On her first day as a Fox News contributor, Tomi Lahren made a complete fool of herself. Within minutes of insisting that it’s an important public interest to get FBI files on Hillary Clinton’s emails, Lahren offered to ditch the whole "scandal" in exchange for others dropping Russia coverage.
In her Fox debut, Lahren helped Sean Hannity attack the FBI’s decision not to fulfill a Freedom of Information Act request to release files about its investigation into Clinton’s private email server, citing her privacy rights.
First, Lahren claimed to be thinking of the public good when she insisted she thought the information should be released. She sounded oh, so poutraged in her opening tirade.
HANNITY: It’s in everybody’s best interest to get the truth, right?
LAHREN: Of course it is. And I think that the funny part of this whole thing is that her privacy somehow trumps our right to know. I’m sorry, when you use a private email on a private server, your privacy rights are out the window when you’re the secretary of state of the United States of America. You don’t have privacy anymore. She chose to do this. This is on her. And I personally would like to know.
But the other guest, the more moderate Geraldo Rivera, began his argument by slobbering over Lahren as some kind of interesting thinker:
RIVERA: [W]elcome Tomi, who, although I obviously disagree with many of her political positions, I think she has intelligence, she’s reasonable, and she’s got, most importantly to me and you, true grit. So Tomi, welcome aboard.
However, Rivera went on to shoot down the efforts to keep the Clinton email scandal alive:
RIVERA: In terms of the substance of her answer and your obvious concerns, Sean, I think this is a disaster for Republicans to get anywhere near this stuff. It’s already destroyed the career of Jason Chaffetz who led the charge, Trey Gowdy who was a promising candidate heading for great things, maybe a senator from South Carolina. I think he’s an afterthought. They were made fools of. Enough with Hillary’s emails. It’s a big yawner.
Sean, if she was going to go to jail, she would’ve gone to jail when James Comey in the summer of 2016 announced that there was nothing criminal there but extreme carelessness. Enough already. We have bigger fish to fry.
Lahren’s response once again proved her rank hypocrisy and shallowness of thought:
LAHREN: Listen, I have some friends that spent a few hours in Benghazi who would really like to know what was in those emails, they’d really like to know why she deleted them. So saying that the public doesn’t have a right to know or that we’re not interested, that’s a load of crap, number one. Number two, how about we make a deal? How about when the mainstream media stops covering Russia day in and day out, maybe we can wrap the Hillary email scandal. But until then, I think I’m going to stay on it.
Even worse than Lahren’s admission that she was ready to toss aside what she had just presented as the public interest in favor of friendlier Trump coverage, was her use of the word “we.” It suggested that she was willing to try to dictate that deal to Fox News.
But Rivera let Lahren’s jaw-dropping divulgence go unremarked. In fact, he helped validate it by calling Russia “another big yawner.” Then he further helped Trump on the Russia front by baselessly suggesting that Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s former IT administrator, recently convicted of bank fraud, was the real leaker of DNC documents to Wikileaks:
RIVERA: Russia is another big yawner. I think this guy Imran Awan, this is the guy they should check out as the possible colluder on the leaks with WikiLeaks, you know, the guy who worked for Debbie Wasserman Schultz. I think there is fertile grounds for investigation forward. Forget about history and political history. Go forward. What was the DNC hiding? Why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz hire this guy now accused of—
The U.S. intelligence community has already assessed with "high confidence" that Russia was behind the DNC hack and leaks to WikiLeaks.
Yet Hannity, who seems to have masterminded Lahren’s hiring at Fox, also seems hell-bent on discrediting the IC's conclusion and - facts be damned – blaming a Democrat, possibly with active collusion with Fox and the White House. Predictably, he said nothing about Lahren's unscrupulousness.
It suggests that Hannity and Fox News are willing to fit any piece of information or news to its political agenda.
But you already knew that, didn’t you? In fact, Fox News did that right in the title of its video of this segment, calling it, “Lahren: Public has right to know what’s in Clinton’s emails.”
Watch Lahren reveal her true (lack of) character below, from the August 30, 3017 Hannity.
(Transcript excerpts via Fox News).
I would add Greg Gutfeld to the “too nauseating” category and Kimberly Guilfoyle is a runner up.