Megyn Kelly, “truth detector,” seemed a lot more interested in attacking Texas’ Democratic gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis than in sniffing out facts last night. Even as Kelly acknowledged that an anti-Davis video produced by the very suspect James O’Keefe organization was “unvetted,” she promoted it. Then, in an interview about the video with Davis’ opponent, Greg Abbott, Kelly repeatedly prodded him to go after Davis more aggressively than he obviously wanted.
Kelly had many reasons to suspect anything from O’Keefe regarding liberals and women
In case you don’t recall O’Keefe’s disreputable history, here’s a summary:
He’s already been arrested when he was caught trying to improperly gain access to Senator Mary Landrieu’s telephones. He was caught trying to seduce and humiliate then-CNN reporter Abbie Boudreau. He was punked to accept crackpipe money and in an effort to uncover voter fraud, he likely committed it himself. Mediaite (has reported) that a woman named Nadia Naffe has started a series of blog posts about O’Keefe called, “My Time as an Accomplice to Convicted Criminal James O’keefe.” Naffe previously filed a criminal harassment complaint against O’Keefe (dismissed on jurisdictional grounds). Her latest accusations echo the Boudreau incident.
Since then, O’Keefe has forked over $100,000 to a former ACORN worker illegally recorded and then falsely portrayed as an enabler of underage prostitution in one of O’Keefe’s previous “sting” videos.
But Kelly mentioned none of that when she hyped his latest suspect video.
At the end of a visit to The O’Reilly Factor last night (the first video below), Kelly was asked what was coming up on her show. She said, “We’ve got something big. …You will not believe the video that has just come out of what is reportedly supporters of Wendy Davis making fun of (Abbott) for being a paraplegic among other things. We have the tape and we have Greg Abbott.”
Interestingly, the FoxNews.com video of Kelly’s interview with Abbott (the second video below) eliminated O'Keefe's clip from the tape along with Kelly’s introduction and her first question. But, as the transcript shows, she both gave credence to O’Keefe’s video and professed skepticism at the same time. She described O’Keefe merely as a “conservative filmmaker.”
Breaking tonight, ugly new video surfaces in a political battle getting national attention. And Republican Greg Abbott is here to respond to the attacks on him captured by hidden cameras.
… Late today, video surfaced from conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe. He claims to have gotten undercover cameras into meetings held by Democratic group called Battleground Texas, where the issue of Greg Abbott and his handicap came up. We are still vetting this tape, but we know what it says, and so does our guest.
Even if you don’t know O’Keefe’s sordid record, there’s reason to be skeptical of a highly edited video of Davis supporters knocking Abbott inappropriately. After all, it’s not Davis herself saying these things. David Weigel, at Slate, explains why he finds there’s no there there:
The video’s actually a bit of mishmash… The money quote …from one unidentified volunteer, is:
I’m wondering how this is going to work out, because he’s in a wheelchair and most of the slogans are “Stand With Wendy.”
There’s rueful laughter after the volunteer says that, but is it “ridicule”? This is a conversation that anyone strategizing to elect Davis was going to have, just as the Abbott campaign was going to strategize (hopefully without cameras in the room) about how to run against a woman without making gaffes. “Stand With [name of candidate]” is a common frame, used by Marco Rubio—only natural, isn’t it, to wonder if it looks cruel when the opponent can’t walk?
“Stand with Wendy” also references her epic 11-hour filibuster against Texas’ extreme anti-abortion legislation.
Kelly was more eager to attack Wendy Davis than her opponent was
Kelly’s only guest to discuss the subject was Abbott. Once he came on, she again promoted O’Keefe’s video at the same time that she made a show of distancing herself from it:
As I say, we continue to vet this tape, but we’ve seen it. And in the transcription and in the videotape of it, you can clearly hear these women who purport to be a part of a group called Battleground Texas, trying to turn Texas blue, and supporters of Wendy Davis, talk about your being a paraplegic, laughing about it, saying they think it’s amazing you’re in a wheelchair but you have no sympathy for anyone in any way, you may have a personality disorder, you don’t speak very well or have a good personality, and you’re in a wheelchair in response to what the audience cackles with laughter. Your response, sir?
Abbott clearly did not want to go where Kelly was prodding him to take the matter. He said:
Well, Megyn, denigrating the disabled is unworthy of Texas. The reality is, Texans look far beyond superficial appearances. What Texans really look at is depth of character.
Megyn, there is a reason why I have been elected statewide in Texas five different times. That’s because Texans know I have the quality and depth of character to represent their families and their values.
So Kelly pushed him to make it more about Davis:
You know, this comes a day after Ms. Davis herself was accused of making an insensitive comment. She’s turned around and attacked you. And in the context of it, she came out and said that clearly anybody who doesn’t understand her story hasn’t walked a mile in her shoes, which led others on the Internet to say once again it is a veiled shot at your disability. What do you think?
Abbott demurred again:
Well, Megyn, the accident that put me in this wheelchair when I was 26 years old has helped me really understand the challenges that people in Texas and across this country face every day. I know that Texans, some of them have disabilities, some of ‘em have physical handicaps, others have financial or other types of challenges. We all have challenges in life. What matters is not the challenges we face but how we respond to those challenges.
Kelly tried yet again:
What do you think about her suggestions that you had something to do with what she calls the attacks on her life story? Have you had anything to do with it? Did you speak with the Dallas Morning News, did anybody from your campaign speak with them? Are you behind this article, which it must be said was revealed—they revealed the truth about her history in a very gentle way.
And yet again Abbott ignored the bait:
The author of that story, Wayne Slater, indicated publicly in a tweet himself that he had zero contact with my office about that story. But all of these, Megyn, are just distractions, because what really matters are not all these background stories. What Texans really care about is what we’re going to be doing fighting for their future.
And again:
KELLY: Your office did come out with a statement suggesting that if she’s gonna mislead about her personal biography, what else will she mislead about? Do you stand behind that? Do you believe this is an issue or not?
ABBOTT: Well, it’s going to be up to the voters to decide what issues are relevant, and which issues are not, which candidate can best represent them and their values in their future. And I think both my story, my history and what I stand for and what I have done for Texans will help answer that question.
And again:
KELLY: OK. But respectfully that sounds like a dodge, and I mean that respectfully. Because you put out a statement and you went after her. And this is not before the Dallas Morning News article, it’s after. And you said if you can’t trust her to be honest about her history, what can you trust her to be honest about? What else does she misstate? Do you stand by that?
ABBOTT: Well, again, those are going to be issues, Megyn, that the voters of Texas just have to decide on their own as they develop their own idea about the kind of person they want to govern the great state of Texas.
At that point, the pre-recorded interview ended.
In an October teaser before her prime time show debuted, Kelly promised, “I’m not gonna let anybody come on and give me talking points." Well, why should she? She seems to deliver enough talking points for two.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/24/the-right-subjects-wendy-davis-to-litmus-tests-no-male-would-ever-face.html
It would seem only “fair & balanced” to put her on, right? BTW, as I was scoping out Politico today (below), I also found an article by Liza Mundy that dovetails nicely with Powers POV of the right-wing fringe attacks on Wendy.
Here’s the article that I mentioned below by Katie Glueck @ Politico:
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/wendy-davis-defense-102601.html
Abbott is going to play it safe and watch his tongue on the air. Kelly knows that all eyes will be on him to see if he makes a gaffe. Maybe somebody should point out to Kelly that Abbott supported one of his friends on Twitter for calling Wendy “Retard Barbie.”
Where were the FOX News feminists on that one?
1) Everyone who’s gonna vote against her is already watching Fox News, and
2) Remember how much more pull she got when they pulled that shit on her at the filibuster? That’s gonna pale in comparison to them slandering her out of office.
This is a lose-lose for them, but they lose less leaving her be. But if they were capable of knowing that, they would left Gabby Giffords alone, wouldn’t they? After all, that was the last time they ‘learned’ this lesson… Yet, they’re still helping the NRA destroy their own case against gun control by attacking her every chance they get.
They simply do not learn.
Let us not forget that everyone in TX thought Ann Richards had no chance of beating Clayton Williams.
I would still be very surprised if she won, but we’ll see.
I haven’t seen any polls on what her chances are and I don’t think Texas is ready to turn blue yet, but I don’t hear the right going after any D’s running in Utah, Oklahoma or Alabama for obvious reasons.
Go Wendy!
These cafeteria Catholics have no problem with Jimmy-boy’s criminal history. In fact, they have a lot in common, given the history of News Corporation’s hacking scandals in the U.K.
Another thing that people need to understand is that the abortion law filibuster wasn’t Wendy’s first “stand” against the “good ol’ boys” of TX.
Diane Ravitch writes, "…she filibustered against the mammoth budget cuts to public education of $5.4 billion, which crippled many schools and turned out to be completely unnecessary ( but the funding was not restored).
For her valiant resistance to the cuts, the Republican leadership kicked her off the education committee, but she continued to sit in on its meetings and even to offer legislation. She joins the honor roll today as a champion of American education and an all-around champion of courage in public life."
But, we all know the GOP could care less about public education! So, when Wendy Davis chose to use the word “Stand” in her campaign slogan, it had absolutely nothing to do with Abbott’s disability, and this is why he didn’t take Kelly’s bait! Since Kelly lives in the FOX/GOP bubble, I’m sure she is very unaware of Wendy’s first filibuster at the TX capitol.
You know, this comes a day after Ms. Davis herself was accused of making an insensitive comment. She’s turned around and attacked you. And in the context of it, she came out and said that clearly anybody who doesn’t understand her story hasn’t walked a mile in her shoes, which led others on the Internet to say once again it is a veiled shot at your disability. What do you think?
Read more at http://www.newshounds.us/megyn_kelly_jumps_on_unvetted_james_o_keefe_video_to_attack_wendy_davis_01242014#QVyiPxHLi2VwREHW.99
Really Meg? Accusing Wendy Davis of attacking her chair-bound opponent by conflating a part of her statement about “walking a mile in her shoes” is the lowest form of yellow journalism I’ve seen in a long time.
She’s making Hannity sound like a moderate with her nightly screed.
Well, if Mr Abbott can use the word “stand” without being asked “Is that really an appropriate word/phrase for you to use, given your condition,” then it seems a bit silly for anyone else to think that Wendy’s using the word or her supporters using the word is somehow a slam at Abbott.
The only thing this proves is that, once again, being a GOPer means it’s all about party and self above all else. You would think that Mr Abbott would show some sort of empathy or understanding about others but he doesn’t. If it doesn’t affect him or his party directly, he doesn’t care about it. I’m pretty certain he’d be the first to file a lawsuit if a “public” facility (even if it were a privately-owned business) didn’t have handicap access if he needed to use it, but if a group of similarly disabled people were to bring a suit against a facility that Abbott didn’t use, he’d be right there supporting the facility’s owner.