Report typos and corrections to: corrections@rawstory.com.
Like this article ? Text `Support` to 50123 to donate.
'Stupid rules!' Fox News host has massive meltdown after unvaxxed tennis star is deported from Australia
January 16, 2022
Fox News host Rachel Campos-Duffy attacked Americans who are under 30 years old after Australia banned tennis star, Novak Djokovic, over his refusal to get vaccinated for Covid-19.
"It is a warning," Campos-Duffy said during a Fox News segment. "And I think that the only reason that it hasn't happened here are, one, obviously we have some constitutional protections but just in terms of talking about the mindset. It's people from our generation on up who know what America always was and I think those are the people on the right, sensible people in the middle who are holding ground and fighting back and saying no to these masks."
"But if our country was run by everyone 20 to 30, I think we'd be Australia," she continued. "I think we have completely -- and by the way, if we included kids going all the way down to 15 who are even more normalized to this, um, it's over. And this is what concerns me about the American experiment. We have normalized closing churches, closing businesses, telling people what businesses can open and what businesses can't."
The Fox News host complained that abortion clinics are allowed to operate during the pandemic while some churches are allegedly not allowed to gather.
"You know, tell people to wear masks!" she continued. "Telling them they have to put medicine in their body when their doctor said you already have natural immunity and this is actually going to be bad for you. But you still have to do it! All of this stuff is so nuts. And then the stupid rules that we've put up with as we talked about earlier with the [ Saturday Night Live] skit. You know, wearing a mask in a restaurant when you're going to the bathroom but not when you're eating, in the plane when you're having a snack."
She added: "All this stupidity that we've put up with, that we've known -- it's shocking to me that we've all put up with it but I tell you, it's the young people that are going to ruin us in the years forward. I'm really worried about the fact that we've created a generation of kids who probably think more like Chinese kids than American kids."
Watch the video below from Fox News.
CONTINUE READING
Show less
The morning after Donald Trump rehashed all of his complaints about the 2020 presidential election that saw him lose to President Joe Biden and then attacked fellow Republicans, a CNN host dismissed his words as an "avalanche of lies."
During the speech, the president also asserted that his "Stop the Steal" rally crowd was massive, telling the crowd, "They talk about the people that walked down to the Capitol, They don't talk about the size of that crowd. I believe it was the largest crowd I've ever spoken before, and they were there to protest the election."
After sharing clips of Trump's ranting about critics within his own party who aren't buying into his election lies, host Abby Phillip cut to the chase and also noted the former president's defense of the Capitol insurrectionists.
"I don't actually recommend people listen to the avalanche of lies last night," she stated, "but it's notable how much effort went into defending these January 6th defendants and saying that they were being held as political prisoners. It's a window into where this is all headed for Republicans."
Watch below:
CNN 01 16 2022 08 27 30 youtu.be
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Should Donald Trump survive his legal difficulties and challenges from other Republican Party contenders for the 2024 presidential nomination he may find his hopes of returning to the Oval Office stymied by his inability to get on the ballot in multiple states.
As S.V. Date reports for the HuffPost, the former president, who is being investigated for his part in setting off an insurrection on Jan 6th of last year, may find himself banned from appearing on ballots in six southern states -- including North Carolina, Georgia and Florida --- due to a law passed in 1868 following the Civil War.
As Date wrote, "The third section of the 14th Amendment prohibits people who swore to defend the Constitution, but who subsequently took part in an insurrection against the United States, from holding state or federal office."
As the report notes, the law was passed to "put the burden" on states that seceded, compelling them to "keep those who have been involved in insurrections from seeking office" -- which could include the former president.
RELATED: House riot committee wants to question Pence over efforts to oust Trump: report
According to Gerard Magliocca, a law professor at Indiana University, the law is "still on the books," adding, "The law is still there. And it could be appealed to.”
"The six states affected by the 1868 law — North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana and Florida — together have 88 electoral votes, or 33% of the total needed to win the presidency. Trump won all of them in 2020 except for Georgia, which he lost by 12,000 votes," Date wrote before adding, "The former president was impeached for inciting an insurrection by the House, but not enough Republicans in the Senate voted to convict him, arguing that they did not have the authority because Trump was no longer president. Had they done so, a simple majority vote could then have banned Trump from holding federal office for the rest of his life."
According to Ron Fein, of Free Speech For People, "It would have been great if Congress had already taken care of this. We fully intend to pursue this type of challenge if Mr. Trump chooses to run.”
"Before the 14th Amendment had been ratified, Congress passed a law in 1868 making enforcement of the insurrectionist ban in the proposed amendment a condition of six Southern states’ readmission to the Union. The remaining Confederate states were readmitted after the amendment had been ratified, and so the laws letting them back in did not contain that specific requirement," the HuffPost report adds. "Fein said that the 1868 law’s language does not so much create a different standard for office-holders in those six states as it does illustrate that lawmakers then — the same ones who passed the 14th Amendment — wanted all states to enforce its anti-insurrectionist restriction."
You can read more here.
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Copyright © 2021 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections or concerns, please email corrections@rawstory.com.
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}