<< PART TWO FOLLOWS BELOW >>
This is basically an excoriation of the idea that the “Central Park Five” are innocent. Psalm 97:10 says, “Let those who love the LORD hate evil.” I think of that when Trump mentions society “hating” these rapists (12:05 mark) Larry Elder plays how Van “commie” Jones and Chris Cuomo deal with one of the few Republicans left over at CNN (a MUST read article about CNN can be found at the WASHINGTON TIMES) who differed on the “Central Park Five.” Around the 6:00 mark Larry interviews (from last year) Ann Coulter, and then later (at the 14:41 mark) reads from a DAILY BEAST article, “The Myth of the Central Park Five”
Ann Coulter has a couple good articles on the topic:
- What You Won’t Read in The Papers About the “Central Park Five” (April 2014)
- Central Park Rapists: Trump Was Right (July 2018)
The refusal to allow dissenting views is a BIG issue at CNN and MSNBC. In fact, Larry Elder says this episode where Lawrence O’Donnell refused to let John O’Neill of Swift Boat fame speak is what got him a job on MSNBC. NOT ONLY does the MSM censor conservative and Republicans, by doing so they perpetuate the innocence of thugs and killers. Thus, bringing a net evil to society in various ways (attacking truth, attacking innocent civilians, allowing criminal to be emboldened).
- 7 Things You Need To Know About The Central Park Jogger Case (DAILY WIRE, August 2016)
- Donald Trump Isn’t Alone in Believing “Central Park Five” Are Guilty (LAW and CRIME, October 2017, )
- The “Central Park Five”: Still Guilty (FRONT-PAGE MAGAZINE, August 2014)
Larry Elder reads from various sources, one being the Wall Street Journal piece by Linda Fairstein entitled, “Netflix’s False Story of the Central Park Five: Ava DuVernay’s miniseries wrongly portrays them as totally innocent—and defames me in the process“. A previous upload can really be PART ONE to this audio: “Yes, The Central Park Five Are Guilty“. I highly suggest LEGAL INSURRECTION’S post on this topic as well.
Enjoy… I will share a thought from a comment from part one:
- “The comments are filled with people who didn’t listen to the video and didn’t look at the evidence independently.”
I can only assume the same will happen here.