This week we saw more proof of the Democrats' disdain for democracy

It is said that when an individual responds to an allegation with a personal attack, the allegations are probably true, and the accused is most likely guilty.

This week, we saw proof of the guilt of the Democrats during two separate instances.

We look at Exhibit 1.

Tucker Carlson aired episodes based on the security camera footage from the Capitol Building on January 6, 2021.

The footage was the most closely guarded secret in the D.C., although newly elected speaker Kevin McCarthy had pledged to release it to the public and did so.

Carlson debunked the Democrat narrative of a mass armed and dangerous insurrection with visual proof.

The insurrection narrative was mounted by the Democrats and their P.R. agencies that masquerade as news media outlets by slyly editing the footage to convey chaos and violence.  Footage of crowds being unruly, lighting up a fire outside the Capitol Building, and windows being broken were played in a loop to push the insurrection narrative.

The January 6 Committee hearings were based on unverified claims based on third-party accounts.  While they claimed that democracy in the U.S. was under threat, they denied Trump's lawyers the fundamental right that exists in every democracy to question witnesses because they knew that claims made would fall apart after elementary scrutiny.

The narrative was used during the 2022 midterms and will be used for the 2024 elections to scare citizens into voting for Democrats.

But Carlson burst the balloon of propaganda with the pin of truth.

Carlson proved that it was a protest that was mostly peaceful.  The protesters were queuing as they toured the building.  They took selfies while law enforcement officers accompanied them as they ambled through the Capitol Building.

If facts were on their side, the Democrats would not have restricted access to footage in the first place.

If facts were on their side, the Democrats would have released footage of every claim they made, and every Democrat mouthpiece would have played it in a loop.

The incriminating footage would have been used during the January 6 "trial." 

But since they didn't have facts, the Democrats are attempting to silence and discredit Carlson.

Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer commanded Rupert Murdoch and Fox News to prevent Carlson from airing further episodes on the January 6 footage.  Establishment Republicans such as McConnell, Tillis, and Romney, like always, sided with the Democrats.

The mainstream media charged Carlson with what they are guilty of: spreading hateful and unsubstantiated claims.

YouTube restricted videos of Carlson debunking the Democrat narrative.

A series of private text messages allegedly from Carlson that were released by Dominion Voting Systems as part of their $1.6-billion lawsuit against Fox News were assiduously covered by the media to falsely portray Carlson as a conman who doesn't actually believe the claims he is making.

In the coming weeks, expect attacks on Carlson to escalate.  The aim is to disgrace Carlson to such an extent that he becomes unemployed and unemployable.

Now for Exhibit 2.

Journalists Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger, who are among the authors of the Twitter Files, were in D.C. to testify regarding Twitter's inner workings before the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. 

Twitter had suppressed the exposé of Hunter Biden's Laptop which was the most important story of the 2020 election cycle. 

A NewsBusters poll revealed that 16% of Biden voters would have voted differently had they known of Hunter's laptop.  Another survey showed that 79 percent of Americans think Trump would have won re-election if voters had known facts about Hunter's laptop.

The Twitter Files series that began last December revealed how the social media giant was colluding with government agencies and Democrat politicians to manipulate the narrative in favor of the Democrats.  For every claim they made, they provided evidence of documents or screenshots of correspondence.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) chaired the hearings and made it clear that selective state-sponsored targeting "disinformation" is an attack on the First Amendment.

The Democrats reacted by attacking the messenger once again.

Rep. Del. Stacey Plaskett (D-U.S. Virgin Islands) branded Taibbi and Shellenberger as "so-called journalists" during her opening statement.  Plaskett even attempted the pressure Taibbi to reveal information about his sources, which he rightfully refused to do. 

Rep. Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas, asked the journalist duo if they were being paid to testify and also wanted to know of Taibbi's sources.

An unhinged Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz attacked the principle of journalism itself and the idea of receiving monetary compensation for their work.

Rep. Daniel S. Goldman (D-N.Y.), a proponent of the "Russia collusion" hoax, claimed that the government had never actually told Twitter to remove any "lawful" speech from the platform.

Jordan demonstrated how to counter falsehoods: you offer proof.  This is how he debunked Goldman's big lie.

Other Democrats also accused the duo of peddling conspiracy theories for pecuniary gains.

The Democrats did not offer an iota of evidence to debunk the claims made in Twitter Files, nor did they offer proof for claims that the journalist duo was doing it for monetary gains only.

It has to be remembered that when elected representatives mount vicious attacks against journalists or regular citizens, there is always a subtext of threat.  When it is the Democrats, the threat is amplified considerably because the Democrats control the bureaucracies of weaponized government agencies.

The raids or arrests or phone confiscation inflicted on Trump allies and the draconian punishments inflicted on Trump-supporters for protesting on January 6 are proof that the Democrats don't just bark, but bite. 

Beyond reprisals from government agencies, the Democrats are implicitly signaling to their rowdy "protester" wing that dissenting journalists are a target.

Taibbi responded sharply to counter Plaskett's vile smear.

"I've been a reporter for 30 years, I'm a staunch advocate of the First Amendment."

"Ranking Member Plaskett, I'm not a 'so-called journalist.'"

"I've won the National Magazine Award, the I.F. Stone Award for Independent Journalism, and I've written ten books — including four NYT bestsellers."

Taibbi and Shellenberger describe the Twitter Files that exposed Democrat overreach as one of the most significant news stories they have covered.

The irony is that by mounting these attacks, the Democrats are providing evidence of the very government overreach to control the media that the committee was investigating with this hearing in the first place.  

Carlson, Taibbi, Shellenberger, and various others are doing what the fourth estate in a democracy must do by holding the powerful accountable.  

The hearings held by the House GOP are the first step that hopefully begins a journey to punish the guilty, but the hearings must not be conflated with action.

Photo credit: Twiter video screen grab.

If you experience technical problems, please write to