Tucker Carlson on FISA Memo: The Media Opposes Transparency When It Hurts Democrats


FNC's Tucker Carlson comments on the impending release of the memo prepared by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and wonders why anyone opposes its release:

TUCKER CARLSON: Washington has been in near-limbo all day, mesmerized by the promise that the now-famous House Intelligence Committee memo will be released at any moment.

Any second! We don't know when it turns out.

At this point, all we know about the memo is that it is four pages long, it was compiled by Intel Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, and as of tonight, it remains classified and hidden from public view.

To some who have read it, the memo exposes shocking misconduct by our intelligence and law enforcement agencies during the 2016 election-- including spying on Americans for political purposes. We can't confirm any of that -- like pretty much everyone else, we have not seen the document, but the charges are strong enough to shake public faith in some of our most important public institutions. The only way to fix that is to release the memo, so the rest of us can see the evidence and decide for ourselves what it amounts to, that's how democracy works.

It seems like an obvious solution, in fact it is the only solution, and yet for some reason the prospect or transparency has resulted in panic among the Democratic Party and its Praetorian Guard in the media.

Just a year ago, the Washington Post adopted the pompous, and yet indisputably true slogan, Democracy Dies In Darkness. Just this week, the paper dismissed the Congressional Memo as 'a hyper-partisan attempt to discredit Mueller.'

Of course, the Post would have no way of knowing that, they haven't seen the memo. They don't want you to see it either. How did "Democracy Dies In Darkness" become "Some Things Are Best Kept Secret"? It turns out that when transparency affects Democrats, the media oppose transparency.

Remember when CNN's Chris Cuomo warned viewers they would be breaking the law simply by reading John Podesta's leaked emails?

Needless to say, most government bureaucrats agree with the media on this, as The Onion put it today: FBI Warns Republican Memo Could Undermine Faith In Massive, Unaccountable Government Secret Agencies. No surprise there, most people everywhere would rather avoid responsibility if at all possible.

The federal government's transparency caucus has always been noticeably small.

The question is, are there legitimate reasons to oppose releasing the memo? Reasons that have nothing to do with craven media cheerleading for Democrats, or with Adam Schiff's career aspirations?

Only two possible legitimate reasons come to mind:

1. Are the contents of the memo provably false, and therefore libelous?

2. Would releasing the memo imperil national security?

Those are real questions, and so far the answer to both appears to be no. There is no excuse from withholding this document from the public. Claims to the contrary are partisan barking, and you ought to ignore them.

Show commentsHide Comments

Latest Political Videos

Video Archives