Judge GOP senators criticize Tucker Carlson for downplaying Jan. 6 attack

Offensive and misleading. That's how the chief of the U.S. Capitol Police is describing Fox News host Tucker Carlson's attempt to, in effect, rewrite history o the January six insurrection, describing it as a peaceful gathering speaker.

Kevin McCarthy, you may remember, gave Carlson access to tens of thousands of hours of footage from the Capitol atta Well, a number of his fellow Republican lawmakers are specifically not too happy with Fox's decisio.

To play that with Tucker Carlson downplaying downplaying the insurrection. It was a mistake, in my view, fo Fox News to depict this in a way that's completely at va with what our chief law enforcement.

Official here couple thinks. I was there on January 6th and I saw what happened. I saw the aftermath. Look, there was violence on Janu I think the footage that's avail should be made available to all and everybody should be able to see for themselves.

Just what kind of chaos we had on that day. I think it's bullshit. I was her I was down there, and I saw maybe a few tourists, a few people who got caught up i But when you see police barricad breached, when you see police officers assaulted,.

I just don't think it's helpful. He's not the only one. CNN chief congressional correspondent Mont Roger joining us now from Capito Some of you also spoke to McCart last night. What is he saying? Yeah, he defended the decision.

In fact, he did not agree with the criticism from Senator McConnell. And also the criticism from the Capitol Police chief who said that this portrayal on News of January six was offensiv it was misleading.

It was cherry picked Mitch McConnell saying he aligned himself squarely with that. And when I asked the speaker whether or not he regretted providing this footage to Tucker who attempted to whitewash, whit the events.

The speaker defended his decisio The footage that you gave Tucker last night, he went on to. So this is a mostly peaceful chaos, as he said, he downplayed Brian Sicknick's death, said it was not related to January 6t This was not an insurrection.

Do you regret giving him this cl so he could whitewash the events on that day No, I said the very beginning transp And so what I want to produce for everybody is exactly that, so that people could actually lo and see what's coming on that. W.

This horrible portrayal of what happened and that each person came come up with their own conclusio But I want I just want to make sure that I had transparency so he continued to say that he wanted.

To provide for transparency, but would not explain why he provided to Carlson, who has long had a history of downplaying the events of tha that McCarthy himself condemned immediately after that happened on the House.

Four days later. But really exposing the divide here between the House Republicans an Republicans in particular over January six, a follower of that in the role of Donald Trump.

In the party going forward. McCarthy, of course, aligning him squarely with Trump. Mitch McConnell on the other sid taking a much different approach to how that party should handle these issues going forward, all being exposed.

And over McCarthy's handling of the security footage and this attempt to provide a different light about what happened from January by Fox News and by some House Republicans as Yeah, I mean, Thom Tillis not mincing words.

They're calling it B.S.. Manu Raju, thanks so much. Well, today, newly disclosed mes from some of the biggest stars and executives at Fox News show that what they said and communicated in private cont what they told their viewers and repeatedly.

A trove of texts, emails, other made public Tuesday as part of Dominion Voting Systems, $1.6 billion, defamation lawsuits, lawsuit against the right wing c Fox News staff privately critici dismissed Trump's election fraud even though the network continue.

To promote them on the air. Take a look at these messages from November 20th between Fox h Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraha Carlson writes, Former Trump attorney Sidney Powell, who was sharing many of these lies, quote,.

Is a nut to which Ingraham appli No serious lawyer could believe what they were say But just one night later, this is what Ingraham was saying on the air. Now, legal challenges continue in a number of states. Serious questions about vote.

Counting, poll watcher access are outstand But unless the legal situation changes in a dramatic and frankly and unlikely manner, Joe Biden will be inaugurated on January 20th. Now, to say this does not mean I don't think that this election.

Was rife with problems and potential frau Despite what Tucker Carlson has behind the scenes. He is still to this day sowing doubts on air. This is from a show on Monday In retrospect, it is clear the 2020.

Election was a grave betrayal of American democracy. It is galling to be lectured about democracy by a man who took power in an el so sketchy that many Americans don't believe it was even real. Joiningme now to discuss, NPR.

Media correspondent David Folken David, good to have you on today Great to join again. So, David, based on what we're seeing from Tucker Carlson, despite the fact that now we know he was lying to his viewers.

Around the election, saying one thing in private. One thing on the air, he is still calling the election into question. Are any Murdoch owned publicatio whether it be Fox, Fox Business New York Post, Wall Street Journal,.

Or are the viewers or readers of any of those publications seeing what we're seeing here, the revelations from these court documents Oh, I think if you read The Wall Street Journal, we are getting a fairly straight news report in its pages, often.

Prominently displayed of what actually transpired. And I think you're seeing folks from The Wall Street Journal's news side trying to ensure that its readin public believes in its brand pro that of telling the news straigh without fear or favor.

It's like it's a game that Murdo He sort of separates in his mind how he treats his upscale broadsheet newspapers, like The Times of London and The Wall Street Journal from the tabloids, like The New York Post, which he treats more like Fox Ne.

Which is you're going to see the political influence throughout the entire report. Understood. Now, we should note. Is it correct Fox News has banned any discussion of thi given it is Fox News,.

Where where the majority of thes lies were shared with viewers Yeah,you saw Fox News's own chief media correspondent and anchor Howie Kurtz come forward about ten days ago and say that he was barred from discussing on his show that he disagreed with it.

But that was the corporate edict That's an extraordinary admissio because for Fox News to smother the coverage of the biggest story in media and one of the biggest stories in politics right now is a concession that they're not putting news.

Values first. Yeah.And listen, it allows the lie to continue. And it's why we see in polls why many Republican voters still believe to this day that the election was stolen. The lawsuit goes right to the to It reveals that Fox News chairma.

Rather, Fox Corp. and NewsCorp chairman Rupert Mur he repeatedly himself rejected the election conspiracy reading now Dominion lawyer aske do you believe that Dominion was engaged in a massive and coordinated effort to steal presidential election? No.

Have you ever seen any credible to suggest Dominion was engaged in a massive and coordinated eff to steal the 2020 presidential e No. So. So the boss knew it. And by the way, the questions we and he continued to answer No.

The boss knew it. Let his outlets continue to spread those lies. What are the consequences? What are the most likely consequ here in this case? Well, right at the moment, this is barreling towards a court date, a trial da.

I should say, in the middle of next month. It's a $1.6 billion defamation case brought by Dominion Voting Syste whose machines were described in and described on Fox's airwaves at times seemingly endorsed.

By a number of Fox's top stars as having thrown votes from Donald Trump than the sitting president to Jo You know,it seems likely that if they lose in court, they'll have to pay a lot. They'll appeal it. And then at that point,.

One might see something, some sort of settlement. You know,the key thing for Murdoch is he made clear in that same de he would never apologize. He didn't think they did anythin or at least that's his position. It certainly dovetails with their legal defense.

All they were doing was relaying the claims of the p in the United States, a newswort and his attorneys. But what really is happening is that they don't want to acknowledge their own viewers that they presented information they knew was false.

They're willing to pay money to kind of avoid that.

Sharing is caring!