Megyn Kelly didn’t go easy on militia leader Ammon Bundy, currently involved in an armed occupation of a federal building at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, but she was nowhere near as combative and condescending as she has been with black activists who had not broken the law nor threatened anybody.
As I’ve been reporting, the sons of Fox’s former pal, Cliven Bundy, the racist, law-breaking rancher, have taken up an armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge building in protest of an arson sentence for two guys, Dwight and Steven Hammond, who are cooperating with the law. Last night, Ammon Bundy, now calling his group "Citizens for Constitutional Freedom," appeared on The Kelly File.
"How is what you are doing not lawlessness?" Kelly asked.
"Well, I think that we have to go to the supreme law of the land to answer that question," Bundy answered. "And that is that the federal government does not have authority to come down into the states and to control its land and resources. That is for the people to do. And that is clearly stated in Article 1, 8, 17 of the Constitution.
That is not at all how the Constitution has been interpreted by courts. But Kelly, who is an attorney, did not challenge a word of Bundy's legal theory. She merely said politely that the Hammonds “had their day in court and they were found guilty and it went all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court which denied their appeal. Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to work in our country when it comes to the rule of law?”
Kelly was rather tart with Bundy when he asked her a rhetorical question designed to make his point. But she let him ramble, uninterrupted, about the illegitimacy of the federal government’s claim against the Hammonds and how his illegal actions will be all for the best: “There’s good things that are going to come from this," Bundy insisted. "It will be a benefit for many, many people across this nation.” Bundy's criminal behavior poses a far bigger threat to law enforcers than chants by Black Lives Matter protesters that Kelly has suggested endangered police.
While Kelly listened respectfully to Bundy’s views, that was quite different from her argumentative behavior with the African American attorney for the African American Freddie Gray family. Then, Kelly badgered him to accept in advance what she strongly hinted would be the exoneration of the police officers in whose custody Gray suffered a spinal cord. She was far more disrespectful toward Congressional Black Caucus Congressman Al Green when he tried to explain why he had protested the Ferguson Grand Jury’s decision not to indict the police officer who shot and killed African American Michael Brown.
You could say it was a contrast of black and white.
Watch Ammon Bundy below, from the January 4 The Kelly File.
On the other hand, Ailes doesn’t like that these yahoos are acting out during an election year, and I doubt he thinks they have a chance at anything other than jail terms. But he knows he can’t just attack them without consequences. (His likely position is that their behavior is inevitable given the current President, but that these guys are just making a mess.)
So he has Kelly try to go down the middle of the road. She doesn’t exactly agree with Bundy’s comments, but she doesn’t shout him off the air either. So the GOP fans of Bundy can say that he got his points in, and the GOP critics of Bundy can point to her correcting him here and there.
And yes, if this was a left-wing sit-in at a congressman’s office where the protestors were refusing to leave until, say, the congressman changed their vote on something like the Iraq invasion, Kelly would spare no ammunition in ridiculing and blasting at the protestor.
I really hope nobody gets hurt.
Except their feelings.
If the authorities allow supplies to pass through, then they are bigger idiots than the ones in the building.
Al Jazeera got 45 minutes and freedom to wander around at will, except for the kitchen. During that time, there wasn’t a gun in sight, no grandstanding or strutting about like over-sexed roosters. A sign, perhaps, that they’re not getting the sort of support they got during the original Bundy event. I don’t think they’re smart enough to realise that the world is watching with wonderment. Once again, I’m having a hard time trying to explain that the USA is not all like that.
Off topic: am watching Wolf Blitzer on the gun control issue. Have heard some totally off the wall fools (Mike Rogers claiming that it’s the Democrats who haven’t wanted to compromise… sheesh). One thing that’s caught my eye is Wolf’s obsession with tears shed by Obama. Could that be the start of “he did that too” whenever someone (like my brother) brings up Boehner’s propensity for tearing up? Blitzer is such a disappointment as well as a major reason that I consider CNN to be “Fox-lite”.
If they don’t comply, just let them stew in their own juices.
Was it by Skype or something? I hope they aren’t allowing a news crew to get in that close to armed tresspassers. Since when does Faux give an open platform to people conducting illegal activity? Not a legal protest, but an armed takeover.
It’s amusing to see the fair and balanced freedom-lovers at right-wing Fox News suddenly get all empathetic with civil disobedience, a topic they typically rage against (since lib minorities tend to practice it). 👍