The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Jesse Watters

Youtube Screenshot

Fox News propagandist Jesse Watters on Wednesday alleged President Joe Biden and other top Democrats may be behind the man who was arrested earlier that day who reportedly admitted he wanted to kill Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“This could be a little criminal conspiracy,” Watters alleges, asking, “did the orders come all the way from the top?”

For more than seven minutes Watters cobbled together various benign incidents from over the past two years in a clearly fictious narrative that draws the President, the Speaker of the House, the Senate Majority Leader, the White House Press Secretary, and a top Democratic Senator into what he baselessly suggests could be a conspiracy to kill a U.S. Supreme Court Justice.

Watters – who was highly criticized for using “violent rhetoric” by calling for a “kill shot” in interviews about Dr. Anthony Fauci – told Fox News viewers the man who he suggests is some high-powered hit man hired by the President, “got cold feet when he saw U.S. Marshals with arms guarding Kavanaugh’s house and called the cops on himself, telling them everything.”

“He says he was furious over Roe v. Wade possibly being overturned — remember the leak? — and was looking for purpose in his life,” Watters continues, as Media Matters reported. “So he found that purpose by going out and trying to kill a Supreme Court justice. Do you think that idea just popped into his head? Or did the orders come all the way from the top?”

Watters then tries to make his case, which amounts to “by Democrats’ own standards” there must be an investigation into this event because the left has accused Donald Trump of inciting the insurrection, Watters claims, merely by giving a speech at the January 6 rally.

By the end of his seven-minute-plus rant, Watters concludes:

“This is just the beginning, this summer is going to be ugly. That’s why we have to get to the bottom of this. This could be a little criminal conspiracy that needs to be investigated – again by the left’s own standards. We might have to appoint a commission. We might have to hold hearings,” he says, as if he is a member of Congress or DOJ official.

“We have a criminal leak,” Watters falsely claims, referring to the leak of the Supreme Court draft, which legal experts make clear was not criminal.

“We have a group that’s protesting outside [Kavanaugh’s] house. You have an attorney general that’s not doing anything about this,” he claimed, after earlier complaining that the protestors outside Supreme Court Justices’ homes should be arrested.

“You have a senator who’s agitating,” Watters claims, earlier referring to a March 2020 statement Senator Chuck Schumer made.

“You have a White House, who’s giving this license. Maybe time to put some people in leg shackles like they did to Navarro. These people incited violence possibly, we need to hold them accountable if they did. Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Liz Warren, anybody who has their hands on this should face consequences again, by the left’s own standards. Don’t call me crazy. They set the rules. We’re just following.”

Watch:


Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Wandrea "Shaye" Moss

YouTube Screenshot

Just who deserves protection in America?

If you observe the folks this country chooses to protect and chooses to ignore, you may get an answer that doesn’t exactly line up with America’s ideals.

Keep reading... Show less
YouTube Screenshot

The First Amendment reflects a principled but shrewd attitude toward religion, which can be summarized: Government should keep its big fat nose out of matters of faith. The current Supreme Court, however, is not in full agreement with that proposition. It is in half agreement — and half is not enough.

This section of the Bill of Rights contains two commands. First, the government can't do anything "respecting an establishment of religion" — that is, sponsoring, subsidizing or providing special favors for religious institutions or individuals.

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}