In predictable fashion, Sean Hannity rushed to Donald Trump‘s aid on Tuesday night. The former president has been hit with his third indictment, this time for the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capital building as well as his aggressive efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. As usual, Hannity played fast and loose with the facts while railing against the “deep state” and calling for the resignation of Attorney General Merrick Garland.
“This is an incredibly weak, baseless, convoluted indictment,” Hannity ranted. “It is bizarrely centered around what is clearly protected speech, zero criminal statutes, because there are none that were applicable that are actually written into law.”
Hannity; This is an incredibly weak, baseless, convoluted indictment, it is bizarrely centered around what is clearly protected speech, zero criminal statutes, because there are none that were applicable that are actually written into law. pic.twitter.com/zhWKVUlzuw
— Acyn (@Acyn) August 2, 2023
Via Media Matters for America:
Are we now living in America where equal justice is dead? The equal application of our laws is a thing of the past? That where the shredding of our Constitution, we’re witnessing this in real time, in front of our own eyes? Is it past time to impeach Merrick Garland? Is it time to flush out all of the Democratic activists out of the bureaucracy and the deep state?
There were just a couple things wrongs with Hannity’s rant. For starters, the indictment included four criminal statutes that Trump allegedly violated. They’re listed right there in the 45-page document. And speaking of said document, the third paragraph is dedicated entirely to the issue of Trump’s first amendment rights.
“The Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won,” the indictment reads. “He was also entitled to formally challenge the results of the election through lawful and appropriate means, such as by seeking recounts or audits of the popular vote in states or filing lawsuits challenging ballots and procedures. Indeed, in many cases, the Defendant did pursue these methods of contesting the election results. His efforts to change the outcome in any state through recounts , audits, or legal challenges were uniformly unsuccessful.”
As Twitter user Kevinly Father noted, Hannity claimed he “spent an hour” reading the indictment, yet somehow he missed the above paragraph and a listing of the criminal statutes. Funny that.