Jack Smith urged to investigate Fox News for inciting Jan. 6 violence with election lies - RawStory

[GGoss]

Jack Smith urged to investigate Fox News for inciting Jan. 6 violence with election lies - RawStory

According to former prosecutor Glenn Kirschner, special counsel Jack Smith should expand his investigation into the Jan. 6 insurrection by including Fox News for spreading election lies that helped incite the violence that occurred that day.

Appearing on "The Katie Phang Show," the attorney noted the text messages between high-profile Fox News hosts admitting they knew the election fraud claims were lies but spread them on-air anyway because it was helping with their ratings.

Speaking with host Phang, Kirschner stated he believes the network helped incite the riot and that the Department of Justice should open an investigation based upon the new revelations.

"These were not lies about which toothpaste will make your teeth whiter, or which floor wax will make your floors more shiny, these were lies about whether the American peoples' votes were stolen and their election rigged," he told the host.

Link: https://www.rawstory.com/fox-news-election-lies-2659438536/?traffic_source=Connatix

[Kaleva]

1. Supreme Court's ruling on Brandenburg v. Ohio might shield Fox

"Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969),
A state may not forbid speech advocating the use of force or unlawful conduct unless this advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/444/#:~:text=Ohio%2C%20395%20U.S.%20444%20(1969)&text=A%20state%20may%20not%20forbid,incite%20or%20produce%20such%20action.

The key is "imminent".

[onenote]

8. Will shield them.

Not a close case.

[Kid Berwyn]

2. Excellent suggestion.

A purported news organization willfully disseminated a lie, causing millions to believe a falsehood.

Must be a coincidence that the lie also benefits their chosen candidate.

[Kaleva]

4. Freedom of speech comes into play

[Kid Berwyn]

5. It's called libel when people and corporations are injured.

See Dominion vs. Fox News.

Perhaps there’s another name for it when an entire country is injured.

[Kaleva]

17. And that's a civil case and not a criminal one

[Kid Berwyn]

29. And it's called treason when overthrowing the Constitution.

Founders thought truth essential to maintaining a free nation. That is why only one business is mentioned by name in the Constitution, the press. When they serve a traitor like Trump on January 6, they are co-conspirators.

[Kaleva]

30. What do you think "freedom of the press" means?

" the right to publish and disseminate information, thoughts, and opinions without restraint or censorship as guaranteed under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution"

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/freedom%20of%20the%20press#:~:text=%3A%20the%20right%20to%20publish%20and,Amendment%20to%20the%20U.S.%20Constitution

[GGoss]

7. I Don't Believe Incitement To Riot Is Protected By The 1st Amendment

[Kaleva]

16. But the violence has to be imminent.

See post #1

[GGoss]

18. Ok... If The President Tells The Crowd, "Let's March To The Capitol, And I'll Join You!"

I'D take that as imminent.

Wouldn't you?

[Kaleva]

19. You'd have to prove that he intended violence was to happen

[GGoss]

21. I'm Not Sure About That... If I Yelled "Fire" In A Crowded Theater

Would you have to PROVE I knew people would trample each other?

[Kaleva]

24. It's legal to yell fire in a crowded theater

The 1969 Brandenburg v. Ohio case settled that

[GGoss]

26. You Are Correct, Thank You

Link: https://reason.com/2022/10/27/yes-you-can-yell-fire-in-a-crowded-theater/

[Kaleva]

28. It was here at DU were I learned that

[Qutzupalotl]

22. We know he knew they were armed

and ordered the magnetometers removed.

[GGoss]

23. AND... He KNEW They Weren't Gonna Hurt HIM

Thank you

[Kaleva]

27. Does that prove intent?

[Qutzupalotl]

31. Not in isolation

but if they ever do, I'm sure they'd cite that, among other factors.

[Kaleva]

32. I agree

[FakeNoose]

3. Yes he should, but we know he's not going to

I think Jack Smith has enough on his plate for now.

Maybe the Senate can open an investigation in the same vein as last year's House Select Committee to investigate J-6? That might be the more appropriate way to shine a light on Faux Noise and the Murdochs.

[dlk]

6. Rupert Murdoch is arguably the most dangerous man in the world

And his son, Lachlan isn’t far behind.

[onenote]

9. I think Putin is more dangerous. And Kim Jong Un.

But you are free to disagree.

[dlk]

10. Arguably...

The pen vs. the sword.

[onenote]

11. Putin and Kim can use the sword to vaporize millions

Murdoch doesn't have that power with the pen. In fact, he doesn't have nearly the power that is ascribed to him here.
If he did, Trump would be president, 100 Senators and 435 members of Congress would be Republicans

[dlk]

20. Putin and Kim know if they are foolish enough to try that

They won’t be long for this world, either. They will have destroyed themselves and as pathological as they are, they’re not that irrational. In the meantime, Murdoch is moving right along destroying democracies wherever he can. There’s a reason he’s not welcome in Australia.

[onenote]

25. For someone "not welcome" in Australia, Murdoch has a lot of media properties there

News Corp Australia operates 170 newspaper and magazine titles in Australia. They also own the Australian News Channel and have a 65% ownership interest in FoxTel. Australian News Channel operates SKY News Net which is a 24 hour multichannel, multiplatform news service distributed throughout Australia. FoxTel is Australia's largest subscription based television provider. News Corp Australia other properties include, among others, The Australian, The Daily Telegraph, Herald Sun, The Advertiser, and the Courier Mail in Australia. News Corp's annual revenues from Australian operations exceed $4 billion -- on a par with revenues from US operations. Last year, digital subscriptions to News Corp's Australian publications grew by 12 percent.

And he plays hard in Australian politics, but hasn't been successful -- further evidence that fear of him is wildly overstated.

[mzmolly]

12. I agree with Mr. Kirschner.

Fox should be held criminally liable.

[Initech]

13. I remember last year the Washington Post had a story about Fox News.

That said that Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Laura Ingraham all had prepared remarks about how to spin January 6th if the MAGA insurrectionists were to actually succeed. What the hell did they know and what the hell were they planning to report? I feel like this is something that needs to be investigated further. Fox News has blood on their hands.

[Justice matters.]

14. They probably saw that 'come to DC on January 6. Will be wild.' tweet from

the 'stand back and stand by' hair furhair...

[brooklynite]

15. Answer: no

Unless you imagine that you can prove Fox WANTED an insurrection to occur (as opposed to simply juicing the ratings and profits), you won't have a criminal case.