DWS tries to silence RFK with smears after his opening statement at CENSORSHIP hearing

In what will likely go down as one of the most surreal moments in modern House of Representatives history, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) moved to censor Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., mere moments after he delivered his opening remarks to the Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government detailing how he has been the victim of censorship.

Kennedy was invited by House Republicans to testify, and, in what appeared like a surge of pure desperation, the Democrats did everything they could to keep him from speaking.

As American Wire News reported, the event kicked off with Democrat Rep. Stacey Plaskett launching into a petty notation of the amount of time Kennedy would be allowed to speak.

“If you want to cut him off and censor him some more,” Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) shot back, “you’re welcome to do it.”

In his opening statement, Kennedy recalled how YouTube “de-platformed” him five minutes into his candidacy announcement speech “when I mentioned Paul Revere.”

“I didn’t talk about vaccines in that speech,” he said. “I didn’t talk about anything that is a verboten subject. I just was talking about my campaign and the things, the conversation, that we ought to be having with each other as Americans, but I was shut down. And that is why the First Amendment is important.”


Respectful debate, Kennedy said, “is the fertilizer, it’s the water, it’s the sunlight for our democracy. We need to be talking to each other.”

Kennedy held up a letter signed by 102 Democrats on Thursday who claimed he was in violation of House rules “aimed at preventing defamatory or degrading testimony,” Fox News Digital reports. Alas, they were unsuccessful in their attempt to prevent him from testifying.

Kennedy called the move “antithetical” to the Democratic Party.

“This itself is evidence of the problem that this hearing was convened to address,” he stated. “This is an attempt to censor a censorship hearing.”

And after Biden’s opponent finished his remarks, Wasserman Schultz, incredibly, tried to do it again.

“I move we remove into an executive session because Mr. Kennedy has repeatedly made despicable anti-semitic and anti-Asian comments as recently as last week,” she said, claiming that his testimony would defame or degrade others, a violation of House rules.

On Friday, Kennedy was blasted by Democrats for comments he made while speaking at a press dinner concerning a controversial theory that COVID-19 is a bioweapon created by a nefarious government to target victims based on their ethnicity.

“COVID-19 — there is an argument that it is ethnically targeted. COVID-19 attacks certain races disproportionately. COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese,” he said, adding, “We don’t know whether it was deliberately targeted or not but there are papers out there that show the racial or ethnic differential and impact.”

The media and far-left organizations seized upon the comments, accusing Kennedy of being an antisemitic conspiracy theorist.

“The claim that COVID-19 was a bioweapon created by the Chinese or Jews to attack Caucasians and black people is deeply offensive and feeds into sinophobic and anti-semitic conspiracy theories about COVID-19 that we have seen evolve over the last three years,” the ultra-progressive Anti-Defamation League asserted.

The following day, Kennedy denied in a tweet ever having “suggested that the COVID-19 virus was targeted to spare Jews” and explained that he’d simply been discussing a legitimate scientific study.

Offering nothing but her outrage, Wasserman Schultz’s motion was immediately met with a motion to table her motion, at which point, she demanded a “roll call vote on the motion to table.”

Ultimately, thanks to the narrow Republican House majority, Wasserman Schultz was shot down in a 10-8 vote.

Online, the motion was met with disbelief from even Twitter owner Elon Musk, who responded with a single exclamation point.


“Censoring someone during a hearing on censorship,” stated one user. “Make it make sense.”

Melissa Fine

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles