Thursday, September 18, 2025. Jimmy Kimmerl's cancelled by right wing freaks, yes, but also by idiots in the media who can't get their facts right and who make us all as stupid as they are with their poorly done jobs.
Let's start with Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC last night.
Lawrence is right. He usually is.
That said, while he can ignore the topic (and should), we can't ignore the topic even though I sat through two hearings yesterday planning to cover at least one at length in this snapshot. Now we probably won't.
But our scope demands we cover this and I can't wait until Sunday when Ava and I could cover it for THIRD. Too much damage has been done. In addition, it's our beat. We've always covered the media. And we especially need to call it when the left keeps promoting stupidity.
Idiots. I'm so sick of this country losing out because of idiots.
Jimmy Kimmel -- not calling him an idiot -- has lost his job. That's reality right now. There's a segment of Jen Psaki talking about that. I'm not seeing it on MSNBC's YOUTUBE page. Which is actually a good thing because no one ever needs to see that.
She doesn't do a good job.
Her guest is actually much, much worse.
He tells Jen that this could happen to her.
Are we talking about the FCC and Jen? Because -- as she understands (and as it actually is), the FCC has no control over this issue because Jen's on cable not over the airwaves. In the '00s on AIR AMERICA RADIO's THE LAURA FLANDERS SHOW had an FCC commissioner on one weekend night and our own Maria got a question to him. But he was too stupid to get it and I don't think Laura did either. Her question was about the FCC's control and the FCC commissioner and the idiot from the FCC ignored that. She was talking about what NYT had called the death of free TV in an editorial. And her question was, when over the airwaves TV dies what happens next? Does the FCC have any control over cable.
Preet Bharara is a f**king idiot and we can't afford his stupidity. We can't afford him. The country suffers enough without his idiotic mouth.
I found out the news about Kimmel via Jen's show. We're in DC to attend some hearings and we're speaking around this area to various groups. I grabbed a nine o'clock last minute invite because I could squeeze it in when I should have gone home since I'd have to get up at 4:30 in the morning. It lasted a little over two hours. When we were headed back to the hotel, I didn't return any calls, I didn't surf on my phone. I just yawned and tried to stay awake. (The nine o'clock group, y the way, was informed and wonderful and I'm not insulting them in any way.) I get back to the hotel, pose for some selfies and then get to my room and turn on the TV. Jen's show is just coming on and that was the first segment. That's when I learned that Jimmy was out of his job and when I learned that MSNBC needs to stop bringing on analysts who aren't qualified to speak on the topic.
Yes, Preet's an attorney. He has no expertise on the FCC. He's a f**king idiot who should be on the air tomorrow apologizing to viewers who might have made the mistake of trusting him.
Jen raised it but she's not the expert. She raised the topic of FOX NEWS letting Brian Kilmeade go on air and call for the homeless to be executed (Ava and I covered that in our piece at the start of the week) and get away with it Which he did. From Ava and my piece:
Now during that discussion, I wrongly said they should get lethal
injections. I apologize for that extremely callous remark. I am
obviously aware that not all mentally ill, homeless people act as the
perpetrator did in North Carolina and that so many homeless people
deserve our empathy and compassion.
Scapegoat an
entire group of people -- you know, the way TD did his entire adult life
-- and someone who points that reality out is fired but call for the
homeless to be executed and offer a three sentence "apology"
Do you see us saying, "Contact the FCC!" No. We didn't and we honestly wouldn't because we're not right-wing nut jobs promoting cancel culture. It's funny when you grasp that they are always the one screaming for someone to be cancelled. But as usual, they lie and people go along with them. After 9/11, it wasn't left wingers, for example, calling for POLITICALLY INCORRECT to be cancelled. It was right-wingers. And they're the reason Bill Maher is on HBO now and not ABC.
Jen brings up the FOX & FRIENDS host and Preet rushes to sign off on it and to waste time and to not only demonstrate his own stupidity but to promote it to the masses.
We can't afford the stupid. Not now. Not ever.
The FCC has no control of FOX & FRIENDS. Why? Because it's not a broadcast TV show. It is not broadcast over the airwaves. It's a FOX "NEWS" -- cable channel -- program. FCC does not hand out a license to FOX NEWS.
The stupidity is appalling.
We're dropping back to May 2st of 2024 for that day's snapshot. Before we do, let me just bring you up to speed. Before nasty ass trash got on TIKTOK in the fall of 2024 attacking Black women for supporting Kamala Harris, this site covered the assault on Gaza. Daily. But when that trash told Black women to take Palestinians out of their mouths? We did as requested. And, no surprise, the country stopped caring. Because we were the best advocates for Gaza to America. Not you with your harsh views and pinched faces constantly bellowing. You divide yourself from the American public. And that's before you cost Kamala the election. So now you're on your own.
And too bad for you, FAIR doesn't do the work required. I do. I Matilda Joslyn Gage it. Because I learned in college that knowledge is power and stupidity is a prison.
Today's students face their own battles. In my day, the biggest one was liars as professors. They'd flat out lie to promote their prejudices. A foreign born sexist (mis)teaching one course I took hated women and felt the need to insult The WACS (Women's Army Corps). He stated, in class, that they were whores. That the only contribution they made to the US effort in WWII was to "hop in bed with horny GIs." He said that. And I'm aghast but everyone else in the room is nodding and taking notes. He co-wrote the text book for the class. No where in the text did that libel appear. I got the book the dean wrote which, being a true history book of that period, and it did not present lies about The Wacs. I documented everything in a six page typed evaluation and met with the dean to review it. Though the classes by the foreign born sexist had already been announced for the next semester, he didn't end up teaching them. He didn't teach another thing at that college. He administered the final and that was the only thing he ever did at my university after I met with the Dean with six page typed evaluation supported by my classroom notes.
That's sound and basic journalism. Let's zoom in on a 'local' news
report that was, in fact, aired nationally with a liar at each station
pretending that they were the 'reporter' on the piece.
Who's
a whore? So many but let's go to a big market, let's not pick on
someone already struggling in a small one. So let's go to Los Angeles.
KTLA's
Sandra Mitchell is a whore. I get it, I do. When you look like her in
Chicago, viewers might just find you plain. But for Los Angeles TV?
You're butt ugly. You're the one they take up an office donations for
cosmetic surgery. So I get it, Sandra, you'll stoop to anything. But
your decision to pass someone else's report from New York off as your
own on local Los Angeles television?
Well, whore, that means you have to answer for it.
So
she needs to answer for her report yesterday evening (which again she
just narrated and pretended like she had done it herself) when you
featured two people -- each billed solely as "Columbia student" --
praising the violent assault by the police. Onscreen they were just
"Columbia student." And wasn't it, strange, Sandra, how "you" (reality:
some reporter in New York) could only find two students to speak to and
they weren't involved in the protest so they really weren't pat of the
news. But the two you provide for context both hate the protesters and
these two are just students, just two students with no dog in the
battle.
No, they do have dogs in the battle.
Take bow wow Jessica Schwalb who is actually a journalist and is
actually a Palestinian hater who has been Tweeting hatred at the
protesters for as long as it's been going on and this Laura Loomer fan
girl goes back even further on her Tweets attacking the Palestinians and
attacking their supporters -- no links to trash.
She's
not the only nightmare. Playing a right-wing version of the Rupert
Everett to her right-wing Julia Roberts, we get Jonas Du -- known as
Jonas Doo-Doo to his friends? This "Columbia student" who is also the
only other student interviewed by "Sandra" also happens to be a
right-winger.
In fact, he and Jessica are
working with the right-wing press as he noted before he and Jessica
spoke to "Sandra" for "her" "report" -- he Tweeted:
It’s an honor to work with
@bariweiss
and
@TheFP
in collaboration with
@jessicaschwalb7
to cover the madness that has engulfed Columbia
Get it?
It
took me less than two minutes -- while walking on the treadmill to warm
up -- to find the information that "Sandra" should have found herself
before putting a name to a report that she didn't do and couldn't have
done.
But that is what happens thanks to
media consolidation. Like far too many channels in this country, KTLA
is owned by NEXSTAR MEDIA GROUP. They own 197 TV stations throughout
the country.
Shame on Sandra and KTLA and every
other of the 196 that the garbage 'report' got aired on. Sandra now
resumes trying to pose her body seductively while doing hard hitting
topics like dog safety. Does she think this is the pose of a journalist
or a sexpot?
Normal
women don't angle themselves in a chair like that -- nor, and this goes
for her co-host as well -- do they were Joan Crawford f**k-me heels for
a mid-day segment.
They
won't tell the truth about the protesters because the truth hurts their
side. The truth puts the blood on their hands. So they lie about the
protesters and NEXSTAR viewers were under the impression that they were
watching a locally produced segment (how did their local TV favorite get
to New York and back!!!!) with fairness and no distortions. They
didn't know that the students -- the only ones who got to speak on
camera -- were both fright-wingers working with Bari The Transphobe
Weiss. Don't worry, Zac and Gavin will find a way to brag about Bari's
ethics in yet another edition of THE VANGUARD.
Media consolidation hurts us all. Might be something to remember as renewal licenses are sought.
NEXSTAR is brought up by Preet and Jen. And they just don't know a damn thing.
In fairness to them, we're the only ones who covered it. NEXSTAR could have lost every broadcast license they had for pretending -- LYING -- that a NYC report was done by a local reporter in Los Angeles, in every city that NEXSTAR owns a station.
FAIR has noted NEXSTAR five times in FAIR's history. First in August of 2017 "This Is a Company That Is Essentially Producing Trump TV" and last July 21, 2023 with "Covering 'Racist State'’ Backlash-- but Not the Reality That Israel Is a Racist State." That was it. But once student protests started on campus, NEXSTAR filed one lying 'report' after another. And FAIR didn't say a word and nobody did.
Your stupidity kills us.
Seriously, shut up.
You are killing our country. Just shut up. You don't know what you're talking about but it never matters to you.
NEXSTAR announced they would stop carrying Jimmy Kimmel.
In fact, FAIR's never covered it.
Now we have NEXSTAR killing Jimmy's show. And we can't even get reality there from MSNBC's supposed legal expert who knows nothing about the FCC or about stations or about anything to do with the topic.
MAUDE had an episode where Bea Arthur's Maude had an abortion in November 1972 -- some stations refused to air the two-part episode (Champaign and Peoria's CBS affiliates being two). Later in August of 1973, the two episodes were not re-run by 39 affiliates. And back then, summer TV was pretty much nothing but repeats -- the way CBS still programs -- and a few 'summer replacement shows. Norman Lear (who produced MAUDE) would have been the first to tell you that you can get away with that as long as it's just an episode or two. But when a large number of affiliates refuse to air the show, you cant get away with it.
NEXSTAR cancelled Kimmel. This was carried out by right-wing TV. And NEXSTAR is already the nation's largest owner of broadcast TV stations and has met the cap but it's now attempting to buy even more TV stations which will require the approval of the FCC.
Now there could be a miracle that saves Jimmy's show. I don't see it happening and no one I spoke to at ABC did either. NEXSTAR's actions have pushed us to where we are now.
I turned my ringer on while watching Jen last night and the calls poured in. I made a few myself. I talked to three suits at ABC. Jimmy's dead.
What could change it?
You could let ABC know how popular Jimmy is and they could try moving the show to DISNEY+ as an exclusive -- DISNEY+ and HULU are one in the same and they're phasing out HULU. They could keep it on the air at the same time if they wanted but with the understanding that half the country won't be able to see it via the broadcast airwaves. But they do need product for DISNEY+ and they don't really have a lot.
NEXSTAR viewers could express their anger to their NEXSTAR affiliates and that might -- I doubt it -- make NEXSTAR drop the boycott.
Again, this is a political decision made by a conservative group who right now wants to buy up even more TV stations and needs FCC approval to do so.
Are you getting why that idiot
A conservative organization controlling the most broadcast stations in the US, lying on air (and there were more lies than just that) and reaching more Americans than watch FOX "NEWS" and FAIR didn't bark. Nor did THE NATION.
It's not a surprise -- though Jen's show tried to pretend it was -- that NEXSTAR was the deciding factor. Preet doesn't know a damn thing. If you asked him about why TURN-ON aired only one episode in 1969, he'd say, "What?" He's an idiot.
He was presented as an expert and he knew nothing about the topic.
This stupidity harms us all.
Stop bringing on people presented as experts who don't know a damn thing. And stop ignoring NEXSTAR and other conservative outlets working to undermine our democracy. Maybe you won't get as many clicks as when you call out Laura Ingraham but NEXSTAR has more viewers each day than Laura will ever have at night on FOX "NEWS."
Your stupidity -- those of you on the left who have ignored NEXSTAR -- hurt us there.
Your stupidity also accounts for the power of The Demagogue. MSNBC, you went all in, flooded the one, day after day starting September 11th. And your first days -- plural -- coverage was appalling. Your appalling non-stop and fact-free coverage turned him into a folk hero.
Your Whiteness threatens us all.
Fortunately, those of us who are Black, are not playing your game nd pretend.
As Ava and I noted at THIRD:
TD was not well known before his death.
Most
Americans had no idea who he was. Sorry to break it to the political
types -- whether you provide commentary, serve in Congress or work on
campaigns, most Americans don't know who you are and don't care. The
last true political celebrities emerged in 1992 and their names are
Mary Matalin and James Carville. Their couple hood inspired a film
(SPEECHLESS with Geena Davis and Michael Keaton). She worked on George
HW Bush's campaign while he worked on Bill Clinton's campaign and they
fell in love and married (and are still married today). It gave a human
interest quality and it made them famous. No one knows who David
Axelrod is married to -- not even the limited number of Americans who
know the name David Axelrod is.
But damned if the
panty-pissing, flood the zone that MSNBC led on and others followed
didn't canonize TD. Especially when they wouldn't allow reality to be
presented. Only hagiography. And as hour after hour was wasted on TD,
the message became: Here is someone wonderful.
Why else would you be talking about them constantly? Especially when you weren't broadcasting the truth about them.
Chump
saw the reaction, Chump saw it and used it. He and others calling for
leftists to be arrested for remarks. The left's being demonized and
it's a direct result of the coverage supposedly left MSNBC provided.
There were real issues if you were going to cover the death of TD but
MSNBC made clear with the firing of Matthew Dodd that real issues would
not be allowed on air.
Your stupidity brought us to this point. You display weakness in front of Chump, he will bite your neck until you bleed out. And to not know that, to not grasp that you have to stand up to the bully, at this late date is stupidity and, MSNBC and the rest of you, your stupidity is hurting us yet again.
Let's bring in Ben and MEIDASTOUCH NEWS from this morning.
If you saw that awful segment on MSNBC that Jen and Preet Bharara I hope you noticed what Ben did above -- something not done in the MSNBC segment.
The Maga Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered [The Demagogue] as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.
No, Jen, he didn't blame the murder on MAGA.
Who the hell was in charge of that MSNBC segment?
It mischaracterized what Jimmy said. The idiot expert didn't know how the FCC worked (Jen is not going to by the FCC, they have no control over cable nor is FOX & FRIENDS a broadcast show), the idiot knew nothing bout NEXSTAR -- not how many stations they owned, not that they're conservative, not that they're now trying to buy more stations and will need FCC approval since they've already met the limit, nothing.
It was garbage and it was stupidity and we're all a lot worse for it.
The Demagogue was a hate merchant.
Should he have been murdered? Hell no. We don't support murder and that's why we have laws against it.
But he was not a saint. He was a hate merchant. Repeating, his death did not change how he lived his life and the hatred he spewed. But MSNBC and others DISNEY-fied him and said to the country -- again, most of whom never heard of him -- this is a folk hero and it's why we're going wall-to-wall with coverage.
That coverage was offensive to those of us who are Black. And the Whiteness of media players has still not led to any public reflection. As Rebecca noted last night, Ezra Klein has not apologized or acknowledged he did anything wrong, he's just doubled down:
people were bothered by ezzie klein's nonsense because it only factored in white people.
for ezzie, it was all just words. as a white man, he never knows how racism actually works. it doesn't impact him.
maybe
next time, white ezzie, before you give some 1 a pass for words you
'disagree' with, take a moment, you stupid idiotic fool, to grasp that
what's just words for you often morphs into targeted discrimination
aimed at black people and targeted violence aimed at black people.
you don't know a damn thing you're talking about and you'd be better to shut up.
We can't afford the stupidity. Did you read Kat's "Racist Amber Greene only harms her image further each time she speaks"? Please read it if you haven't but let's note it in a nutshell: At a workplace, a White woman states that something was N-word rigged. A Black employee objects to that term and the supervisor both-sides it -- like Ezra Klein -- and says 'let's call it Obama rigged.' And thinks she's funny. She's not. She failed to stop racism in the workplace, she not only failed to stop she encouraged it and spread it. And she was fired. She's now claiming it's not fair because they really only listened to one person No, they listened to the person who objected to Greene's unprofessional and racists response -- something that violated their written work code.
But this is MAGA. They think they can say and do whatever and then lie bout what they said or insist it was a joke so no harm.
And White racists like Green and Klein think because they're White that any debate on an issue begins and ends with them.
The world doesn't work that way.
Jimmy said:
The Maga Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered [The Demagogue] as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.
There's nothing wrong with that statement. It doesn't even acknowledge the hate that The Demagogue regularly spewed. Hate that leaves our children -- Black people's children -- open to violence, hate that fosters violence. Jimmy's statement doesn't even shine a light on that truth.
All it does is rightly note that MAGA has spent days trying to pin the shooting on other groups -- which they have -- and using it as a political football -- again, which they have.
And MSNBC couldn't get that right? Jen and Preet had to mischaracterize what was said. Couldn't quote it but couldn't even sum it up right. There was no factual error, Jen.
The stupidity is killing us.
Some of you really need to shut up.
Your actions last week are the reason Jimmy Kimmel's in trouble today. Know the facts and tell them accurately or STFU.
We don't need you both-sidings racism. It's sad that in 2025, I have to point out that is not needed, have to point out that both-siding racism is justifying racism and distorting reality.
We don't have a lot of room left I'm told by the friend I'm dictating this to. So we're not covering the House hearing yesterday. We're instead moving over to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell -- two criminals that Ka$h Patel wants to protect -- and Epstein's dead. They're pedophiles who both -- BOTH -- had sexual relations with underage girls. They sex trafficked those girls. The survivors are demanding justice.
Guess what?
They shouldn't have to.
Murder is a crime. The demagogue's family and supporters shouldn't have to demand legal justice for the murder. Sex trafficking is a crime. The survivors shouldn't have to demand justice.
Tuesday’s
Senate hearing featuring FBI Director Kash Patel didn’t shed a ton of
light on the substance of the Jeffrey Epstein files. But it was hugely
significant in another way: It signaled a new political effort by the
Trump administration to ascribe blame.
And the target is none other than a former top Trump administration official – one whom Trump very notably once defended.
Testifying
to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patel seemed to make a point to
fault Alexander Acosta, who was US attorney in Florida in the late 2000s
and cut a nonprosecution agreement with Epstein. That deal came during
the George W. Bush administration, years before Trump in his first term
picked Acosta as labor secretary.
Patel twice brought Acosta up unprompted, including in his opening statement, during Tuesday’s hearing.
“I’m
here to testify that the original sin in the Epstein case was the way
it was initially brought by Mr. Acosta back in 2006,” Patel said at the
start of the hearing.
It's
good that they've found their fall guy. They appear to need one now
more than ever. Yesterday, the House Oversight Committee released some
portions of the closed-door testimony former US Attorney General
William Barr gave the Committee back in August. Gabe Whisnant (NEWSWEEK) reports:
Former
Attorney General William Barr told a House committee he spoke twice
with Donald Trump about Jeffrey Epstein during Trump's first term,
including after the financier died by suicide in a New York jail cell.
Barr
said in a deposition released Tuesday by the House Oversight Committee
that he called Trump immediately after learning of Epstein's death. "You
better brace for this," Barr recalled telling him.
Trump, Barr said, reacted with the same shock he felt: "How the hell did that happen, he's in federal custody?"
So,
uhm, it wasn't over? Their friendship -- Chump and Epstein's -- was
over long before then, remember? That's what Chump insists. Epstein
"stole" and employee from Chump eleven years ago and the friendship was
over. And, as we've all seen in the previous Chump administration, when
Chump's cut you loose, you're gone for good. Though many words have
been attached to Chump, sentimentality has never been one.
Keep
that in mind and read it again. Epstein's dead. And Barr has to rush
to Chump -- "better brace for this." And Barr delivered the news and
Chump was shocked.
Can you
picture what Barr's describing? To me, it speaks of a much tighter
relationship than Chump has ever indicated. Certainly much tighter than
'it was over in 2004 or 2005 and he was dead to me.'
4Q So could you tell us about those two conversations?
5 A One was when I heard about the suicide, I called him up and said, "You better brace for
6 this," and I told him words to that effect, and I told him about it and told him we were going to be
7 investigating it very vigorously.
8 And the second one, I can't say for sure whether it happened before his suicide,
9 during -- meaning around the time of his arrest or whether it happened after his suicide during the
10 continued developments there.
11 But the topic of Epstein came up in the conversation. Multiple people were there. And,
12 sort of, the news of -- it was commented on being the news of the day.
13 And the President said something to the effect that he had broken off with Epstein long ago
14 and that he had actually pushed him out of Mar-a-Lago.
15 Q Okay. And just to clarify, those were both conversations with President Trump?
16 A Both involved with President Trump, yeah. Those are the only two conversations I can
17 remember where Epstein came up with the President.
18 Q And when you say that you told President Trump who the news of the suicide would
19 affect, what did you mean by that?
20 A Who it would affect? Did I say that?
21 Q I'm sorry. Unless I'm misunderstanding your characterization.
22 A I didn't mean to say that.
23 Q Okay.
24 A I said that I told him that he committed suicide and that he suspected it was apparently
25 suicide. And he had the same reaction I did, which was, "How the hell did that happen, he's in
26 Federal custody?" And the last everyone knew, he was being carefully watched precisely for that
27 reason.
28 And I think I conveyed to him that it was appalling and that we were going to investigate it
29 vigorously and I -- and he had the same reaction I did, which is this is going to certainly generate a lot
30 of conspiracy theories.
31 These are not his exact words, but that's what I remember about the conversation being
32 effectively -- maybe words to the effect, yeah.
33Q Did President Trump say anything else in that conversation?
34A That's all I can recall.
And
before we leave the topic of Epstein and Maxwell, let's go back to the
August questioning of Bill Burr to note this exchange during US House
Rep Jasmine Crockett's questioning:
8 Ms. Crockett. Okay. Just to be clear for the record.
9 And, really quickly, I'm going to jump in just before we have to wrap.
10 Because we are talking about the investigations, Maxwell was investigated during your
11 tenure, not necessarily taken to trial, while you were still at the DOJ. She is someone that was
12 involved in this SDNY situation.
13 You are aware that Maxwell was not born in this country, correct?
14 The Witness. Yes.
15 Ms. Crockett. Okay.
16 You are also aware that a jury of her peers found her guilty of five out of six counts that were
17 brought against her by SDNY, including child sex trafficking and conspiracy, correct?
18 The Witness. Yes.
19 Ms. Crockett. In addition to that, have you been made aware through public reports -- well,
20 let me clarify this. Child sex trafficking is not considered to be a low-level offense in the Federal
21 Government, correct?
22 The Witness. I'm not sure what "low-level" means, but it's a serious offense.
23 Ms. Crockett. It's definitely a felony, correct?
24 The Witness. Oh, yes.
25 Ms. Crockett. And a person can face up to life imprisonment for it, correct?
1 The Witness. I haven't looked at the statute, but it wouldn't surprise me.
2 Ms. Crockett. Okay.
3 And typically when someone is classified by the time that they enter into the Bureau of
4 Prisons, their classification is usually based upon a multitude of things, one of them being how
5 serious of an offense a person has been found guilty of, correct?
6 The Witness. That's one of the factors.
7 Ms. Crockett. Okay. In addition to their criminal history and other things. But, long story
8 short, they are looking at whether or not a person is potentially a danger to the community, correct?
9 The Witness. That's another factor.
10 Ms. Crockett. When you are reading your public things, I'm assuming you've heard that
11 there has been a transfer approved for Ms. Maxwell to a minimum-security prison camp. Are you
12 aware of that?
13 Mr. O'Callaghan. You're referring to press reports, Congresswoman?
14 Ms. Crockett. Yes, because that --
15 The Witness. I've seen --
16 Ms. Crockett. -- that would be the only way that --
17 The Witness. I've seen those press reports.
18 Ms. Crockett. During your tenure as Attorney General, during either time, I'm curious to
19 know, are you ever -- is it ever within your recollection that there was someone who had been
20 convicted, finally convicted -- well, I guess it's not final; she's still on appeal -- convicted of five counts
21 of child sexual trafficking and they somehow ended up transferred to a minimum-security prison
22 camp?
23 The Witness. I mean, off the top of my head, I can't remember a situation like that.
24 Ms. Crockett. In fact, you'd agree with me that, in order for someone to be transferred
25 under those type of circumstances, it would actually take a higher level of approval. That is not
75
1 something that just any old low-level BOP person would be able to do, correct?
2 The Witness. I wish that were correct. You never know.
3 Ms. Crockett. Because mistakes happen.
4 The Witness. Yeah. Sometimes you wake up and you find that something's happened, like
5 taking someone off suicide watch.
6 Ms. Crockett. But you'd would agree with me that the policy in general is not to put
7 someone who's been convicted of those types of crimes into a minimum-security camp?
8 The Witness. I think -- actually, I think the way the system works is, the political level usually
9 allows the Bureau of Prisons broad leeway in determining how people are handled under their
10 structure and using their criteria, and if they disagree, they might intervene.
11 Ms. Crockett. Understood.
12 The Witness. That's how I think the system generally operates.
13 Ms. Crockett. Understood.
14 To the best of your knowledge, whether it's during your tenure or during reports, she's never
15 been in that type of facility in the last 4 years of her incarceration until now, correct?
President
Donald Trump and Department of Justice officials have faced scrutiny
after convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell was moved to a
minimum-security federal prison following a multihour interview with
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. The transfer has prompted
criticism from lawmakers and victims’ advocates who argued it raises
questions about whether Maxwell received a benefit tied to cooperation
and has increased calls for the release of Epstein-related records.
Maxwell was moved after nine hours of questioning by Department of
Justice (DOJ) officials and the transfer is being examined for any link
to her cooperation.
When speaking
on CNN regarding the case, Maxwell attorney Arthur Aidala stated, "When
anybody who’s represented by a lawyer who knows what they’re doing goes
in and meets with the government, there’s always a quid pro quo."
Aidala
added, "You don’t just take your client in and say, ‘Let me talk to you
about something.’ They wanted information from—hypothetically, anytime
the government wants information from a citizen, the citizen says,
‘Well, I have a right to remain silent. If you want me to give up that
right, I need something in return.’"
Former
Biden administration adviser Neera Tanden said, "You just admitted to a
quid pro quo with the Trump administration," to which Aidala stated,
"But that’s how the whole system works!"
We need answers. We The American People are owed answers. Our government works for us, not the other way around. If we worked for them, we'd have to vote. There'd be a law demanding that we vote. We don't work for them. They work for us and that -- nd free speech -- is why we can and do criticize our public officals.
And let's tie this all together. You can't both-sides it. You're a nut job if you think you can. We have free speech or we don't, our government is answerable to us or it isn't, you're doing your job or you're not. And if you're not, get the hell out of the way because the country can't afford you or your 'reporting' that's incomplete and incorrect but didn't it fill up a TV segment for you.
We're winding down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
ICYMI LAST NIGHT:
Senator Murray Calls for Inspector General Investigation into RFK Jr.’s
Ousting of Top CDC Officials and Restrictions on Vaccine Access
ICYMI:
Senator Murray, WA Health Secretary, Doctors Speak Out Against RFK Jr.
Blocking Vaccine Access and Wreaking Havoc at CDC, Lay Out State of
Vaccine Access in WA
*** VIDEO of Senator Murray’s Q&A with witnesses HERE***
Washington, D.C. — Today, at a Senate Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee hearing with former
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Susan Monarez
and Dr. Deb Houry, former CDC Chief Medical Officer, U.S. Senator Patty
Murray (D-WA)—a former chair and senior member of the HELP
Committee—pressed the public health experts on whether parents can trust
the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)’s vaccine
recommendations after U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s purge
of the entire panel of experts. Murray also questioned Dr. Houry on how
she, as Chief Medical Officer, learned that CDC was no longer
recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for most pregnant women and
children—to which Dr. Houry revealed that she found out through a social
media post. Dr. Houry also shared that no scientific evidence has been
provided for this vaccine guidance change by the Secretary to date.
Last night, Senator Murray requested
an independent, comprehensive review by the HHS Acting Inspector
General of recent actions taken at HHS to limit access to vaccines, and
recent personnel changes at the CDC.
[ANNOUNCEMENTS ON VACCINE GUIDANCE]
Senator Murray began by questioning Dr. Houry on the CDC’s recent
guidance no longer recommending the COVID-19 vaccine for most children
and pregnant women—and how she found out about the change: “In
May, Secretary Kennedy announced in a video on social media that the
COVID vaccine was no longer going to be recommended under CDC guidelines
for most children and pregnant women. The fallout was actually
immediate, I heard from a nurse in my state who was pregnant, she was
trying to get the vaccine, she was turned away from several pharmacies
and ended up calling my office and saying, ‘what am I going to do?’
“Dr. Houry, I want to ask you, how did you learn about CDC’s new COVID-19 vaccination guidance?”
“The same as you, on social media,” Dr. Houry replied.
“What was your title at CDC when this happened?” Murray asked.
“I was the Chief Medical Officer of the agency,” Dr. Houry answered.
“It’s unthinkable to me that the Chief Medical Officer at CDC
was left in the dark about such a consequential public health decision
that affected real people,” Murray said. “Dr. Houry, how was this change in guidance supported by the scientific evidence?”
“We have not seen the data yet. In fact, after the tweet came
out, we asked for a written memo from HHS, because I couldn’t provide
guidance off of a tweet. The written memo didn’t say the same as the
video. There was a difference between healthy versus all,” Dr. Houry replied.
“You can’t provide guidance off of a tweet,” Murray replied.
Dr. Houry replied, “I didn’t think that was prudent. And then we did ask for the data to back it up, and we have not received the data to date.”
Murray continued with her questioning: “To date, no evidence.
Okay, well, the Secretary has made clear he wants to change the
childhood vaccine schedule for measles and chickenpox and for Hepatitis
B, as well as changes to COVID vaccine recommendations. And as we all
know, the ACIP will meet starting tomorrow to consider these
recommendations.
“Dr. Monarez and Dr. Houry, I want to ask you both, are you
aware of any scientific evidence to support changing the age of which
children should receive these vaccines that’s being considered by this
advisory committee?” asked Murray.
“I am not. I was certainly open if there were scientific data
sets or evidence associated with anything that would help keep our
children safe, I was open to seeing it. I have not seen that data,” Dr. Monarez replied.
“We’ve asked for the data and asked for the modeling to support any decision that is done,” Dr. Houry responded.
“Are either of you aware of any scientific evidence to support changing eligibility for COVID vaccinations?” asked Murray.
“I have not seen any evidence, no,” Dr. Monarez responded.
“I think what’s pretty alarming here is that if there was
such data [that] existed, the CDC Director and Chief Medical Officer
would absolutely be aware of it. And apparently, there is none,” Murray replied.
[ACIP RECOMMENDATIONS]
Senator Murray continued her questioning by asking Dr. Monarez and
Dr. Houry about CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
(ACIP) and the meetings that have taken place this year, both before and
after RFK Jr. fired the slate of 17 experts who previously sat on the
board and replaced this with vaccine skeptics: “I want to
continue asking about the ACIP, Dr. Monarez, you mentioned that
Secretary Kennedy asked you to pre-approve the September ACIP
vaccinations a month before the committee was scheduled to meet—without
knowing what they were, or what evidence that was based on, correct?
“Correct,” responded Dr. Monarez.
“I find that troubling—and ironic, given what Secretary
Kennedy said in June when he fired all 17 members of the ACIP without
cause and called them, quote: ‘little more than a rubber stamp.’ That’s
exactly what he wanted you to be—for his new board of unqualified
vaccine skeptics. The former members of the ACIP actually met in April.
“Dr. Monarez and Dr. Houry, would you feel confident telling
parents they could trust the recommendations of the Advisory Committee
that were made back in April?” asked Senator Murray.
“The individuals who were participating in April had the
commensurate skill sets and background to be able to evaluate the
decisions before them,” Dr. Monarez replied. “The
processes were regular in terms of using the evidence to recommend.
There was working groups that substantiated this, the information, there
was robust liberation during the ACIP meeting I would, I would say that
it comported to the standards where the Americans could trust them.”
“Agreed, the data was presented, and the committee was filled with experts with experience,” Dr. Houry added.
Murray continued: “The newly chosen ACIP members met in June and will meet again starting tomorrow.
Would either of you feel confident telling parents they can trust the
ACIP recommendations that come out of this week’s meeting?”
“I’d feel very nervous about it,” Dr. Monarez responded. “I
don’t know. They haven’t met yet. I know that the medical community has
raised concerns about whether or not, again, they have the commensurate
backgrounds to be able to understand the data and the evidence and to
evaluate it appropriately. I have to pre-judge. I don’t know what will
happen, but I certainly will be watching.”
“I have significant concerns,” Dr. Houry replied.
“The public hasn’t been able to weigh in. The general vote should have
been posted two weeks ago, so the public knew what was being discussed
other than high-level things. There haven’t been work groups other than
for COVID, and there haven’t been, as of yesterday, the data hadn’t been
posted yet, so it’s unclear to me what decisions are being made.”
Senator Murray, a longtime congressional leader on health care who has led hearings on addressing vaccine hesitancy, has been a leader in raising the alarm over RFK Jr.’s nomination and handling of HHS since the beginning—speaking out on the Senate floor, holding numerous events, raisingthe alarm after meeting with him, and hammering the threat he poses to Americans’ health nonstop. She ledtheoppositionto the
Trump administration’s disastrous plan to dismantle HHS and fire tens
of thousands of staff in critical positions across CDC, NIH, FDA, and
other agencies, and spoke out forcefully against RFK Jr.’s ousting of the entire CDC vaccine advisory board, including one ACIP member from Washington state. Senator Murray has held countlessevents across Washington state and in Washington, D.C. with doctors, patients, and former HHS officials to
lift up how Trump and Republicans’ attacks on health care will be
devastating for families. Senator Murray recently took to the Senate
floor to reiterate her call for RFK Jr. to be fired immediately; she also praised the launch of
the West Coast Health Alliance to provide evidence-based public health
guidance for Washington, Oregon, California, and Hawaii. Last week,
Senator Murray called for RFK
Jr. to testify publicly before the HELP Committee and for Director
Monarez to be given the opportunity to testify publicly alongside other
former senior CDC officials. Last Friday, Murray held a virtual press conference
with Washington state health leaders on RFK Jr.’s increasingly
dangerous attacks on vaccines and America’s public health
infrastructure.