THIS EVENING, FOX NEWS’ SEAN HANNITY moderated Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) and Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) in a debate that had been agreed to some time ago when DeSantis’ poll numbers in the Republican presidential primary race were much better than they are today. At the time, it was also expected the imposter occupying the White House, Joey Biden, would be impeached, ousted, or ready to retire, a mere footnote in the 2024 campaign season, and that Newsom might be the new Big Guy taking his place.
I haven’t watched Hannity, or Fox (except Maria Bartiromo on Sunday morning), since early on Election Day of 2020 when the cable news channel prematurely and erroneously called the State of Arizona for Biden with only a tiny fraction of the vote counted. I didn’t miss much, it seems.
It wasn’t really a debate, but rather, a clearly one-sided G.O.P. presentation, albeit, a well-researched and accurate one. Newsom would have none of it, though, and talked over Sean and DeSantis, sometimes very loudly. His answers were unresponsive and irrelevant as he ignored the facts presented to him by Hannity that painted a tarnished picture of the Golden State. Many of his assertions were just plain untrue, except, perhaps, for his correction to DeSantis’ pronunciation of Kamala Harris’ first name. Newsom came across as the pompous ass he truly is, but credit where due: he agreed to appear on (gasp!) Fox.
DeSantis, for his part, came across as sane, reasoned, and prepared. He is not known to be a good debater (this was good practice), but he can do a pretty credible compare-and-contrast presentation, as he illustrated. He came with a show-and-tell package, which included, e.g., an actual map currently in use showing where the human shit on the streets in San Francisco is especially bad and a couple of actual books in current use in California schools that glorify homosexuality in age-inappropriate ways. He had to be a bit annoying by speaking fast and loud to be heard over Newsom’s constant interruptions. At the end, it sounded as though the two had agreed to continue the debate another 20 minutes, but during the commercials, they changed their minds. A news imbroglio ensued.
It appears over 5 million watched the fiasco. All the while, it was irrelevant to 2024, but maybe it is a glimpse into the future—2028.
JENNA ELLIS, a former Trump attorney, apparently didn’t study the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution at law school in first year Con Law. That’s kind of funny because it’s the first thing taught in law school because it’s likely the most important amendment, but not to Colorado Judge Byron Large.
Judge Large set Ellis straight, though. Ellis faced discipline through the bar association of the state for having been highly critical of the controversial election of 2020, the one where Trump won, but had the election stolen from him using a number of techniques, not the least of which was using defective and inaccurate voting machines made by Dominion Voting Systems and perhaps others. Ellis thought she had—get this!—a First Amendment right, right!, to express her views.
Silly goose! Of course she didn’t! This is America, after all! Expressing un-permitted views on the likes of Fox News, Fox Business, MSNBC, or Newsmax isn’t freedom of the press either, one surmises. So the good Judge Large made her hang her head in shame and repent—10 times!—for ‘misrepresenting evidence’ about the 2020 election. In exchange, she was allowed to keep her law license.
What did she say that was un-permitted speech? We should take note! 1. Hillary Clinton didn’t concede the 2016 election. 2. Trump’s legal team had witness affidavits, fraudulent ballots, and other evidence to show there was a coordinated effort to manipulate the election results. 3. The election was stolen from President Trump (and we can prove that). 4. Trump’s team will present testimonial and other evidence in court to show how the election was stolen. 5. Properly counted, Trump won by a landslide. 6. There was “widespread fraud” in 2020’s election where at least six battleground states “were corrupted, of not more through their voting systems.”
For the record, all the above statements are all TRUE, except for #4: Trump was never able to be heard in court because no one was deemed by the courts to have the requisite standing needed to be heard. It would have been found to be true, however, if his team was heard. The takeaway here, then, seems to be that true statements are false under the law and therefore not permitted. The corollary is, it seems, that false statements are true under the law and are permitted. True, it’s confusing, but it’s important to not get tripped up in this very trippy world.
THE TUCKER TAPES, as the J-6 surveillance videos have been dubbed, were toned down substantially after last week’s premiere. It is widely believed Fox News’ Rupert Murdock got a dressing down bySen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and others about airing the video at all. Nonetheless, there has been some aftermath from the initial airing. For starters, Albert Watkins, Jacob Chansley’s defense attorney stated that while he had been given many hours of video by prosecutors in response to his Brady request, the video of Capitol police ushering his client around the Capitol, as if giving him a tour, was not among them.
It was a crucial clip because it made it evident his client, a/k/a the “QAnon Shaman,” posed no threat and apparently wasn’t perceived by police to be dangerous, either. It surely would have been compelling for a jury to acquit if it went to trial, or at least be a conduit to dropping charges or a more favorable plea deal. There’s supposedly a lot more explosive video in the can.
When he was asked if he requested it, Watkins said he had, but he was entitled to it, anyway, as a matter of law. This is a true statement of the law. Even if Watkins didn’t specifically ask for it or didn’t even know it existed (which is very likely), the prosecution is required to relinquish, without the formality of a specific discovery request, any evidence that could be deemed to be exculpatory—which this certainly is. Watkins, like everyone else, only learned of the existence of the footage on Tucker Carlson’s show. Even though Watkins no longer represents Chansley, he opined that Jan. 6th defendants as a whole ought to get any convictions vacated. That is the appropriate remedy for prosecutorial misconduct.
The exculpatory evidence rule stems from a 1963 case, Brady v. Maryland (here) which requires disclosure of any information favorable to the accused “which may reduce a defendant’s potential sentence, go against the credibility of an unfavorable witness, or otherwise allow a jury to infer against the defendant’s guilt.”
It would seem probable that Chansley, now serving a 41-month sentence that is almost over, will appeal the decision based on this apparent error of law. Seeking a mistrial would be a sort of Pyrrhic victory, however, he could try to clear his record based on mistake. Whether he is given any consideration is another question, given how courts have tended to treat these defendants. Another non-violent defendant, Sara Carpenter, a retired NYPD cop, was denied a continuance to review the newly-released footage prior to trial by U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg.
If the name sounds familiar, it should. He has ruled on ,any politically charged cases, given he sits in the District of Columbia and on the FISA Court. He’s a mixed bag in terms of his rulings: e.g., found U.S. violated Fourth Amendment (per FISA court); dismissed Vindman case against Trump allies; dismissed (twice) Clinton email suits; and referred for discipline a Minn. attorney, Erick Kaardal, who sought to invalidate the 2020 election in court on behalf of voters in several states (order here). Take from that what you will.
Some of the defendants have begun their legal responses. One can expect the Department of Justice will have a legal excuse for why it didn’t produce, which will likely be that the tapes weren’t technically IN its possession, but were, instead, in the possession of the legislature, and therefore, couldn’t be turned over, according to Constitutional Law expert Jonathan Turley. Turley admits, though, Chansley got the shaft here.
And meanwhile, The Gateway Pundit and some 33 J-6 defendants have filed an official request to get the government footage from Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy, who will hopefully provide it, given the gravity of their situations. But it begs the question of the legality of not providing Brady materials because one has transferred possession of them to another. The rationale behind having to provide such materials would suggest this is no excuse, especially when the need for the materials is foreseeable to the original owner/possessor as is the case here.
These J-6 defendants have had a very rough go of it all. As a fundraiser, these inmates awaiting trial, who reportedly, recite the Pledge of Allegiance every night, recorded their version of “The Star Spangled Banner” as the “J6 Prison Choir” with 46th President Donald Trump reciting the pledge. The song named “Justice for All,” reached No. 1 on iTunes and can be heard here, but don’t look for it on YouTube which bans everything Trump. And for what it’s worth, Elon Musk is supportive of Chansley and can actually voice it on Twitter that he owns, for what it’s worth!
THE KANGAROO COURT that was once the so-called “House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol” disbanded, and with it, the preposterous lies it perpetrated. Finally, the truth of what happened on that fateful day is coming to light, and with evidence, not Democrat propaganda. Fox News’ Tucker Carlson began his exposé on Monday night’s show, a replay of which can be viewed here. He had obtained over 44,000 hours of security video footage from House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, the same the Committee had, but either didn’t bother to review or flatly lied about. Apparently, Carlson got the footage because he was the only one who asked for it, even though it is supposed to be made available to any reporter requesting it.
“Democrats in Congress, assisted by Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, lied about what happened that day. They are liars. That is conclusive, and that fact should prevent them from ever being taken seriously again.”
The videos predictably show a lot, including, for example, the Capitol Police calmlyescorting an unarmed and costumed Jacob Chansley, later-nicknamed the “QAnon Shaman,” throughout the Capitol. They acted almost like tour guides and on a few occasions, even tried to open doors for him. Indeed, Chansley and others were literally waved in and assisted through the Capitol by uniformed police It all appeared to be anything but “an insurrection,” especially in light of the fact police outnumbered Chansley and others in the proximity. Overall, with only some exceptions, people who entered the Capitol walked silently and reverently inside the ropes, and were respectful, almost in awe. All they took were selfies. Chansley himself later thanked the officers in prayer on the Senate floor. .(He is now serving a 41 month sentence for obstruction in federal prison.) The Nov. 2021 D.O.J. press release, however, misrepresented the entire encounter.
It is possible that the police simply escorted the protesters inside to avoid confrontation and possible physical damage to other people or to the premises. This can be an effective technique to control crowds, but to suggest these were people engaging in an insurrection is belied by the evidence, save for the very few who did cause property damage. Even for those who did cause damage, it didn’t seem to be an insurrection as much as it did simple vandalism.
One of Carlson’s biggest revelations was the truth about Officer Brian Sicknick’s death. The Committee would have us believe he was “slain” by the dangerous mob in the “insurrection” that breached the Capitol, but as surveillance footage clearly shows over and over, he was alive, well, and actively walking around after the alleged deadly fire extinguisher strike. None other than the Grey Lady herself, the hallowed New York Times, initially propounded the fire extinguisher death back then, citing anonymous sources. Carlson also showed the political theater of Dems practically bowing and praying to Sicknick’s cremated remains as they were displayed in the Rotunda three weeks after his death. And actually, as it turns out, Carlson showed that the Committee couldn’t have simply overlooked the footage showing Sicknick was not “slain”: there was an electronic bookmark still archived in the Capitol’s computer system. So yes, the Committee unequivocally lied.
Sicknick’s brother, Ken Sicknick, came out at the time and said he had spoken to his brother afterwards, and said he was “in good shape,” and he never mentioned anything about any fire extinguisher. By April, a report from the Medical Examiner’s Office in Washington, D.C., which the Capitol Police publicly accepted as true, made a specific finding that Sicknick, age 42, had died ‘of natural causes,” rumored for some time to have been a heart attack or stroke. But Dems kept peddling their fantasy he had been “slain” by Trump supporters, with Biden even talking about it abroad six months later, and even on Jan. 6th of this year. All the while, the person who was slain, by a Capitol Police officer, Ashli Babbitt, was not referenced at all nor did her killer ever face prosecution.
Another misrepresentation (if you’re charitable) or lie (if you’re cynical) made by the government concerned the mysterious agitator, Ray Epps, who was never charged with anything and thought by many to be an agent provocateur. Epps testified he texted his nephew he had left the Capitol grounds when he hadn’t. Another statement that was misrepresented by the Committee concerned Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) being a coward. The video they showed had him being ushered alone out of the Capitol by police. In fact, many lawmakers were ushered out early, all by police. Hawley was just at the end of the line.
What was the intent of members of this Committee? Was it merely to castrate, kill, bury, and condemn to hell the 45th President, Donald Trump, so he can never be the 47th president? A growing number of people think the objective was even more ominous, and the charade was meant to turn us into a one-party state, or alternatively, to cause a civil war. Anything’s possible, I guess, given the lengths these legislators have gone to sinisterly fabricate the false story of the Jan. 6th “insurrection,” which it clearly was not. But most of us knew that, anyway. When all is said and done, will this reporting even matter? I’d say the jury is out on that one, but no one bothers with juries when you have partisan hacks in power.
The Swamp is not happy Carlson is speaking truth, not only to power, but to the powerless. A Committee ringleader, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), was so trumped up over Carlson’s report, he pleaded for censorship, calling Fox News C.E.O. Rupert Murdoch to request it be stopped immediately. He told Murdoch he “has a special obligation to stop Tucker Carlson from going on [Monday night], now that he’s seen how he is perverted and slimed the truth, and for letting them go on again and again and again. Not because their views deserve such opprobrium, but because our democracy depends on it.” Because, you know, Democrats love “our democracy,” and claim its preservation can only be effectuated by playing by one side’s —Dem’s — rules.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) didn’t like Carlson’s report, either, calling it a “mistake,” while scolding Speaker McCarthy for relinquishing the footage to him. In the uni-party system, however, McConnell, too, thought Jan. 6th was a “violent insurrection.” (As for McCarthy, he had no choice but release the tapes; it was a condition precedent for his speakership, as it should have been.)
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called Carlson’s reporting “dangerous,” a favorite descriptor used by Dems. He added, “I have no indication at this moment that the police have vetted that footage. It is my hope and expectation that that will absolutely occur.” He continued:
“The Jan. 6 insurrection was violent. Approximately 140 officers were seriously injured. A handful of officers died as a result of the events of the Jan. 6 violent insurrection. There are serious security concerns… We’re releasing footage into the public domain in an era where political violence is on the rise, and there are people, including the former president, who fan the flames of extremism.”
[N.B. Carlson stated his show had been reviewed by authorities and security suggestions were followed.]
The MSM also is wound up. MSMNB’s Rachel Maddow said:
“So the Speaker of the House just gave them all of the security camera footage from the actual Capitol for them to play with, to see what they can do… ‘Here you go, Fox News Primetime. Hopefully, you can use this official government material to concoct an alternate narrative to give us some more convenient revisionist history about what happened on January 6.”
Because, you know, the Dems would never do anything like that!
Carlson will be releasing more video, and one can expect it will come out in dribs and drabs for ratings. Dems will have ample opportunity to paint him as a conspiracy theorist, an election denier, an insurrection denier, and worst of all, a Trump supporter. His has been the number one rated show on the number one watched channel for over 100 weeks, beating CNN and MSNBC combined in prime time. The stage-managed political kabuki theater about an insurrection-that-wasn’t, once called by Biden as “the worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War,” will, instead of Trump, be castrated, killed, buried, and condemned to hell, as it should, lest we all have to envision a society on the road to fascism.
THE WASHINGTON POST almost seems contrite over its misreporting on 45th President Donald Trump. Sorta, kinda, almost. WaPo is retracting much of its Trump-Russia-collusion reporting, and is even going so far as to accurately point an accusing arthritic finger at the crooked Hillary Clinton: “The indictment secured by [Independent Counsel John] Durham on Nov. 4 suggests, but doesn’t explicitly assert, that [Igor] Danchenko may have gotten his information about the hotel encounter not from [Sergei] Millian but from a Democratic Party operative with long-standing ties to Hillary Clinton,” they noted on Friday. (Brackets mine.)
Also remarkable, a WaPo columnist (media critic!) Erik Wemple, criticized CNN for its reporting on the so-called “Steele Dossier,” and called on them to correct the record. Meanwhile, there appears to be a major shake-up at CNN, known to the G.O.P. as the Clinton News Network, for its adulation of the adulterer, Bill Clinton, and his accomplice, Hillary. A “good number” of CNN’s on-air talent and staff are slated to be cut. The propaganda arm of the D.N.C. claims it’s going back to being a “100% news channel.” Right. But Deadline is reporting it.
Once CNN completes its merger with WarnerMedia, Discovery chief David Zaslav is expected to take the helm, but he’s keeping mum. Still, it’s a reasonable expectation after CNN’s horrible October, where viewership was in free-fall, with all but two programs failing to average a 1 million cume, according to television ratings company, Nielsen. (It was so bad, only the 90-minute Biden Town Hall exceeded 1 million viewers, with 1.2 million (but still came in last after Fox News and MSNBC), and the half-hour follow-up to it, “Cuomo Prime Time,” with 1.1 million. In fact, CNN averaged under 1/2 million in total day viewership in October, a drop of a devastating 76%, as compared to January, before President Trump had the election almost certainly stolen from him, though surely that’s all purely coincidental.
Democracy is indeed dark with the “most trusted name in news.”
sua sponte 