How did McCarthy not know who spoke at the 1/6 rally

[Cheezoholic]

4 days afterwards? How did he not know what they said 4 days afterwards? Seriously, litsen to the recordings released Monday and ignore the backtracking crap and listen to him. He asks an awful lot of questions with answers half the population of America knew, answers that had been plastered all over news media for days. He's got Scalise googling Brooks exact quote at the rally. Does anyone even find any of that remotely suspicious? Him lying, big deal in repuke land, it's the norm. Why is he asking specific questions about the 1/6 rally under the impression he has no clue what happened that day? I'm either paranoid or people are way more gullible than I thought. Listen to him, not the headline....

[global1]

1. Who Is The Source Of These Recordings?.....

I've heard these recordings the first time today on Nicole's show - and then they were played on every MSNBC's show afterwards. I know that these have something to do with a book that is coming out or is out - but I didn't (maybe cause I'm sick of all this) listen or hear who made these recordings or who is releasing them now.

Why all of a sudden - are we getting all this info?

Are these being used to sink McCarthy's chances of becoming the speaker should the Repugs retake the House - OR - are these being used as some sort of way to make McCarthy look good. I'm not really sure?

Maybe I'm dense here - but there's something really fishy about all this.

Last night I posted that I was concerned that this is coming out now - to take the wind out of the sails of the J6 hearings. That by the time we get to the hearings - the American People will have heard all this; it will be covered ad nauseaum by the MSM and talking heads - and it won't have an impact on the public.

Today after hearing these recordings - I really don't know now. Is it just so these authors can sell their book?

[NJCher]

2. I found that weird, too

Not-so-bright people have a very narrow focus, I’ve noticed.

[NJCher]

3. Here's another option

He was using members as a sort of research group to save himself time and effort. Nothing wrong with that—4 or 5 heads are better than one, especially when one is his.

[Cheezoholic]

5. I wouldn't say research group

I'd say inadvertent witnesses just in case his ass ends up in a sling.

[Cheezoholic]

4. I'm glad you said "fishy"

And yes there is a book by a couple of NYT reporters I believe. The fishy part IMO isn't something nefarious by the reporters nor the NYT, nor MSNBC, whom all have been leading this story. We have no idea where these recordings were leaked from which is ok, protect your sources etc. But the more that are released the more it perks my BS detector from the recordings themselves. Like I said in the OP, the ones that came out Tuesday seem to show McCarthy asking who spoke at the 1/6 rally 4 days after. They show him asking what those individuals said 4 days after. He's asking his fellow colleagues this shit! Thats my main question. Why did the leader of the house minority party not know any of this? So in other recordings that day he was supposedly condemning dipshit for 1/6 yet he didn't even know 4 days later anybody that was speaking at the rally? this is very fishy. I'll go out on a limb and say the recordings are real. McCarthy himself made these calls. Whether he had these calls recorded to put into his pocket just in case shit blew up, or was aware of the possibility they were being recorded, it gives him some deniability. Whether he released them or someone on his staff released them or someone on the call released them we may never know. I do know one thing, if you listen to his questions, they are very calculated. The fact he asked the questions he did 4 days after just makes it more suspicious.