CNN's Manu Raju Shocked, Hurt That Republicans Will Strip Ilan "Omar" Nur and Eric Swalwell of Their Committee Assignments, Should They Take the House
Plus: Derschowitz's $300 M Lawsuit Against CNN Goes Forward

He casts the valid use of on-point precedent as some kind of devious pretext.

Immigration-defrauding, brother-marrying terrorist whore Ilan "Omar" Nur claimed that the armies of Israel as well as the US were committing the same atrocities as Hamas and the Taliban.

The Democrats pretended to denounce those statements, but Nancy Pelosi couldn't even hold to the cover story, and quickly admitted it was all for show.

Ilan "Omar" Nur then "clarified" her remarks by saying she didn't say what she quite plainly said.

Nancy Pelosi says: "We thanked" her.

"We did not rebuke her. We thanked -- acknowledged that she made a clarification," Pelosi told CNN’s Dana Bash.

Eric Swalwell, meanwhile, is a walking, farting pile of kompromat, given his sexual relationship with an actual Red China spy -- the dirty Fangbanger -- and yet the Democrats insist on keeping this security-risk waifu on the Foreign Intelligence committee.

And Manu Raju of CNN is shocked, shocked that the GOP will strip them of their committee assignments "citing" the Marjorie Taylor-Greene precedent.

Videos below.

But before that: Alan Derschowitz previously filed a $300 million defamation lawsuit against CNN, for a defamatory lie they told about him when he was defending Trump during the impeachment.

Derschowitz said that any criminal act could be an impeachable offense. He allowed that non-criminal acts could possibly be impeachable if done with corrupt motives. But he added that no president could be said to be acting "with corrupt motives" when trying to get re-elected, because all presidents think that their reelection is best for the country. Hence, not a corrupt motive.

What did CNN report he said?

CNN lied and made it #Hot4TwitterClicks and claimed that Derschowitz said that a president can do anything to get elected, and it can never be impeachable.

This was a lie, misquoting him to convey a false impression of him and damage his professional reputation. No competent lawyer would say "the president can do literally whatever he wants to get reelected and its never impeachable," and Derschowitz, being a competent lawyer, did not say that.

But CNN needed to fill up some screen time with outrage and clickbait, so they claimed he did.

CNN filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that this statement was "just opinion."

No, it's not. You made a false factual claim about what he said.

They further trotted out the weird claim that misquoting Derschowitz was harmless, because any diligent news consumer, such as those who watch CNN, would either know the real quote that CNN was lying about, or could just do their own research to find the full, fair, and non-defamatory quote.

The judge disagreed that CNN viewers could be relied on to know the real facts or search for the real facts.

That's kind of amusing -- No, CNN viewers cannot be expected to be well-informed. Or to even be readers.

CNN viewers stupid, lazy, and easily tricked by hucksters, judge rules.

At any rate, the lawsuit goes forward.

"They simply distorted my words, the judge looked at it, he said, 'No, they don't get the benefit of the fair-reporting privilege ... their reporting was unfair.' They didn't accurately reflect what I said, and I'm gonna be able to prove it made a deliberate, willful, malicious decision from the top down to doctor my tape in order to make me say exactly the opposite of what I said.''

He added, ''Two commentators came out to say, Dershowitz said a president can do whatever he wants, including committing crimes. He could be like Hitler and Stalin, they used those words. They knew full-well that I had said exactly the opposite, and it's not about me.''

Dershowitz later noted that he gave an ''80-minute speech in which I said, 'of course the president can be impeached [for something] awful or illegal. The Constitution says high crimes and misdemeanors. In fact, CNN criticized me for focusing on the fact that it has to be a crime. And then, a day later, they had their commentators come on and say, 'Dershowitz doesn't believe that a president can be impeached even if he committed a crime.'''

He said, ''They knew what they were doing ... because they acknowledge that I had done a very good job defending the president and they wanted to undercut that. And so we will be able to depose Jeffrey Zucker, the head of CNN, we'll be able to depose those who made the decision to edit the tape, and we'll ask them: 'Why would they take out the words unlawful and illegal?' All of your viewers just heard me say that the only thing that would make a quid pro quo unlawful is if the quo were in some way illegal.

Viva Frei and Robert Barnes discussed this victory, and I recommend watching it.

They got me very excited when they said that the reason Derschowitz sued for $300 million is that he wants to make it clear that no amount of money CNN can offer will be enough to satisfy Derschowitz. They noted that Derschowitz is 80 years or older, and $5 or $10 million will not make any difference in his life.

What Derschowitz wants, they posit is a repair of his reputation and legacy, and to get that, he'll want... discovery of internal CNN emails and communications.

To prove what lying, defaming partisan whores they are.

And he's hopefully going to get it.

Meanwhile, CNN's paid "analyst" -- Democrat donor and disgraced Russiagate conspirator Andrew McCabe -- says that he still can't figure out the motives of James Hodgkinson, who went to the baseball field with a list of Republicans he wanted to kill.

Must be an attempted suicide-by-cop.

Never forget that NeverTrump continues to believe every single word CNN prints.

Or, at least: they pretend they believe every word. They are either stupid and uneducatable, or they are willing accomplices in each conspiracy to deceive the public that CNN launches.

Plus: Derschowitz's $300 M Lawsuit Against CNN Goes Forward&bodytext=He casts the valid use of on-point precedent as some kind of devious pretext. Immigration-defrauding, brother-marrying terrorist whore Ilan "Omar" Nur claimed that the armies of Israel as well as the US were committing the same atrocities as Hamas and...&topic=world_news"> posted by Ace at 04:40 PM

| Access Comments