Sean Hannity’s widdle feewings must really have been smarting ever since Rep. Keith Ellison smacked him down as a yellow journalist the other night. So once again, Hannity got "revenge" by, essentially, proving Ellison right. You may recall that last night, Hannity “asked” if Ellison was the black equivalent of the Ku Klux Klan. Tonight, Hannity “wondered” if Ellison was a secret racist who hid his true feelings in order to get elected. Ironically, the very criteria Hannity used for his accusations – Ellison’s past associations - are far more damning of his own bigotry. Unlike Ellison, Hannity has never renounced any of the many bigots he has palled around with and in some cases still does.  

Once again, Hannity had no – zilch, zip, nada – evidence that Ellison actually shares the beliefs of the “racist, anti-Semitic radicals” that he was associated with decades ago. All Hannity had were clips of the “vile human being,” i.e. Khalid Abdul Muhammad with whom, Hannity revealed excitedly, Ellison “shared a stage on at least one occasion.”

Well, if sharing a stage means an endorsement, then Hannity has some ‘splaining to do about why he has shared his radio airwaves with white supremacist Hal Turner, why he keeps sharing his television show with “Thank God for slavery” Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson and why he spent half a show conducting a three-part, lapdog interview with Mel Gibson. Or maybe Hannity could explain why he repeatedly hosted birthers Donald Trump and Jerome Corsi and, at the same time, insisted he (Hannity) is not a birther. I mean, if sharing a stage equals endorsement, then there’s no way Hannity could not be a birther, right?

As I wrote last night, even if you didn’t know that Ellison publicly renounced his association with Muhammad and Hannity’s other uber black boogeyman, Louis Farrakhan, in 2006 (whereas I have yet to see a single apology from Hannity over his past associations) the telltale sign that this was a bogus attack was that there was no Fox News reporter to present any kind of information to support the picture Hannity was was trying to paint of Ellison. Nor did Hannity present a single person who witnessed – much less suffered from – any of the radical, racist or anti-Semitic views Ellison is accused of harboring.

Instead, Hannity brought out two more of his regular African-American designated black attackers, Niger Innis and David Webb.

Webb, apparently unaware of the kinds of bigots Hannity has palled around with, said: “It’s as simple as what our parents taught us, Sean. Who you associate with is who you are and he made choices.”

However, just as he did last night, Hannity prodded his guests to make explicitly racial attacks:

…Do you think that scrutiny has been withheld from (Ellison) in this case? In other words, would anyone else be able to have had these associations and gotten a pass?

Innis took the bait. He characterized Farrakhan and Muhammad as “racial pyromaniacs” and added, “(U)nfortunately, it is the Keith Ellisons, the Congressional Black Caucus, most of them, that apologize for these types.”

Hannity pressed further:

Do you think he is hiding the radical beliefs so he is more electable? Do you think he still believes these things (nice sleight of hand there because Hannity never provided any indication that Ellison ever believed them to begin with) because obviously, one time, if he’s hanging out with these radicals, he must share their views. …How do we know?

Well, we might know by Ellison’s actions. He was elected to Congress in 2006. If he’s such a secret black radical that there’s nothing in his record by now, Ellison is either really, really good at keeping the secret… or he’s just a regular guy.

Meanwhile, Webb and Innis got busy playing the race card against Ellison – with Hannity’s full approval.

Webb said African Americans like Ellison “push these race pimps… push the race narrative, because it’s about power and control. They want to keep it. They want blacks in line.”

“That’s right,” Innis agreed. He later said, “These black politicians give the black community bread and circus also known (as) racism.”

Hannit’s final question was, “Do you think there would be any Republican …that in the 1990’s was hanging out with radical, anti-Semitic racists like Farrakhan and Khalid, that they could ever have a chance at being elected?”

I don't know about getting elected but I know for sure such a person could get a prime time show on Fox News.

Video below via Mediaite.