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.”

“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.



 
 
 

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.



Tucker Carlson

This would give the government terrifying power

This isn’t about banning TikTok. This is about introducing flat out totalitarianism into our system.

Published

on

Tucker looks at what’s potentially bad about our government’s bipartisan effort to ban TikTok, a move many of us would be on board with…if it weren’t another crudely disguised attempt to rush through something that gives them more vague powers in the name of national security. Highlights include:

“Every day more than 2 billion people use the social media app called TikTok. Many of them are young people under the age of 24. If you had kids, you probably know already how TikTok works. TikTok lets users upload short videos, usually they’re under 30 seconds. What’s interesting is that the content of these videos varies a lot depending upon what country you’re in. If you’re in China, where TikTok is headquartered, you tend to get more educational content. But if you live in this country, you get an awful lot of filth and propaganda tailored for kids.”

“Can you see what’s going on here? Well, China does, they run TikTok and China knows if you want a productive society that extends beyond, say, next week, you teach your kids about hard work and creativity and personal responsibility, respect for authority. But if you want to destroy a society, you funnel a bunch of garbage to kids about gender ideology and ‘twerking’. As the account ‘Libs of TikTok’ has documented extensively, that’s exactly what TikTok is doing here. There’s a whole genre of videos of teachers boasting about indoctrinating kids.”

“Right now, in response to criticism of TikTok, China’s government and the company itself are doing the same thing they did when they responded to allegations of a lab leak in Wuhan. They’re saying anyone who raises questions is a racist, and they’re doing that everywhere across the media, and they can because a lot of the news that you consume is paid for by TikTok.”

“One of the bills that would ban TikTok is being pushed, as we said, by senators in both parties. It’s called the Restrict Act. Mark Warner of Virginia and John Thune of South Dakota, Democrat and Republican, introduced this legislation. Now, the bill is ostensibly protecting American national security and ending ‘foreign adversaries’ from interfering in our elections through apps like TikTok, because of course election interference by Twitter and Facebook is no problem at all, but election interference from TikTok is totally unacceptable, okay. But in reality, and you should know this if you’re opposed to TikTok, as we are, this bill isn’t really about banning TikTok, it’s never about what they say it is. Instead, this bill would give enormous and terrifying new powers to the federal government to punish American citizens and regulate how they communicate with one another. For example, the bill would regulate ‘certain transactions between persons in the United States and foreign adversaries’. Now, what’s a foreign adversary and who gets to decide? Well, the Secretary of Commerce and the DNI, not the Congress, get to decide what foreign adversaries are.”

“So, if the Biden administration decides that you’re doing this, then the secretary of commerce can then enforce ‘any mitigation measure to address any risk arising from any covered transaction by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States’. These ‘covered transactions’ can involve ‘current, past, or potential future transactions’, and the mitigation measures include, but are not limited to throwing American citizens in prison for 20 years.”

“So, you would be allowing the executive branch, the Biden administration, to regulate speech on the internet, and if you are somehow involved with a ‘foreign adversary’, lets say you oppose the war against Russia, you got to prison for 20 years. So, this isn’t about banning TikTok, this is about introducing flat out totalitarianism into our system.”

Watch the video below and give us your thoughts in the comments:

Continue Reading

Tucker Carlson

Tucker: This is malicious

In this country the prosecution has to, for Constitutional and moral reasons, turn over exculpatory evidence to the defense. That did not happen. This is wrong.

Published

on

Tucker comments on the Biden administration’s wanting to arrest up to another 1200 people, not for committing crimes, but for showing their support for democracy, the left’s second favorite word since Biden took office. Highlights include:

“Here’s what we know, a Soros-funded prosecutor in New York, a man who ran on the promise to indict Trump, seems to be working hard to indict Trump, indicting him for a crime that no one even pretends is a crime, including the federal agency that has already investigated it and declared it not a crime.”

“So, in Manhattan tomorrow, what will certainly be an overwhelmingly liberal grand jury will meet, and unless something unexpected happens, Democrats will have taken the unprecedented step of using a corrupt justice system to take out the front runner in the Republican presidential field in a presidential race, and if that happens, America will never be the same.”

“As of tonight, it’s not just Trump who is the target of this, it’s Trump’s voters. The Biden administration is in the process of preparing yet another law enforcement dragnet of more than 1,000 non-violent January 6 protesters. These are not people who broke windows or tussled with cops, these are patriotic Americans who dared to question the official story of the 2020 election.”

“They watched with the rest of us as covid was used as a pretext to eliminate longstanding barriers to voter fraud. They saw a democratic partisan Mark Zuckerberg spend nearly half a billion dollars to influence the mechanics of voting, including in critical swing states. Nevertheless, as they watched the news on the night of November 3, Trump seemed to be winning reelection, and then they woke up and smug tv anchors are telling them that actually, a senile man who refused to campaign had won the biggest landslide in American history.”

“The Biden administration has identified 1,000 additional Trump voters for non-crimes that they claim took place on January 6, mostly walking as Jacob Chansley did. In recent months, according to a story in the Washington Post, US attorney Matthew Graves, a willing tool of the Biden administration , has written to court officials alerting them that an additional 700 to 1200 people may be charged stemming from January 6.”

“This dragnet is so vast that prosecutors are warning DC jails and prisons will be overrun with prisoners, prisoners you can at this point only describe as political prisoners. The Washington Post reports, ‘In recent months, law enforcement and judicial authorities have engaged in discussions to manage the huge volume of Jan. 6 cases without overwhelming the courthouse where pleas and trials are held.'”

“This is depraved and it’s malicious.”

“Now, whatever you think of Jacob Chansley or Donald Trump, if you cared about civil liberties, you would be outraged by this. This is as grave a Constitutional violation as you can have. In this country the prosecution has to, for Constitutional and moral reasons, turn over exculpatory evidence to the defense. That did not happen. This is wrong. This man is rotting in prison, his life has ended for a crime he did not commit and that he was not allowed to fairly defend himself against, but liberals didn’t care. They no longer seem to have any interest in justice or civil rights.”

“What you just saw is a measure of the total moral corruption of our news media and the institutions they serve in Washington and it’s implications for you. If they’ll endorse the unjust destruction of one man, they have no limits. They will do anything, and now with these impending arrests, they’re showing you what they will do. So, if you support the wrong presidential candidate, you get arrested and don’t get to see exculpatory evidence in your trial. Apparently, those are the rules. But if you do vote the ‘right’ way, you get paid. Democrats raise money for your bail when you commit violent crimes, they’ll even force taxpayers to give you money after the fact.”

“What’s so interesting is how you never see these very same people fantasize about locking up, say, the murderers or rapists or armed robbers or people who push elderly women in front of subway cars who are making New York City unlivable. This is a city in which the homicide rate jumped more than 50% from 2019 to 2021 because of their policies. They don’t care about that. They’re not mad at the murderers who cause shootings to increase more than 100% in that same period. They’re not mad that Alvin Bragg, their new favorite prosecutor dropped 70% of actual criminal cases since taking office so that these same criminals can continue to terrorize poor people in neighborhoods where MSNBC anchors live.”

Watch the video and give us your thoughts 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