There is no longer a "justice system" in the USA ⋆ Politicrossing
Connect with us

Tucker Carlson

There is no longer a “justice system” in the USA

There was no cross-examination allowed in any of this, because this committee would not allow it, no rebuttal of any kind.

Published

on

Tucker questions the recent and ongoing politicizing of “justice” we’re seeing now. Highlights include

“The hallmark of any authoritarian regime is politicized ‘justice.’ Under that system, your opponents go to jail, your supporters can do whatever they want, and this reveals that the state exists not to serve the people who live in it, but to preserve itself, and to crush all dissent.”

“In fact, we have reached that point, that’s where we are. Yesterday, for example a man leaped on stage at a campaign event and tried to stab Lee Zeldin.”

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Do Not Make This Mistake

“Ordinarily, attempting to assassinate a federal office holder would be considered a big deal. But Lee Zeldin is a Republican, so it’s not a big deal anymore. The man who tried to murder Lee Zeldin was released immediately with no bail.”

“Less than 24 hours later, by contrast, former Trump advisor Steve Bannon was convicted of crimes that until recently were not crimes at all, for which he now faces a prison term of 2 years.”

“If you’ve been paying any attention at all to our ‘justice system,’ particularly under Merrick Garland, you had some sense of where this was going. It was moving toward the authoritarian system we now have, where justice is an illusion. Offend the people in charge, get punished. Support the people in charge, do whatever you want.”

“Still, even knowing that, today’s conviction of Steve Bannon is an escalation. There was not even a pretense in his ‘trial’ that the prosecution of Steve Bannon was lawful.”

“So, the Constitution requires equal protection. Heard that phrase? That means that selective prosecution is not allowed, it’s unconstitutional. If you don’t try one person for a crime, you don’t get to charge another person for the same crime, ‘cuz that’s selective, it’s political. But under Merrick Garland, that’s the new rule. Offend us, go to jail.”

“If the committee wanted to get to the truth of the ‘Trump grabbed the wheel of the limo’ allegation, they would’ve talked to people who were there, but they didn’t.”

“Republicans, if they’d been allowed to cross-examine, if they’d demanded to cross-examine, we’re not defending Republicans, they’ve fallen down on the job, that’s an understatement. But if someone had been allowed to ask adult questions of the witness, we might have learned what CNN viewers will never know. But none of that was allowed, ‘cuz it’s pure propaganda.”

“There was no cross-examination allowed in any of this, because this committee would not allow it, no rebuttal of any kind. So, of course there was no inquiry as to why a Capitol Hill officer with a documented history of recklessly mishandling firearms shot an unarmed woman in the neck, an air force veteran.”

“Why? We’re not allowed to ask. What happened to those thousands of hours of surveillance footage? Why can’t we see those? You’re not allowed even to ask why we’re not allowed to see them. We can’t know why police are on video letting people into the capitol complex on January 6, why is that? Not allowed to ask.”

Watch the video below and tell us what you think in the comments.

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
 
 
 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



News

What the Trump raid was really about

Indicting Donald Trump is a very big step, not simply because a lot of people like him and he’s the former President, but because indicting him at this point would be to reveal that this entire thing, and by ‘thing’ we mean our justice system, is just transparently political.

Published

on

Tucker looks at what didn’t make sense about the recent FBI raid on Donald Trump’s home in Florida.

Highlights include:

“No honest person could believe that the raid on Donald Trump’s home last week was a legitimate act of law enforcement — it was not. Even the Biden administration didn’t really bother to pretend otherwise. The official explanations that we have heard for the raid make no sense at all. It doesn’t matter how forcefully they are repeated by the media, they’re nonsensical.”

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Do Not Make This Mistake

“For the sake of argument on our show, we’re gonna say that it is, in fact, true, and that Donald Trump did, in fact, have boxes of classified documents sitting in his cellar. Let’s say that’s true. What would it mean? Well, what it means depends in part on what the documents were. Did those documents contain meaningful information? Should they have been classified in the first place? Is there a good reason the rest of us should not have been allowed to see those documents? Now, you never hear those questions asked in public, but anyone who lives in Washington knows perfectly well they should be asked in public, a lot, because in Washington virtually anything can qualify as an official state secret, and often does.”

“If that is true, would it justify what happened? Would it justify sending a large team of federal agents to shut down the entire southern tip of Palm Beach to raid Mar-A-Lago on a weekday? No, it wouldn’t. So, one of the laws they’re telling you that Trump broke doesn’t even have criminal penalties attached to it because it’s not serious enough. Federal paramilitaries don’t show up at your house when you violate the Presidential Records Act.”

“There was endless huffing on television about something called the ‘rule of law’ and how absolutely no one is above that, no one, not even a former President. We’re informed of this by the same people who paid rioters to burn down our cities, the ones who eliminated bail, the ones who encouraged tens of millions of foreign nationals to ignore our federal immigration statutes and move to our country permanently at public expense as a reward for breaking our laws. But, keep in mind, no one is above the law.”

“It’s exactly what it looks like: a show of force against the opposition leader by the head of state and his personal bodyguards. If this happened in any other country, it immediately would be denounced as the act of a dictator.”

“Now, superficially all of this is about Donald Trump, and on some level it is. Permanent Washington does not want Trump to run again. Of course, it’s their greatest fear, and they’re doing all he [sic] can to prevent it. It turns out democracy was too important to let voters choose their own president. But if you take three steps back and consider what’s actually going on, you’ll see that none of this is really about Donald Trump the man. It’s about power, and that means it’s about crushing and humiliating anyone who gets in the way of people who want to retain power.”

“Indicting Donald Trump is a very big step, not simply because a lot of people like him and he’s the former President, but because indicting him at this point would be to reveal that this entire thing, and by ‘thing’ we mean our justice system, is just transparently political. It’s just a means to an end, a means to power, and people know that at this point. They’ve watched it. They understand what’s happening, even people who don’t like Donald Trump, even people who didn’t vote for Donald Trump and don’t want to vote for him in 2024. They know, and they can’t un-know, and that means that we are at this point on the edge of something unprecedented, and something awful.”

Watch the video below and tell us what you think in the comments.

Continue Reading

Tucker Carlson

Tucker: They don’t care about you at all

Democrats don’t care about inflation because they’re rich and it doesn’t affect them.

Published

on

Tucker gives his analysis of the Democratic primary in New York City, where it’s incumbent vs incumbent because of a new redistricting. Remember that Futurama episode in which two identical politicians were running against each other? It’s kinda’ like that, except not funny.
“Highlights” include:

“If you’re an incumbent member of Congress, pretty much the last thing you ever want to do is to debate a primary opponent in public. As a sitting member, you already have every possible advantage, unless you drop dead during a speech or get drunk and take your clothes off on a commercial airplane, you are very likely to be reelected to Congress.”

“So, a televised debate cannot help you. It is all risk and no upside.”

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Do Not Make This Mistake

“But occasionally there is no avoiding it. Democrats held a primary debate in New York City last night, they had no choice. Both the candidates in this race are incumbent. Thanks to a court decision that redrew congressional boundaries, the two most powerful members of the New York delegation are now running against each other for the same seat.”

“What was very interesting and what tells you a lot about the Democratic party is how these two candidates talked about their personal accomplishments and their goals for the country.”

“Now, we should tell you, having watched it, that figuring out exactly what Maloney and Nadler were trying to say was not easy. These are not spry, articulate people. They’re not magicians with the English language.”

“But at one point, Nadler gathered the strength to boast about his greatest accomplishment in the Congress: That would be impeaching George W. Bush, twice. Obviously, Nadler meant to say Donald Trump, not that he can remember what decade it is. But what he meant to say is not really a consolation for Democrats watching at home. The problem here is that Jerry Nadler and Carolyn Maloney … neither of these candidates have anything to say.”

“What’s interesting is what Carolyn Maloney didn’t mention as a top priority, and that would be the economy, inflation. And it’s interesting because every poll taken shows that inflation is the number one issue that actual Americans care about. So, why wouldn’t Carolyn Maloney, who is a politician after all, can probably read a poll, why would she not include inflation? Well, it’s possible she’s not aware it’s happening.”

“So, these are the issues that the leaders of the Democratic party and the party’s donors, many of them in San Francisco and New York, care about. They don’t care about inflation because they’re rich and it doesn’t affect them. In other words, they don’t care about you at all. And by the way, this isn’t just true of longstanding establishment figures in the Democratic party like Jerry Nadler and Carolyn Maloney, it’s everywhere. It’s endemic, it’s in the fabric of the party itself. Even people who want to join the club repeat the same lines.”

“So, no wonder Democrats are unpopular. They have nothing to offer. They haven’t updated their files. They believe it’s 2005. You see this in foreign policy particularly. They are living in their heads in a world in which the US wields the world’s most powerful military backed by the world’s strongest economy and can do whatever it wants just by telling other people to obey. So, like Joe Biden, you just tell Russia ‘don’t invade Ukraine!’, and of course it won’t, we’re America. You just let China know that we back Taiwan and the entire 75-year-old dispute over that island will be settles forever. They really believe that. They have no idea of this country’s relative place in the world order because they don’t know anything about reality as it stands right now.”

“How out of touch are they? Well, the Democratic party’s main ‘radical’ right now is Sandy Cortez of Westchester. How radical is Sandy Cortez? Well, she spends her days defending the ‘intel’ agencies and neocon foreign policy, and the big banks. So, if you’re ‘revolutionaries’ are reading scripts written by the World Economic Forum, maybe they’re not actually very revolutionary. Maybe they’re defending the status quo, and that’s exactly what they’re doing, and they’re doing it because they have no other plan. The sad truth is the people who run the Democratic party have just given up. They’ve given up on the country and given up on the people who live here.”

Watch the video below and tell us what you think in the comments:

Continue Reading

 

Our Newsletter

Become a Politicrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Sites We Like

Our Newsletter

Become a PolitiCrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Trending