KingofLast) November 2, 2022
Well, humor us.
You shouldn't mind seeing us embarrassed, right?
— Jared A. Chambers (@C4CEO) November 2, 2022
"Dude, just trust me bro," is not evidence.
Evidence is evidence.— Ty the Typo Affishianado🏴☠️ (@Ty_in_TX) November 2, 2022
Releasing it would quash them entirely. Hack.
— Bohemio of the Reeeeing Twenties (@El__Bohemio) November 2, 2022
“Show me the evidence” isn’t a conspiracy theory.
— John Hyde (@JohnFlippinHyde) November 2, 2022
A high priced security failure happened and the people who want to see how are to blame.
— mitrebox (@mitrebox) November 2, 2022
"Analysis"
— jimtreacher.substack.com (@jtLOL) November 2, 2022
Seems just like yesterday they demanded all cops have body cameras and now looking at the video from them is detrimental.
— ScottG. 🇺🇸 (@2scottsherG) November 2, 2022
Seeing what happened with our own eyes would lead us farther from the truth?
Now modern journalism is starting to make sense. Here we see a reporter using this principle to get to the bottom of an important story: pic.twitter.com/fkW1gUz5OA— Brian Rose (@drbtrose) November 2, 2022
So then the video would do nothing to dispel the questions?
— J.G. Petruna (@jgpetruna) November 2, 2022
Remember when journalists were skeptical and inquisitive?
— Don Wolt (@tlowdon) November 2, 2022
We’re not ashamed to be called conspiracy theorists, especially seeing how many “conspiracies” have turned out to be true. Release the video.
***
Related:
The ReidOut blogger reveals ‘the sick twist of fate underlying the Paul Pelosi attack’ https://t.co/xLnUUXa2La
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) November 1, 2022
Join the conversation as a VIP Member