The Illinois Republican Top Stories (5/7/23)
Sunday May, 7
Republicans celebrate Tucker Carlson Removal
A sizable number of GOP lawmakers are quietly cheering Fox News' decision to remove Tucker Carlson from its airwaves as making it easier to provide aid to Ukraine, Axios has learned.
Why it matters: Carlson was one of the most vocal critics of continued support to Ukraine, often going after lawmakers by name on his program. His commentary was a source of regular heartburn for defense hawks.
One House Republican pointed to Speaker Kevin McCarthy's rhetoric this week as a sign of the tides potentially changing.
McCarthy, who'd earlier opposed giving a "blank check" to Ukraine, gave his full-throated support while speaking to reporters in Israel on Monday.
What they're saying: Multiple House Republicans, speaking on the condition of anonymity, slammed the former Fox News host's rhetoric on Vladimir Putin and Russian aggression, and said his inflammatory remarks on an array of issues often put them in a tough spot.
"Tucker being gone makes my life easier with many things including Ukraine," one GOP lawmaker said. "Though I think that somebody will own that space in a couple of weeks anyway."
"Well no one is more unhappy about Tucker's departure than the Russians," another House Republican added.
A third lawmaker argued that Carlson "thrived on destroying Republicans ... I say good riddance."
The media wanted to silence Tucker plain and simple. That is why they are continuing to pay his contract out for him to stay home and do nothing. But stay tuned. Tucker just made a deal with Trump to offer a debate stage for the 2024 campaign. This shall be interesting.
After Proud Boy convictions lawyers review charges on Trump
It gets tedious to point this out (see, e.g., here and here), but as prosecutors take their victory lap for yet more seditious-conspiracy convictions today this time, four members of the Proud Boys (a fifth was acquitted) let's remember that the Justice Department's theory of the Capitol riot is the antithesis of the theory posited by the House January 6 committee and echoed by the media-Democrat complex.
The committee insisted that then-president Donald Trump directed his followers to storm the Capitol on January 6 in order to interrupt the peaceful transition of power. To the contrary, the Justice Department contended that the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, and other riotous rabble-rousers engaged in a violent uprising of their own volition. Preventing Joe Biden from supposedly stealing the election was among their pretexts, but according to prosecutors, these are domestic terrorists who perceive themselves as in hostilities against the government and the anti-traditional drift of society. (As DOJ's indictment put it, "the Proud Boys describes itself as a 'pro-Western fraternal organization for men who refuse to apologize for creating the modern world; aka Western Chauvinists.'"
It is not enough to say that the government did not allege that Trump directed the Proud Boys, and that the government never alleged that Donald Trump was an unindicted coconspirator in the Proud Boys prosecution. In fact, prosecutors fought off the defendants' self-serving attempts to argue that they were being used as scapegoats for Trump and others wielding power.
Just as in prior seditious-conspiracy prosecutions, the government portrayed Trump as if he were a nigh-irrelevant side issue. As I've pointed out before, there are legal reasons for this. At the time, Trump was president the most powerful official in the government. If the prosecution's theory were that quasi-militias conducted an attack because they were ordered to do so by the president, then it would be impossible to argue that they were levying war against the United States and opposing government authority by force the crime prescribed by the seditious-conspiracy statute. Their defense would be that they were defending the United States pursuant to the direction of the government's commander in chief.
They are thus playing a double game. To get the seditious-conspiracy convictions, they structure prosecutions as if Trump were irrelevant to the riot. Then, once they've got the convictions, they chirp that, right after Trump gave an inciting speech, Trump supporters violently attacked the Capitol to try to keep him in power.
Fool me once but you can't fool me twice. They got Trump with the New York charges that was illegal but you can't try it again in the court of public opinion. You will just make him more of a martyr!
Conspiracy theorist Robert Kennedy Jr. flies ideas
Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., promised Thursday to protect Americans from "financial censorship" if elected president, arguing that financial companies acting out of "fear" of the government pose a threat to freedom that transcends partisanship.
"The ability to save and spend without political interference is a prerequisite for the exercise of meaningful dissent, and I will defend it accordingly," Kennedy tweeted. "This is not a right- or left-wing issue. It is about protecting democracy from powerful established interests. The digitization of currency has given government unprecedented powers to surveil and control economic life."
Kennedy, an environmental lawyer and fierce critic of COVID-19 restrictions who is challenging President Biden for the 2024 Democratic presidential nomination, accused western governments of "financial censorship of political enemies" during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In a Twitter thread, he pointed to the Canadian government's financial sanctions against "Freedom Convoy" protesters, comparing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's actions to Russian President Vladimir Putin's freezing of assets belonging to opposition leader Alexei Navalny.
"It's not outlandish to imagine that even here in America, your bank account could one day be frozen because of your politics, or comments you've made on social media," Kennedy wrote.
"After all, in 2010, Paypal, Visa, and Mastercard suspended WikiLeaks, at the behest of the U.S. State Department. GoFundMe blocked U.S. accounts from sending funds to Canadian truckers and planned to donate the money to their own preferred charities instead, backing down only when faced with a lawsuit. PayPal modified their acceptable use policy to fine users $2,500 for spreading what they deemed to be misinformation, a change they rescinded under pressure. Nonetheless, thousands of customers are currently suing PayPal for the arbitrary seizure of their accounts," he continued.
"These are the decisions of private companies, but often those private companies are acting out of fear of Congress or regulators, or directly at their bidding," Kennedy said. "Their decisions impinge directly on our rights."
Regardless of what new ideas he brings to the table we do agree they are failed Democratic policies. What's really funny is that some Republicans are actually supporting him because of his stance on the vax. Ok, that alone will get him elected……in another world!
Detroit Blacks to pay themselves reperations
While the eyes of the nation are on San Francisco’s proposal to pay every black person $5 million in reparations for an estimated total cost of $175 billion, Motor City won’t be left behind.
Last year, 80% of Detroit voters in a 78% black city cast their ballots in support of a reparations commission. That was much higher than 63% poll numbers but local election results tend to outperform the polls due to the civic work of the Wayne County Cemetery Voters Association.
Chairwoman Lauren Hood of the Detroit City Planning Commission said that she didn’t know who the 20% were, but assumed it was maybe newcomers to the city or non-black residents.
But with a 78% black majority, Detroit would be taking money from black people to pay reparations to other black people with the government, run by a white mayor, taking a cut.
So…..where is the money going to come from? The state of Michigan? God knows Detroit doesn't have 5 million dollars to give to every black person.
Now let's examine this. In 1960 before the Civil War started, Detroit, was a free city and a FREE state. They did not have slavery or allow the ownership of slaves. Yet, the black people of Detroit feel they are entitled to reperations. How about reperations for the hundreds of thousands of white union soldiers that died to give them their freedom. I say let's vote on that!
Until then or the reperation supporters …..find a job!
