Pelosi Death Threats Linked to Fox News

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Washington, DC - Today, after the mother of Gregory Giusti -- the man arrested for allegedly threatening Speaker Nancy Pelosi's life over health care reform -- stated that Fox News was a factor in her son's alleged actions, Media Matters for America released the following statement:

"The violent language and scare tactics we see on Fox News every day have real consequences," said Eric Burns, President of Media Matters. "This is a network that ran a 14-month campaign against health care reform, which left their viewers confused and angry. The question is, now that one of those viewers has allegedly threatened Speaker Pelosi's life over health care reform, is Fox News going to do anything about it?"

http://mediamatters.org/press/releases/201004080021

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Assistant U.S. Attorney Cynthia Frey said in court that Giusti was convicted of making harassing phone calls in 1991 and had numerous convictions for theft. Giusti said that he may be suffering from bipolar disorder and hasn't had access to treatment, Frey said.

"He is believed to be a danger, at least to a specific person" cited in the complaint, Frey said in requesting that Giusti remain in custody.

Giusti at first denied calling Pelosi in an interview with federal agents on March 30. Then, in a written statement, he said that he called Pelosi about a half dozen times, "called her a witch and said I did not like her pushing the health-care bill down" peoples' throats, according to an FBI affidavit filed in court today.

Giusti, who today was led into the courtroom in handcuffs dressed in a gray T-shirt, didn't enter a plea. Other than stating his name and age, he didn't speak in court.

Halfway House

Elizabeth Falk, a federal public defender representing Giusti, said the prior harassment conviction was for a misdemeanor charge for "offensive words in a public place." She asked Zimmerman to order Giusti to a halfway house where he wouldn't have access to a telephone.

"Given the information I know, I'm not going to," Zimmerman responded. "Some of these threats are pretty serious."

Giusti may need a mental evaluation, Zimmerman said, saying he would consider ordering such a review at a detention hearing scheduled for April 12. Falk said she would object to an order for a mental review.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/04/08/bloomberg1376-L0KTTR0D9L35-1.DTL#ixzz0kXzdBnmk

[scandal 951]

Washington, DC - Today, after the mother of Gregory Giusti -- the man arrested for allegedly threatening Speaker Nancy Pelosi's life over health care reform -- stated that Fox News was a factor in her son's alleged actions, Media Matters for America released the following statement:

"The violent language and scare tactics we see on Fox News every day have real consequences," said Eric Burns, President of Media Matters. "This is a network that ran a 14-month campaign against health care reform, which left their viewers confused and angry. The question is, now that one of those viewers has allegedly threatened Speaker Pelosi's life over health care reform, is Fox News going to do anything about it?"

http://mediamatters.org/press/releases/201004080021

I'm trying to connect your thoughts here Bill.

You post a snippet containing an accusation that Fox News is at least indirectly complicit in a serious threat of violence.

And you post a photo of Nazis exerting authoritarian power.

What is the implication that you are trying to draw? That by making a public statement critical of Fox, Eric Burns the President of Media Matters is chilling speech (presumably by calling for Fox to self-censor its programming) in a way reminiscent of Nazi tactics?

If so, you've gone around the bend and over the line just one time too far for my tastes. If you are indeed suggesting that criticizing Fox amounts to Nazi thuggery, that's an insulting both to Americans exercising their Free Speech rights, and to victims of actual Nazi persecution.

If not, and if I've misunderstood whatever your (admittedly vague) implication is supposed to be, I await your explanation of what on Earth you might possibly mean by the bizarre posting of this photo along with this article.

I suspect you are just trying to bait us to get a juicy thread going, by purposefully acting outrageously. I have no problem with your being a troll, but I'd prefer if you leave Nazi related materials out of it. That really does piss me off.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I'm trying to connect your thoughts here Bill.

You post a snippet containing an accusation that Fox News is at least indirectly complicit in a serious threat of violence.

And you post a photo of Nazis exerting authoritarian power.

What is the implication that you are trying to draw? That by making a public statement critical of Fox, Eric Burns the President of Media Matters is chilling speech (presumably by calling for Fox to self-censor its programming) in a way reminiscent of Nazi tactics?

If so, you've gone around the bend and over the line just one time too far for my tastes. If you are indeed suggesting that criticizing Fox amounts to Nazi thuggery, that's an insulting both to Americans exercising their Free Speech rights, and to victims of actual Nazi persecution.

If not, and if I've misunderstood whatever your (admittedly vague) implication is supposed to be, I await your explanation of what on Earth you might possibly mean by the bizarre posting of this photo along with this article.

I suspect you are just trying to bait us to get a juicy thread going, by purposefully acting outrageously. I have no problem with your being a troll, but I'd prefer if you leave Nazi related materials out of it. That really does piss me off.

We have to learn from history, whether, or not, the examples given are unpleasant. You should click the link, and see the comments made by those that read that propaganda rag. Then tell me we have nothing to fear from jack booted thugs shutting down dissent in America. Or, do you think a certain prolific poster is just one sick individual, not typical of the left?

If the left is afraid of the reactionary right, can the right be afraid of the radical left, now firmly in control of the reins of government?

[luckytxn 2,263]

I see with the mid terms and the oncoming slaughter of the Socialists politically they are trying their hardest to demonize any threats. Good luck with that.

[scandal 951]

We have to learn from history, whether, or not, the examples given are unpleasant. You should click the link, and see the comments made by those that read that propaganda rag. Then tell me we have nothing to fear from jack booted thugs shutting down dissent in America. Or, do you think a certain prolific poster is just one sick individual, not typical of the left?

If the left is afraid of the reactionary right, can the right be afraid of the radical left, now firmly in control of the reins of government?

Oh, I did click the link. And what I saw was (i) a synopsis of the charges against Gregory Giusti (ii) a quotation from Giusti's mother in which she expressed her concern that Fox was among the factors that set off her son on a path that led to his arrest (iii) a collection of episodes in which on-air Fox personalities made remarks that appear extreme, and which presumably in the eyes of Media Matters are inflammatory.

NOWHERE in the article does Media Matters suggest that Fox News should be censored. NOWHERE do they call for government, police, official agents, or citizen vigilantes to take any action WHATSOEVER against Fox, against Giusti, against his mother, against Tea Paryters, or against anyone.

ALL Media Matters did was to write a piece of online journalism which brings together the three threads listed above, and invite readers to draw their own conclusions as to whether Fox is well-behaved and reasonable, or is indeed inciting violence.

So --on the one hand we have Media Matters writing an online essay, expressing an opinion in the grand tradition of American free speech.

And on the other hand, we have an image armed thugs of the Third Reich not merely expressing opinions, but forcefully closing a Jewish shop and persecuting Jews, thereby denying them their most basic civil liberties.

And then we have you, Bill, trying to convince us that the two are somehow morally equivalent on some level.

Bill -- I'm coming around to seeing what Steve has seen in you. You're off your fuckin rocker if you think that in any way these two things are remotely connected, and that it is anything other than outrageous to link them to each other.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Oh, I did click the link. And what I saw was (i) a synopsis of the charges against Gregory Giusti (ii) a quotation from Giusti's mother in which she expressed her concern that Fox was among the factors that set off her son on a path that led to his arrest (iii) a collection of episodes in which on-air Fox personalities made remarks that appear extreme, and which presumably in the eyes of Media Matters are inflammatory.

NOWHERE in the article does Media Matters suggest that Fox News should be censored. NOWHERE do they call for government, police, official agents, or citizen vigilantes to take any action WHATSOEVER against Fox, against Giusti, against his mother, against Tea Paryters, or against anyone.

ALL Media Matters did was to write a piece of online journalism which brings together the three threads listed above, and invite readers to draw their own conclusions as to whether Fox is well-behaved and reasonable, or is indeed inciting violence.

So --on the one hand we have Media Matters writing an online essay, expressing an opinion in the grand tradition of American free speech.

And on the other hand, we have an image armed thugs of the Third Reich not merely expressing opinions, but forcefully closing a Jewish shop and persecuting Jews, thereby denying them their most basic civil liberties.

And then we have you, Bill, trying to convince us that the two are somehow morally equivalent on some level.

Bill -- I'm coming around to seeing what Steve has seen in you. You're off your fuckin rocker if you think that in any way these two things are remotely connected, and that it is anything other than outrageous to link them to each other.

It sorta depends on your perspective. Whether you want to admit it or not, we live in dangerous times, and the Republic is in danger of failing. Free speech is necessary for an informed electorate, and in case you haven't been following behind the scenes, there is building an attempt to take away that right.

[Peikko 1,575]

Rubbish. No one is trying to take away anyone' right to free speech and to use such scare tactics for political gain is the problem.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Rubbish. No one is trying to take away anyone' right to free speech and to use such scare tactics for political gain is the problem.

Really?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs5CL3XscNw

[PhiLandShiR 18]

Rubbish. No one is trying to take away anyone' right to free speech and to use such scare tactics for political gain is the problem.

[Peikko 1,575]

Really?

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=hs5CL3XscNw

Really what? People say moronic things all the time. You do not have to believe any of it.

[scandal 951]

It sorta depends on your perspective. Whether you want to admit it or not, we live in dangerous times, and the Republic is in danger of failing. Free speech is necessary for an informed electorate, and in case you haven't been following behind the scenes, there is building an attempt to take away that right.

I responded to you twice in this thread in full paragraph length, trying to give you the benefit of the doubt for what appeared to be an outrageous stance.

You respond with soundbites and youtube clips.

Go f yourself.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I responded to you twice in this thread in full paragraph length, trying to give you the benefit of the doubt for what appeared to be an outrageous stance.

You respond with soundbites and youtube clips.

Go f yourself.

The lines are being drawn, putting brother against brother. So much for changing how things get done in Washington, or anywhere else. How's that working out for you?