How Fox News Not so Subtly Endorses the Idea of Killing Hillary Clinton

For years Fox News has catered to the “kill the president” crowd, even cracking jokes about killing the president on air, and that call continues for the Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton. And they’re happy to give these people air time.

Back in May, frequent Fox News guest Ted Nugent, shared a fake video showing Hillary Clinton being murdered by a pistol-wielding Bernie Sanders during a presidential debate,” an action that would have gotten any liberal banned with demands of apologies:

And no, that did not stop Fox News from having Nugent visit them, and Nugent just tweeted the other day that Democrats are “the sickos.”

Right. We’ll file that appropriately, Ted.

On Thursday, conservative wet dreams continued as Deirdre Bolton of Risk & Reward with Deirdre Bolton welcomed New Hampshire State Rep. Al Baldasaro. The pro-Trump Baldasaro has previously said Clinton should be “shot for treason” because of her use of a private email server.

Her opening words damned the entire Fox network apparatus:

“Al, great to have you here.”

Yes, a major news network says it’s great to have a guest who wants someone killed for no other reason than he claims she’s guilty of crimes Fox News and other conservatives have conjured up out of thin air.

Baldasaro makes a big deal about the Constitution, but the Constitution doesn’t say using a private email server is treason. He insists “in his opinion” that it is, and therefore that she should be shot.

It would be a messy world if we all just made up laws as we went along and killed people for it, wouldn’t it?

Watch the interview courtesy of Media Matters for America:

DIERDRE BOLTON (HOST): He was the first in the spotlight after sticking up for Donald Trump’s contributions to vets. Then the secret service questioned him at the RNC for saying that Hillary Clinton should be “shot for treason,” over use of a private email server.
 
[…]
 
Al, great to have you here. You have had have an intense a few weeks. Did you have to re- assure Secret Service you’re not planning to harm anyone physically? Specifically, Hillary Clinton?
 
AL BALDASARO: Nobody actually talked to me at the convention. it was — I called on the phone. when I got home to the Secret Service here in New Hampshire. I was in the same hotel with all the Secret Service, and Donald Trump. Freedom of speech is a beautiful thing when you quote the law. You know, the US Code and the Constitution.
 
BOLTON: Well, as a vet, we do take your perspective a little bit more seriously perhaps than just somebody who hadn’t served. But do you have second thoughts about the comments that you made?
 
BALDASARO: No. Why would I have second thoughts? Because what she did with the e-mails with agents, special — you know, DEA, or Secret Service, or FBI agents that are in other countries, that could’ve been my son on that e-mail, who’s in the Marines, who served in Iraq. If those e-mails got in the wrong hands, like they said her emails were hacked, she knowingly had those on a private server. And my opinion, as a military man, I speak for myself as a veteran, as a state representative. That’s treason. That’s aid and comfort to the enemy. What don’t the liberal media get when I said that?
 
BOLTON: Alright, it’s a fair point. But obviously there are many who would say “Listen, she went and she answered questions in front of Congress, and the matter is settled.”
 
BALDASARO: She’s above the law. The matter may be a settled with the FBI and the protection from Obama, and the Attorney General, but the American people are smarter than you think. I hear it all the time in my district, they said “Al, you say things that I only wish I could say.” So, I stand by what I said. I never said she should be assassinated. What I said be — she should go in front of the firing squad for treason. What that means to the slow people is that you gotta be found guilty.
 
BOLTON: Alright.

What takes place via Fox News is a sort of “I’m not saying, I’m just saying” routine, where plausible deniability is maintained while the suggestion is planted that somebody should be killed without actually saying they should be killed.

Baldasaro’s defense that “I never said she should be assassinated. What I said be — she should go in front of the firing squad for treason,” is not only offensive but indefensible.

If Baldasaro were as knowledge about American laws as he claims, he would know we have these things called “trials,” which are proceeded not by “opinions” but by investigations and not feelings but fact.

As he is no doubt aware, people more knowledgeable than him have found that Hillary’s actions do not even warrant charges being leveled against her, so the proposal to shoot her for a crime with which she has neither been charged nor found guilty, is about as vile as it gets.