Stu Blog: Where is your evidence?

Where is your evidence?

I have never seen anything like this. The storyline of blaming Sarah Palin/Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Beck/the tea party/the right continues even though there is NO EVIDENCE SUPPORTING IT. I'm sick of arguing this in the abstract. I am getting to the point on the Arizona story that when I hear someone bring up talk radio, angry rhetoric, or political discourse I refuse to respond in any other way than: where is your evidence? Not "Where is your evidence that someone on talk radio said something you didn't like?" But, "Where is your evidence that this guy has any connection to what you're complaining about?"

This blog is designed to send to those who blame conservatives for the Arizona tragedy. Spread it around. Remember, there is no evidence whatsoever to back the claim that Jared Loughner and his murders had anything at all to do with discourse, radio, rhetoric, tea parties, evil right wingers, or evil left wingers for that matter.

Don't believe me? Here is essentially every major news organization saying so. It's simply amazing that this narrative continues somehow.

ABC News

"Though there are no known ties whatsoever between shooting suspect Jared Lee Loughner and Sarah Palin or any part of the Tea Party movement, the "crosshairs" became part of the media coverage of the Tucson shootings from the very beginning."

LA Times

(23rd paragraph)

“Those seeking a coherent philosophy will probably be frustrated”, said Mark Pitcavage, director of investigative research at the Anti-Defamation League. "So far, most of his beliefs appear to be the product of his own mind, primarily," he said.

Wall Street Journal

"All he did was play video games and play music," said Tommy Marriotti, a high school friend. Mr. Marriotti said much of Mr. Loughner's free time was devoted to the school band. He wasn't especially political, Mr. Marriotti said, though he expressed frustration with the Bush Administration"

(more below ad)

CBS News

(14th paragraph)

Preliminary examinations of Loughner's web presence suggest he shared passions with both the far left and far right.

The Washington Post

"Turns out the politics espoused by the alleged gunman, Jared Lee Loughner, 22, are difficult to pin down.

The New Yorker

"Judging from his Internet postings, Jared Lee Loughner is a delusional young man whose inner political landscape is a swamp of dystopian novels, left- and right-wing tracts, conspiracy theories, and contempt for his fellow human beings."

New York Post

"we really don't know a thing about Loughner's motivations"

Washington Post

At this point, there's no evidence that any statement from any politician sent Jared Loughner over the edge.

ABC News

"However, so far there is no evidence that he has any ties to any political group"

Time Magazine

His exact motivation was not clear, but a former classmate described Loughner as a pot-smoking loner who had rambling beliefs about the world.

Fox News

Megyn Kelly: “…I'm wondering is do you have reason to believe that this particular suspected killer was taking in information or was in any way influenced by the vitriol or the rhetoric that you are referring to on the airwaves"

Sherriff Dupnik: "I have to be specific and say that I don't have that evidence. The investigation is in it's initial phases. My belief, and I've been watching what has been going on in this country for the last 75 years and I've been a police officer for over 50 years, There's no doubt in my mind that when a number of people try to inflame the public that there is going to some consequences from doing that and I think it's irrresponsible to do that."

Megyn Kelly: "Is that, Sheriff, it sounds like you're being very honest, but that's just your speculation. That's not saying it's fact based at this point."

Dupnik: "That's my opinion, period."

CNN

BLITZER:  But the question is, is there any evidence that the suspected shooter in this particular

case was a Sarah Palin fan?

YELLIN:  No.

BLITZER:  Read Sarah Palin's website?

YELLIN:  Absolutely not.

BLITZER:  Watched her FaceBook, her tweets or anything like that?

YELLIN: None at all and there is no evidence that this is even inspired by rage other healthcare.

MSNBC/NBC

Some liberals quick to point the finger are linking 22-year-old shooter Jared Loughner to the Tea Party—showing the same lack of restraint and tendency to demonize their ideological opponents that they accuse the right of having.

Bloomberg

The evidence doesn’t suggest that any of the victims of the Jan. 8 shopping center rampage, including U.S. District Judge John Roll and a 9-year-old child, who were both slain, were shot for their politics, right- or left-wing.

Business Insider

“there's zero evidence that the Arizona tragedy is somehow related to political speech”

Good Morning America

"The shooter's motives remain unclear. One acquaintance from 2007 described him as liberal."

Washington Examiner

There's little evidence he has a coherent ideology. Loughner's philosophy professor says the 22-year-old acted like "someone whose brains were scrambled" and whose "thoughts were unrelated to anything in our world."

The Washington Post

"Loughner's decision to affiliate as an independent rather than a Republican or Democrat would seem to affirm the sense that while he targeted Giffords in the attack, it was not a decision born of a set of deeply held political beliefs that fit neatly into either party."

And, let me end by giving credit where some credit is due—a few left wing publications also telling the truth about the story.

Mother Jones

Barring any new evidence that directly links Loughner to any political activism or activities, Democrats will have a tough time pinning the blame on extreme rhetoric.

Slate

“around a third of the country that blames rhetoric for the attack, despite evidence that it had nothing to do with it.”

The New Republic

"Conservatives are furious that the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords is being pinned on them. Their indignation is justified. "

Some might say--"Hey, doesn't this prove that the media IS covering the truth about Loughner? What are you so upset about?"

Mainly because in many of the stories above, these are toss away sentences in an article or column that furthers the storyline. They include one sentence halfway down the page that basically says "oh, by the way, we have no reason to tie these killings with the right. Now, more about the right's rhetoric and the shooting..."

If you want to complain about our discourse...fine. That's your right. In fact, it's part of healthy discourse. But, conservatives have about as much to do with these shootings eggplant parmesan. Absolutely nothing. It would be nice if someone noticed that.

We did our homework over the weekend; we did the research so we can tell you what is likely coming from Senate Democrats regarding President Trump's Supreme Court Nominee Amy Coney Barrett. Based on our research and the anonymous people who have already come forward to talk about Coney Barrett's youth, these are the main shocking things you can expect Senate Democrats to seize on during the confirmation process…

A man has come forward under the banner of "#MenToo," to say that in second grade, Amy Coney Barrett and her best friend at the time, cornered him at a birthday party at Chuck-E-Cheese and "injected him with a full dose of cooties." Which, if true, would obviously be disqualifying for serving on the highest court in the land.

Then there's a woman who says when she was nine-years-old, she lived on the same street as Amy Coney Barrett. She alleges that Coney-Barrett borrowed her VHS tape of Herbie Goes Bananas and did not return it for at least six months. And then when she did finally get the tape back, the woman says Coney Barrett did not even bother to rewind it. The FBI has interviewed at least two witnesses so far who say the tape was indeed not rewound and that it was very upsetting to the owner of the tape. Again, if true, this is troubling – clearly not the kind of integrity you want to see in a Supreme Court justice.

Apparently, in their elementary school days, they liked to drink milk – and lots of it.

The same neighbor also dropped a bombshell allegation about the drinking problem of Amy Coney Barrett and her closest friends. Apparently, in their elementary school days, they liked to drink milk – and lots of it. The neighbor says she "frequently" witnessed Coney-Barrett and her friends chugging entire cartons of milk – often Whole Milk, sometimes Chocolate Milk, occasionally both at the same time through a funnel.

Unfortunately, shooting-up cooties, injurious rewinding, and potential calcium-abuse are not even the worst of it.

A third person has now come forward, another man, and this is just reprehensible, it's hard to even fathom. But he alleges that in fourth grade, when they were around ten-years-old, Amy Coney Barrett and a group of "four or five of her friends" gang-GRAPED him on the playground during recess. He alleges the group of friends snuck uneaten grapes out of the cafeteria and gang-GRAPED him repeatedly in broad daylight. In other words, and I hate to have to spell this out because it's kind of graphic, but the group led by ten-year-old Amy Coney Barrett pelted this poor defenseless boy with whole grapes. He recalls them "laughing the whole time" as they were gang-GRAPING him.

He recalls them "laughing the whole time" as they were gang-GRAPING him.

Obviously, even if just one of these allegations is half-true, no Senator with a conscience could possibly vote to confirm Coney Barrett. When there is a clear pattern of destructive childhood behavior, it always continues into adulthood. Because people do not change. Ever.

Fortunately, for the sake of the Republic, Democrats plan to subpoena Coney Barrett's childhood diary, to see what, if any, insights it may provide into her calcium habits, as well as her abuse of illicit cooties and the gang-GRAPING incident.

We will keep you posted on the latest, but for now, it looks like Democrats will find plenty in the reckless pre-teen life of Amy Coney Barrett to cast doubt on her nomination. And if not, they can always fall back on her deranged preference for letting babies be born.

[NOTE: The preceding was a parody written by MRA writer Nathan Nipper.]

On the radio program Friday, Glenn Beck discussed the recent news that a primary source for the Steele Dossier — the document on which much of the Trump-Russia collusion investigation was based — had been investigated by the FBI for contacts with suspected Russian spies. Glenn also shared several previously unpublished texts and emails from FBI agents have recently been released.

According to a letter sent by Attorney General William Barr to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Thursday, the FBI knew early on that the research compiled by ex-British intelligence agent Christopher Steele relied on a "Primary Sub-source" that had been "the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 that assessed his or her contacts with suspected Russian intelligence officers" — but still used it to obtain warrants to spy on former Trump campaign-aide Carter Page.

But, it gets even worse. Now, new leaked texts and communications from FBI agents within the department at the time of the entire Russian collusion effort were disclosed in federal court filings on Thursday. According to the court documents, FBI agents purchased "professional liability insurance" to protect themselves in January 2017, just weeks before Donald Trump was inaugurated president, because they were concerned about the agency's potentially illegal activity during the Russia collusion investigation.

"Trump was right," one FBI employee wrote in response to then-President-elect Trump's Jan 3, 2017 tweet which read: "The 'Intelligence' briefing on so-called 'Russian hacking' was delayed until Friday, perhaps more time needed to build a case. Very strange!"

Watch the video below for more details:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Chief researcher Jason Buttrill joined Glenn Beck on the radio program Thursday to discuss an "explosive" new report released Wednesday by Senate Republicans on Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, and the Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

Among other serious allegations, the 87-page report claims that "Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the wife of the former mayor of Moscow," and the richest woman in Russia.

"The transactions discussed [in the report] are designed to illustrate the depth and extent of some questionable financial transactions. Moreover, the financial transactions illustrate serious counterintelligence and extortion concerns relating to Hunter Biden and his family," the report stated.

Jason suggested the Senate's findings provide additional evidence to back allegations of a money-laundering scheme, which Glenn detailed in a four-part series about Biden's shady connections to Ukraine. Learn more on this here.

"Laundered money is very hard to track to its finality," Jason explained. "I'm sure the Biden camp is really hoping that it just looks suspicious, but [investigators] don't ever find the eventual end point. But, if they do – and it's possible they already have – this is going to be explosive, very explosive."

Watch the video below for more details:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Revolutions rarely happen overnight. The Left started laying the groundwork for November 3, 2020, the moment Hillary Clinton had to concede the 2016 election to Donald Trump. It was always solely about getting rid of President Trump — and there's a playbook for that.

Last week, Glenn Beck showed you the "Seven Pillars of Color Revolution" written by a former U.S. diplomat, which are the conditions that must be in place for a successful Eastern European-style "Color Revolution." The left seems to be pushing for a Color Revolution this election because they are using the exact same playbook.

In part two of this series, Glenn peels back the layers on the first four of these Color Revolution pillars to show you how they work and what the end goal is. And he reveals one of the architects of the playbook – a Color Revolution specialist, former ambassador, and former Obama administration official who is one of the key masterminds of this revolution.

Joining Glenn is political campaign veteran and BlazeTV host Steve Deace who says the polls that claim Biden is leading the race "are trash." We're being set up to believe that if Trump wins in spite of the polls, it must be an invalid election.

Watch the full video below:


WATCH all of Glenn's Specials on BlazeTV:

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Save $10 with promo code GLENN.