Watch: The Debate Between These Two Women Gets So Heated Megyn Kelly Has To Take Them Off Screen

A Fox News Channel discussion on the topic of gun control quickly became heated when two panelists – representing opposite sides of the debate – struggled to make their respective points.

Anchor Megyn Kelly introduced the segment, asking guest Nomiki Konst what could have been done ahead of the recent on-air shooting in Virginia to prevent the gunman from accessing a firearm.

“Some of these background checks aren’t as strict as we think,” she responded, declaring that certain states have less stringent guidelines than others.

“The states that have the loose or the lax laws,” she asserted, “actually have more gun murders than in any other part of the country.”

Gun rights activist Dana Loesch disagreed with the assertion that background checks and gun registries are the key to reducing violence.

“We can follow the laws that we have on the books,” she insisted, noting that the shooters behind the massacres at Virginia Tech and in Charleston, S.C., would have been prevented from purchasing guns if the government has properly documented their histories.

Konst shot back with a statistic that the “federal gun registry has prevented 2.1 million criminals from accessing guns,” which elicited a fiery retort from Loesch.

“False,” she said. “First of all, I’m not sure where you’re getting these statistics.”

As for Konst’s insistence that the answer lies in more taxpayer funding for mental health research, Loesch said: “We just spent almost $1 trillion on Obamacare, and we’re going to sit here and seriously argue that we’re not spending enough on mental health?”

After Loesch challenged another assertion, noting the “indisputable fact” that areas with strict gun control have higher homicide rates, the two panelists began arguing simultaneously.

“This always happens,” Kelly conceded, which prompted the end of the segment.

When the remote guests were digitally removed from the screen and their impassioned dialogue silenced, Kelly concluded: “Oh, look at that! The magic of TV.”

Is increased gun control the key to reducing violence? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Watch: Angry Sheriff Clarke Just Had This EPIC Response To Dems’ Reaction To On-Air Killings

It took only a matter of hours after the horrific on-air killings of two TV journalist in Virginia for top Democrats to try to politicize the tragedy. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and others wasted no time in calling for greater federal gun control after a former colleague of two employees of WDBJ-TV shot and killed them at point-blank range.

Speaking with Sean Hannity Thursday night, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke threw the book at liberals for what he called their shameless attempt to exploit the shocking murders.

“Shame on the left, shame on the Democrats for once again exploiting misery and tragedy to pursue a political agenda,” Clarke said on the Fox news show Hannity. “Shame on the president of the United States to invoke terrorism into this horrific incident that happened in Virginia.”

The outspoken lawman who has consistently criticized Obama on a number of issues, including the president’s handling of racial strife, pointed to the U.S. Constitution in his argument that Democrats are trying to use the grief surrounding the Virginia killings as a motivator to restrict liberty.

“This document, the Constitution, protects freedom and liberty. It does not prevent horrific acts done by human beings,” Sheriff Clarke told Hannity.

And what would the popular law enforcement figure do to try to prevent gun violence, without trying to restrict access and ownership of personal firearms?

“You identify the bad guys, you arrest the bad guys, you adjudicate them and once they’re convicted, you lock them up for the longest period of time allowed by law,” Clarke asserted.

By clicking on the video above, you can watch the exchange between Sean Hannity and Sheriff David Clarke in which the Wisconsin lawman sharply criticized President Obama’s reaction to the murders that shocked viewers who saw them on live TV:

“This was a chance for the president to bring the country together, and once again, the divider-in-chief goes out and further separates us.”

Do you agree with Sheriff Clarke’s criticism of Obama, Hillary and others? Join the conversation by leaving your comment below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Watch: Fox News Host Just Asked One Question About On-Air Shooting That Many People Are Thinking

As more details surface about the life of suspected gunman Vester Flanagan, a common theme seems to be his racial aggression. A lengthy suicide note ostensibly written by the former WDBJ reporter suggests he killed two of the Virginia station’s current employees and injured a third individual as a response to a shooting earlier this year at a predominantly black Charleston, S.C., church.

Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson spoke to The Security Brief host Paul Viollis Wednesday, asking if this shooting was a hate crime.

“No, Gretchen, it’s not,” he responded. “This is quintessential workplace violence – from the behavior profile of the individual, to the actions that he displayed; from the manifesto, to the time he was terminated in 2013.”

Carlson followed up, noting that his 23-page letter dealt extensively with racial matters.

“He talks about race a lot,” she said. “He put the initials of the Charleston church shooting victims on the bullets he used.”

She went on to note that he felt “attacked for being a black man” and responded by killing two white people.

“Why is that not a hate crime?” she wondered.

Viollis contended that the shooter was “clearly delusional,” noting that such individuals often “don’t like who they are” and “make up something that will envision them as a victim.”

He went on to assert that hate crimes occur when a perpetrator is “clearly motivated by a a sense of race, color or creed.”

In response to Flanagan’s citation of the South Carolina massacre, Viollis attempted to speak for the deceased suspect.

“He saw the attention that was received for that shooter all over the country,” he said, “and that particular shooter was glorified in the news in his eyes.”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Watch: Megyn Kelly Just Gave Trump-Bashing Hispanic ‘Journalist’ Time To Spread The Lie

“The only thing I wanted to do is ask a question.” That’s what Jorge Ramos claimed with a straight face in a Wednesday-night appearance on The Kelly File. The chief anchor of the largest Spanish-language newscast in the United States and also a host on the Fusion cable network, Ramos tried to pretend that he didn’t confront, badger and level accusations against Donald Trump during a much-talked-about Tuesday news conference.

One might have gotten a hint about the tone and direction of the Ramos interview when Megyn Kelly opened the segment by asking, “What is it like to be caught in the crosshairs of a billionaire presidential front-runner?” The question was clearly a reference to Kelly’s own experience as a target of Trump’s pointed criticisms that some have called crude and unbecoming of a serious presidential candidate.

“You know exactly how it feels,” Ramos answered, before quickly moving on to defending his charge that Trump “tried to silence” him when he insisted on not just asking a question in the testy news conference, but clearly and repeatedly stating his own beliefs about illegal immigration and Donald Trump’s character.

All one has to do is watch what actually took place in the tense moments before Trump asked his security personnel to escort Ramos out of the room. The belligerent “journalist” had acted as an insistent activist, a committed advocate, telling the GOP front-runner that he could not deport illegal immigrants or undo the policy of granting birthright citizenship to anchor babies.

At one point in the conversation with Ramos, Kelly tried to defend the Hispanic anchor’s disruptive actions, telling him, “It’s not unusual for a reporter to do what you did.”

“He tried to silence me,” claimed Ramos, not mentioning that Trump later invited him back into the press room and engaged him for some five minutes in a conversation where the “newsman” continued to interrupt and loudly express his personal point of view.

Several times in the course of the interview on Fox News, Ramos charged that Trump’s actions are “dangerous.” As for the opinion of the Republican pacesetter for president, Trump has countered that Ramos was “ranting and raving like a madman” in the news conference.

By clicking on the video above, you can watch the revealing Megyn Kelly interview with Jorge Ramos. It’s interesting to note that, also on Wednesday night, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly let his audience know that he has tried time and again to book Jorge Ramos on The Factor without success.

h/t: Fox News

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Anti-Trump Pollster’s ‘Legs Are Shaking’ After Learning This About Trump And His Supporters

Already under heat for reportedly stacking a post-debate focus group with individuals critical of the GOP presidential front-runner, Fox News pollster Frank Luntz was recently forced to admit that his predictions for Donald Trump’s candidacy have been wrong.

Focus group participants largely trashed Trump’s debate performance, contrasting the gains he saw in subsequent national polls. Based on the anti-Trump rhetoric expressed by his hand-picked group, Luntz felt comfortable declaring Trump’s debate performance the “destruction” of his White House bid.

In addition to the controversial Aug. 7 focus group, Luntz has made other critical comments about the candidate. The pollster allegedly told one GOP group that Trump is “addicted” to the attention he is receiving, and another one that he has turned “what we believe into a joke.”

When the brash billionaire’s lead failed to diminish, however, Luntz assembled a new focus group – this time populated by Trump supporters. His takeaway, Luntz told reporters shortly after the session concluded, was much different than after the previous event.

He explained that the group’s 29 participants gave a number of strong reasons for supporting Trump, including one man who said he feels “someone is thinking the same way I am” when he hears the candidate speak.

Other common terms used to describe Trump included “tough” and “charismatic.”

“You guys understand how significant this is?” Luntz asked at the subsequent press conference. “This is real. I’m having trouble processing it. Like, my legs are shaking.”

After re-evaluating his position, Luntz suggested the Republican Party should do the same.

“I want to put the Republican leadership behind this mirror and let them see,” he concluded. “They need to wake up. They don’t realize how the grassroots have abandoned them. Donald Trump is punishment to a Republican elite that wasn’t listening to their grassroots.”

Can Donald Trump maintain his lead? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth