Connect with us

Fox News’ Hannity To Birther Issue: I Wish I Knew How To Quit You

Published

on

Last night, Fox News’ birther-conspiracy theory pusher Sean Hannity repeatedly told his guests and his audience how he never really believed the birthers. But Hannity, who last night also claimed, birtherism “was never a defining issue for me,” spent most of his show on the Obama birth certificate issue.

For proof of Hannity’s birther-peddling, read, “Coulter: Birther Rumor Discussed Exclusively On Liberal Cable, Not Fox.”

I confess to watching (and tweeting) Hannity a few nights a week while at the gym, so I’d like to thank the good folks at News Hounds for this report and video of Wednesday night’s “Hannity.”

 

The birth certificate “controversy” was not only the lead-off discussion but took up most of the first three segments on Hannity.

First up, Juan Williams. “Why didn’t he just release it earlier, Juan?” Hannity asked.

Then, later in the segment, Hannity moved on to “just ask,” “Why not release his transcripts? Why not release his thesis?” Then, just as Hannity has pretended all along not to fall in with the birthers, he now said, “I don’t care if he does (release the documents). Honestly, that’s not my focus.”

In the next segment, with Monica Crowley and Sandra Smith, Hannity reiterated, “This shouldn’t have taken two years on the certificate” and went on to showcase Trump’s newer demand that Obama release his school records and prove he deserved to get into Harvard and Columbia.

At the end of that segment, Hannity promised, “Coming up, much more on Donald Trump and the birth certificate controversy.” Hmmm, wasn’t the controversy just settled????

Hannity introduced the next segment, this one with Malkin, by again complaining that Obama took so long to produce the birth certificate. To repeat, what Obama just produced is a longer form of the birth certificate he had already produced.

With her typical sourpuss condescension, Malkin sneered about Obama “wagging his finger” over the issue and called him, “Mr. Waggy McFingerwagger at the media and everyone else.” And speaking of wagging fingers, Malkin she went on to wag her own finger at “the left wingers” and “the media” who had found the birther issue a “useful tool” with which to “demonize the right.”

Sure, Michelle, It must have been those liberal activists who somehow infiltrated “fair and balanced” Fox News and got them to discuss birtherism in at least 52 segments since March 2, 2011.

But to her credit, she went on to denounce the whole birther issue and Donald Trump to go with it.

That prompted Hannity to claim, “This wasn’t my issue either, but as time went on, and Donald Trump brought up the issue, it just seemed to me, just release it and it’s over.” Just like it’s over now, I guess!

Even more laughably, Hannity went on to say that now that the birth certificate has been released, “unless anyone comes up with a big smoking gun, it’s not an issue.”

Well, not until later in the show. When it was time for the Great American Panel segment, Hannity announced that the “big issue involving the birth certificate” was the leadoff topic. Once again, Hannity said, “This was never a defining issue for me but I found it odd… All the president had to do is what he did today. Release it, move on and we’re out of the way. Why did he wait so long?”

Guest Fran Tarkenton suggested that it was because Obama wanted the distraction and would probably want to “lose his birth certificate again because we know he doesn’t have any plan to get more jobs, to cut the deficit, in Libya or wherever.”

Guest Alice Stewart, a former Huckabee aide, said, “It should have been done two and a half years ago.”

Rounding out the “fair and balanced” panel of all conservatives was Fox News’ Peter Johnson who mentioned somewhere that he once worked for the former Democratic mayor of New York, David Dinkins. But Johnson has been a GOP footsoldier on Fox News, including during a recent appearance on Hannity where Johnson gushed over Trump’s birther questions as “common sense.” Johnson made no effort to disavow them here. In fact, Johnson suggested the birth certificate was somehow illegitimate, as he said, “My hope, Sean, is that it was released in good faith, that it’s not about victimology… That’s my concern, whether there’s some deeper plan that goes on here.”

So how did “Release-It-And-Move-On” Hannity respond? By planting a thoughtful expression on his face and saying, “That’s an interesting thought.” Then he went on to claim, “I always want to stay on the big issues.” But first, Hannity teased the next segment of the Panel: “the church that Barack Obama, the president and his family attended on Easter Sunday.”

I’m sure Hannity will get to those “big issues” any day now.

Oh, and by the way, it’s not just Hannity. When the news broke that Obama’s long-form birth certificate was available,FoxNews.com let out a dog whistle to birthers by saying the White House had released “what it says (my emphasis) is President Obama’s Long Form Birth Certificate.”

(emphasis mine.)

https://youtube.com/watch?v=x2Sg8vuovM0%3Ffs%3D1%26hl%3Den_US

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation

Published

on

Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.

Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”

“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”

In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”

He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”

“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”

“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”

“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”

The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.

“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”

Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”

Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.

Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.

Continue Reading

News

Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs

Published

on

President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.

“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”

The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”

Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”

TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”

Critics blasted Trump.

“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.

One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”

Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”

The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.

According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.

Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”

“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”

Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”

Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.

Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.

The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.

“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.

The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.

“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.