Tuesday, March 7, 2023

FOX Allows More Disinformation: Tucker Carlson's Version of January 6 is Total Fallacy

Tucker Carlson live on March 6 via FOX

Capitol Police Chief responds to Carlson’s broadcast
&
Senator Schumer’s floor remarks [click here]

Tucker Carlson is a very sick man who is out of touch with reality. FOX should remove him from the public airwaves for re-editing the January 6 video tapes that McCarthy gave him to show a false  narrative (which it was expected he would do) as Carlson started showing his revised version of January 6.

That is reported on here from CNN with this headline:

“What to know about the Tucker Carlson January 6 footage”

Fox News host Tucker Carlson aired newly released footage from the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol that included images of (1) the rioter known as the “QAnon Shaman,” as well as of (2) Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, who died following the attack.

Carlson, who used the footage in an attempt to downplay the violence and defend the pro-Trump mob, claimed he had Capitol Police review the footage before airing it.

Carlson said on his show:We do take security seriously, so before airing any of this video we checked first with the Capitol Police. We’re happy to say their reservations were minor and for the most part they were reasonable. In the end, the only change that we made was in blurring the details of a single interior door in the Capitol building.”

NOTE: Multiple sources told CNN that Carlson’s show provided only one clip to review and not the others, ergo: Carlson once again proves he is a lying scumbag.

Here’s what was in the footage that aired Monday re: the QAnon Shaman’s role: Carlson claimed that new Capitol security footage taken on January 6 shows Jacob Chansley, known as the “QAnon Shaman,” walking through the Capitol without pushback from police. In one clip, Chansley is shown with two officers who attempt to open a door near the Senate chamber. In a second clip, Chansley, still flanked by the two original officers, walks between a group of about half a dozen officers and none appear to try to step in, and there is no audio in the videos.

Prosecutors say that Chansley disobeyed that request and walked to the Senate floor. Video from that day shows officers following Chansley around the building, and an officer walks into the chamber with Chansley and continues to ask rioters to leave.

Capitol Police officers have testified at several January 6 trials that after the initial wave of rioters entered the building, they felt outnumbered and were afraid of escalating violence by engaging with the mob. Members of the crowd were therefore able to walk into the building without much, or any, physical resistance, according to the officers.

Enter your email to sign up for CNN's "What Matters" Newsletter.

 

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Chansley pleaded guilty to a felony charge of obstructing the Electoral College proceedings on January 6 and was sentenced to 41 months in prison.

Carlson then aired never-before-seen surveillance footage that he said showed Officer Brian Sicknick, who died one day after the January 6 insurrection. Carlson said he focused on this because Democrats have turned Sicknick into a “prop and a martyr” by overstating the links between his death and the insurrection.

Carlson used the new video to try to undermine the known facts surrounding Sicknick’s death, and to argue that January 6 was less violent and “deadly” than it has been portrayed.

Carlson argued that Sicknick looks “healthy and vigorous” in the video, and therefore “it’s hard to imagine” that he was severely injured by the rioters or that he died because of the insurrection.

On January 6, Sicknick was attacked with pepper spray and physically fought with members of the mob. 

An officer testified that she saw Sicknick in significant distress after he was sprayed. He died one day later after suffering a series of strokes.

FYI: The DC ME ruled that Sicknick died of natural causes and then added: All that transpired that day played a role in his condition.”

Note: Carlson did not mention the ME’s part.

My 2 Cents: Carlson as expected selectively picked the spots for the maximum effect and pleasure of his FOX audience – that was apparent by his words about each segment mentioned above with his twists and turns for his agenda.

Was what he showed and what we saw on that horrible day the same tapes parts, yet, it was but re-editing is with his monologue is dangerous and misleading … is it just “freedom of the press?” Not in my opinion it is not. 

It more likely falls into the category of NOT being information but rather disinformation, and that shows him and by extension his boss, FOX News, calling for that horrible day to be repeated in 2024 if the election does not go their way then.

I cite Carlson and his reedited version of January 6 Capitol attack as “content restriction” historically proven as follows:

“Content-based restrictions” on speech have been permitted only for a few historic categories of speech: incitement; obscenity; defamation (libel and slander); speech integral to criminal conduct; fighting words; child pornography; fraud; true threats; and speech presenting a  “Clear and Present Danger” (grave and imminent threat) that the government has the power to prevent.”

Absent from these few categories is any general exception for false statements.

* Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1917-1919), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court concerning enforcement of the Espionage Act of 1917 during World War I.  A unanimous Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., concluded that defendants who distributed flyers to draft-age men urging resistance to induction could be convicted of an attempt to obstruct the draft, a criminal offense.

The “bad tendency principle” is a test which permits restriction of freedom of speech by government if it is believed that a form of speech has a sole tendency to incite or cause illegal activity.

The “bad tendency” test (Patterson v. Colorado, 1907) was a test which permits restriction of freedom of speech by government if it is believed that a form of speech has a sole tendency to incite or cause illegal activity and it was finally overturned in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) and was replaced by the “imminent lawless action” test which states that speech is not protected by the First Amendment if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely.

That to me was and is Carlson’s purpose and intention.

Thanks for stopping by.


No comments: