For years, with no evidence to back up their claims, CNN has attempted to brand Trump supporters as extremists who need to be dealt with.
100 Percent Fed Up reports- CNN host Alisyn Camerota asked Michigan’s even unpopular governor, Gretchen Whitmer, about “domestic terrorism” in America, asking her if she believes “in hindsight” the protests in Michigan were a “dry run” for the Capitol Hill riots on January 6th? Camerota was referring to a group of anti-lockdown protesters who legally walked into the states’ Capitol and chanted outside of the chambers where lawmakers were discussing the lockdown orders.
With a straight face, Michigan’s unhinged Democrat governor, whose tyrannical and unconstitutional lockdowns have devasted the lives of Michigan residents, responded by blaming President Trump for the protesters who were losing their jobs and businesses because of her irrational decisions. “It was encouraged by the former White House…the misinformation…the encouragement…the normalizing of this kind of domestic terrorism.” Hmmm…good to know that protests covered by our First Amendment are considered “domestic terrorism,” by the left.
Camerota continued to misrepresent Trump supporters who have protested across America over a number of issues, most of which are related to unconstitutional lockdown orders by overreaching Democrat governors. Brushing tens of thousands of Americans with a broad brush, Camerota assured her small audience that just because “President Trump is gone,” it doesn’t mean “the extremists” have disappeared.
Whitmer told Camerota that there has to be some sort of effort to hold these people “accountable,” as she completely made up some idiotic narrative that conversation within the Republican Party is “are you an insurrectionist, or are you not?” Whitmer, who marched with the violent Black Lives Matter movement at the height of the pandemic, was clearly working to define Republicans as terrorists, as she turned to the alleged plot by six men who, according to FBI reports plotted to kidnap Governor Whitmer from her vacation home in northern Michigan.
According to a report by The Federalist, a lawyer representing one of the accused men is suggesting the FBI agent set these men up, and that it was the FBI informant who hatched the idea to kidnap the governor.
The Federalist covered the October 13, 2020 trial of one of the six men accused of plotting to kidnap Governor Whitmer – Scott Graham, who is representing 26-year-old Kaleb Franks, argued in court there was no real plan to capture Whitmer. Instead, he said the accused were merely acting as “militia wannabees” who engaged in “big talk between crackpots,” according to the Detroit Free Press. In other words, Graham said, those charged in a plot to kidnap Whitmer were “people who talk a lot … but are never going to do anything.”
“Have you ever dealt with big talkers?” Graham asked an FBI Special Agent Richard Trask during cross-examination. “There’s kind of a military-wanna-be theme that runs between militias.”
Graham specifically asked Trask about his testimony that 13 militia members were planning to steal Whitmer from her vacation home and leave her in the middle of Lake Michigan or try the governor for treason in a nearby state. Trask, the paper reported, said he couldn’t offer a specific answer but that there were audio recordings of the members discussing their plans.
Graham argued in court that it was the FBI’s own informant involved with this group that was actively encouraging the others to engage in illegal activity.
“One of the most active leaders was your informant,” Graham charged.
Gary Springstead, who is representing 24-year-old Ty Garbin, also said the use of an informant raised suspicions that without FBI involvement the “plot” would never have gone anywhere.
“(I)t’s become an issue in certain cases where the informant pushes some of the information, and the court and the government and the defense attorneys have to be leery of that,” Springstead told reporters outside the courthouse. “Because their job is not to assess what the government informant wants them to do, it’s to assess the accused’s intent and what they actually planned on doing.”