Strangling The Truth

I  came across Tomi Lahren because of a post that popped up on my Facebook time line. I went to Wikipedia for a quick education:

Tomi Lahren; born August 11, 1992) is an American television and online video host, and a conservative political commentator. She currently hosts Tomi for TheBlaze. She was previously the host of On Point with Tomi Lahren on One America News Network (OAN).

Her commentary has garnered widespread attention: in late 2016, The New York Times described Lahren as a “rising media star” and BBC News called her “the young Republican who is bigger than Trump on Facebook”. Her commentary is widely polarizing, being seen as “either righteous and rousing or obnoxious and infuriating”

That was encouraging, and it prompted me to head to the Internet to see what the buzz was about. I found this:

Truth is the enemy of the leftist movement

It’s a video clip, and it starts with:

The 24-hour political theater continues. After the Democrats dedicated themselves to slamming Betsy DeVos and losing, they have rededicated their efforts on Jeff Sessions. On “Final Thoughts,” Tomi explains how it’s par for the course as the Democrats are against everything President Trump does, says, tweets or nominates. The Democrats haven’t been able to make a case against Sessions because there isn’t one. Tomi believes that the Democrats’ phony case against Sessions amounts to little more than allegations of racist remarks.

 

“Truth is the enemy of the leftist movement?” Naturally I found this puzzling, because it was not a leftist movement that just elected the presidential candidate with the grandest record of fabrication of any known in history. It is not a leftist movement that pushes for teaching creationism in public schools. It is not a leftist movement that pust forth the claim that President Obama was not born in the United States. The leftists may be guilty of a level of prevarication, but American  conservatives hold the lead by a considerable margin.

What seems to concern Tomi in this clip is Democrats’ opposition to Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education and especially Jeff Sessions as Attorney General.

All they can do is whip out the emotional plea, or worse, tying their dislike for Sessions to  the civil rights movement. Are they seriously trying to tell us Jeff Sessions will return us to slavery, segregation, and Jim Crow? Come on! It is his desire for law and order that bothers them—Democrats. American cities have been hit with the worst two-year spike in the murder rate in the last quarter century, and that’s a problem. A healthy dose law, order, border security, national security, and respect for law enforcement would do the country some good right about now.

That said, she continues with Democrats’ case against Sessions:

But their whole phony case against Sessions amounts to little more than allegations of racist remarks. Think about that. The man is not fit to lead the Justice Department, because back in the mid 1980s someone accused him of making racially insensitive remarks. So, someone’s entire career and service [undecipherable] out the window in a game of he said-she said?

But again, this is a typical leftist move.

To make it clear, here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry for Jeff Sessions relating to the matter of racially insensitive remarks:

At Sessions’s confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, four Department of Justice lawyers who had worked with Sessions testified that he made racially offensive remarks. One of those lawyers, J. Gerald Hebert, testified that Sessions had referred to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as “un-American” and “Communist-inspired” (Sessions said he was referring to their support of the Sandinistas) and that they did more harm than good by trying to force civil rights “down the throats of people.” Hebert, a civil rights lawyer,[21] said that he did not consider Sessions a racist, and that Sessions “has a tendency sometimes to just say something, and I believe these comments were along that vein.” Hebert also said that Sessions had called a white civil rights attorney “maybe” a “disgrace to his race.” Sessions said he did not recall making that remark and he did not believe it.

Thomas Figures, a black Assistant U.S. Attorney, testified that Sessions said he thought the Ku Klux Klan was “OK until I found out they smoked pot.” Sessions later said that the comment was not serious, but did apologize for it, saying that he considered the Klan to be “a force for hatred and bigotry.” Barry Kowalski, a prosecutor in the civil rights division, also heard the remark and testified that prosecutors working such a gruesome case sometimes “resort to operating room humor and that is what I considered it to be.” Another DOJ lawyer, Albert Glenn, said, “It never occurred to me that there was any seriousness to it.” Figures testified that on one occasion, when the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division sent the office instructions to investigate a case that Sessions had tried to close, Figures and Sessions “had a very spirited discussion regarding how the Hodge case should then be handled; in the course of that argument, Mr. Sessions threw the file on a table, and remarked, ‘I wish I could decline on all of them,'” by which Figures said Sessions meant civil rights cases generally. Kowalski, however, testified that he believed “[Sessions] was eager to see that justice was done in the area of criminal civil rights prosecutions.”

Figures also said that Sessions had called him “boy,” which Sessions denied. Figures testified that two assistant prosecutors had also heard Sessions, including current federal judge Ginny Granade. Granade denied this. He also testified that “Mr. Sessions admonished me to ‘be careful what you say to white folks.'” Sessions denied this. In 1992, Figures was charged with attempting to bribe a witness by offering $50,000 to a convicted drug dealer who was to testify against his client. Figures claimed the charge was retaliation for his role in blocking the Sessions nomination. Sessions denied this, saying that he recused himself from the case. Figures was ultimately acquitted.

So, Tomi is wrong on a minor point. It’s a matter of he said-he said instead of he said-she said. At any rate, Jeff Sessions does not appear to have been a fire-breathing advocate for civil rights. Just in case Tomi really meant it when she referred to a case of “he said-she said,” then it is possible she was referring to a letter written by Coretta Scott King in opposition to Sessions’ appointment as a federal judge in 1986. The letter reads in part:

The actions taken by Mr. Sessions in regard to the 1984 voting fraud prosecutions represent just one more technique used to intimidate black voters and thus deny them this most precious franchise. The investigations into the absentee voting process were conducted only in the black belt counties where blacks had finally achieved political power in local government. Whites had been using the absentee process to their advantage for years, without incident. Then, when blacks, realizing its strength, began to use it with success, criminal investigations were begun.
In these investigations, Mr. Sessions, a US Attorney, exhibited an eagerness to bring to trial and convict three leaders of the Perry County Civic League including Albert Turner, despite evidence clearly demonstrating their innocence of any wrongdoing. Furthermore, in initiating the case, Mr. Sessions ignored allegations of similar behavior by whites, choosing instead to chill the exercise of the franchise by blacks in his misguided investigation. In fact, Mr. Sessions sought to punish older black civil rights activists, advisers and colleagues of my husband, who had been key figures in the civil rights movement in the 1960’s. These were persons who, realizing the potential of the absentee vote among blacks, had learned to use the process within the bounds of legality and had taught others to do the same. The only sin they committed was being too successful in gaining votes.

This is the letter Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren  famously attempted to read into the record during Sessions’ confirmation hearing. She was shut down by presiding Senator Mitch McConnell, who spoke those immortal words, “She was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted.”

Tomi Lahren’s failure to comprehend the concept of irony is supremely stunning. She faults liberals (leftists) for enshrining the grand lie (my wording) while a rising pool of deceit should by now be up to her knees:

  • Global warming is a Chinese hoax.
  • Donald Trump’s inauguration crowd was the largest ever seen.
  • Massive voter fraud gave Clinton a 2.8 million edge in the popular vote.
  • Illegal voters were bused from Massachusetts to vote in New Hampshire.

It will not be necessary for me to reproduce the entire list, or even a partial list, starting with:

The complete list of all 57 false things Donald Trump has said as president

The Star’s running tally of the bald-faced lies, exaggerations and deceptions the president of the United States of America has said, so far.

57. Feb. 10, 2017 — Twitter

The claim: “The failing @nytimes does major FAKE NEWS China story saying “Mr. Xi has not spoken to Mr. Trump since Nov. 14.” We spoke at length yesterday!”

In fact: Trump was wrong to suggest the Times made an error: this article was written before Trump’s phone call with Xi. As soon as the call became known, the Times updated the article, online and in its late print edition, to include the details of the conversation. Trump may have been reacting to an earlier print edition, but this was not “fake news,” simply the news as it stood as of the newspaper’s deadline.

56. Feb. 9, 2017 — Twitter

The claim: “Chris Cuomo, in his interview with Sen. Blumenthal, never asked him about his long-term lie about his brave “service” in Vietnam. FAKE NEWS!”

In fact: Cuomo, a CNN host, began the interview by asking Blumenthal about this very subject. His first question: “What is your response to the president of the United States saying you should not be believed because you misrepresented your military record in the past?” While Cuomo may not have pressed Blumenthal as hard as Trump would have liked, he certainly did not ignore the matter.

That is since about noon on 20 January of this year. I’m not getting into the previous 70 years. Somebody else can fill my readers in for those years.

People should follow Tomi on The Blaze, if nothing more than the entertainment value. She’s also a lesson on how not to cement the case for a political state of mind.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Strangling The Truth

  1. Come on, John, give her a break. She’s not even 22 years old – was probably breast-feeding until a few months ago. Her naivete is charming. Not it’s not. But it’s funny. No not either.

    There is however a kind of grotesque attraction seeing someone so beautiful spout such shit.

    • Actually 24 and counting, but who’s counting? I’m trying to remember if we, when that young, were ever that glib. So often that wrong. Lahren comes off as an artesian fountain, fed by a substance-free reservoir.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s