wallace, Nicolle deadline WH

2 L no h

SEE MMA

---

THE BEST PEOPLE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Xh69HTkd24

The emperor is buck-ass naked!” Nicolle Wallace on Trump's MELTDOWN in plain sight

MS NOW

190,750 views Apr 20, 2026

The Best People with Nicolle Wallace

Sherrilyn Ifill joins Nicolle Wallace on “The Best People” for a wide-ranging conversation about President Trump's impact on America and why we will get through it -- but it "will get worse" before it gets better. They talk about how the Supreme Court, in ruling against the public interest and for maximum executive power, have become their own “Frankenstein monster.” Sherrilyn also reflects on the project before us in Trump’s aftermath: “part of what we have to do is to reexamine our definition of what it means to be a responsible citizen in this country.”

an 5 25

..."MAGA went from being, you know, perhaps a surprisingly effective political slogan on a hat to being like the biggest sort of subversive punchline of irony that I've ever seen in politics: Making China look good and like the better, more responsible actor. Making Europe the magnet for science and research," she said. "These are the real consequences of Trump's second term."

...

---

MMA FEVER SWAMP EXPLAN

February 17, 2025 edition of MSNBC's Deadline: White House

NICOLLE WALLACE (HOST): Back to Project 2025 which was so wildly unpopular that Donald Trump said he had never heard of it. After deporting people in this country illegally who committed violent crimes, you have a majority of Americans who oppose everything else, majority of Americans oppose retribution if it means that FBI agents are purged or prosecutors are purged, and the IRS having more reach and having more political people with more fingers and grubby hands on your personal data is almost universally opposed.

What is going on?

ANGELO CARUSONE: Yeah, I mean, and Project 2025 sort of teed this up. Their proposal for sort of getting to where we are right now was to, and the objective, and that's the thing, the objectives were stated pretty clearly, which was to increase the politicization of the IRS so that it could be another instrument of revenge, and that's the important thing to consider here.

:{:{A lot of these initial actions are as much about sort of aggregating and consolidating power as possible, but the through line, the part that he's appealing to and It's not the majority of Americans, it's the most intense sort of fervent part of Americans that have been pickled in misinformation and rage for decades. That’s who he’s appealing to here. That’s why he announced his campaign in Waco which is a site of an attack against the government, it’s a symbol.}:

It’s to say we are going to be revenge. And so part of it was to turn the IRS into that and what they were proposing was adding in additional appointees into the IRS. It’s one of the agencies that has very few. I think it’s one or two, they wanted to add an additional seven and that was to help politicize it to speed it along. And what DOGE provides and it provides it not in this context but also more broadly, is essentially an accelerant for Project 2025's objectives and policies and that's that's really the difference maker here is that something that was already going to move at breakneck speed is actually going to speed up quite a bit.

And the other part that’s illuminating – why the IRS, why this data, what’s the point? Sarah sort of got to it about a bunch, when she was talking about how it could be weaponized and deployed and as a tool to shrink civic spaces. And so to really understand why they were going after the IRS in Project 2025 and now it’s that you have to look at it from the perspective of somebody that has been sitting in the right-wing fever swamps for a while. And if you have been, if you’re a consumer of the same kind of content Trump consumes every day what you believe is that there’s a massive conspiracy by liberal billionaires and the deep state to fund protesters, to feed, to fuel the deep state attacks on you, to turn the IRS into an instrument of revenge against conservatives over the past few years.

So what this is designed to do is validate those falsehoods and then operationalize them. And that’s the scary part.

---

AN 12 24

Rick Wilson, the former GOP political operative turned critic of Donald Trump and MAGA, has defeated a defamation suit filed by Michael Flynn, briefly Trump’s national security adviser, involving social media posts tying Flynn to Russia and the Qanon conspiracy theory.

Following a January trial, a Sarasota County trial judge ruled that Flynn, also a retired lieutenant general, failed to prove that Lincoln Project co-founder and Tallahassee resident Wilson had defamed him.

On Wednesday, the Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the decision.

Wilson argued that his messages were protected by the First Amendment as opinion or rhetorical hyperbole; the trial and appeals courts agreed.

“We have the privilege of living in a country with a ‘profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks,’” Judge Susan Rothstein-Youakim wrote for a panel also including judges Darryl Casanueva and Laurence Silberman.

“Like it or not, such attacks are a characteristic feature of our democracy — regardless of the political persuasion of the speaker and regardless of the political persuasion of the public figure on the receiving end of that speech,” the opinion continues. “As the trial court noted, Wilson’s tweets may not have been polite, and they may not have been fair. But the First Amendment required neither, and so we affirm.”

Flynn sought $50 million in damages and an order for Wilson to stop “defaming” him. Instead, he has been ordered by the court to pay Wilson’s appellate fees — which, Wilson wrote, amount to “Many zeroes. Six figures.”

“Their decision wasn’t just a win for me — it was a powerful affirmation of free speech,” Wilson said in his newsletter. “Not the warped, Elon-flavored ‘The Nazis had some good points’ free speech MAGA Twitter loves to celebrate, but actual free speech: my right to call out Mike Flynn’s character, conduct, and record.”

Ukraine invasion

Wilson’s tweets came in response to Flynn’s reaction following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

“My ‘offense?’ I tweeted ‘Putin Employee Mike Flynn’ after he tried some shameless Vladwashing of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. And their second ‘pillar’ — and I use that word as loosely as possible — was that I retweeted Jim Stewardson, who (in part) referred to Flynn as ‘Q’ of QAnon fame,” Wilson wrote Thursday in his Substack newsletter. “I kept imagining the legal implications if a retweet could be found to be defamatory. The world would be in some deep legal waters.”

Flynn has had a number of connections to Russia. He served 22 days as national security adviser but Trump fired him after concluding Flynn had lied to the FBI and Vice President Mike Pence about discussing U.S. sanctions placed by Barack Obama on Russia with the Russian government before taking office. Additionally, Flynn accepted a speaking engagement with RT, Russia Today, in Moscow in 2015, receiving $45,000, NBC reported.

Plain meaning

Flynn’s arguments focused on the plain meanings of the words Wilson used but the appellate judges replied that the context was crucial.

“And stripped from the rest of the tweet, Wilson’s statement may indeed appear to be making a factual claim about Flynn’s economic relationship with Putin,” the opinion reads. “But that is not what a reasonable reader of Wilson’s Twitter feed would think Wilson was trying to communicate. Rather, whether Flynn gets a regular paycheck from the Russian Federation — like Putin’s secretary perhaps — just isn’t Wilson’s point.”

The court said Flynn provided no evidence that Wilson acted with legal malice, nor could the Qanon statement be proven true or false.

“We agree with the trial court that no reasonable jury could find that Wilson defamed Flynn through the retweet of ‘FYI, Mike Flynn is Q,'” the judges wrote.

‘Lawfare’

Wilson wrote that the case exemplified the use of “lawfare” by the MAGA movement to intimidate critics.

“Flynn’s crusade against me is just one stitch in the broader MAGA tapestry of lawfare. Whether it’s their suits against the Federal Government, NBC, CNN, Nicolle Wallace, Andrew Weissmann, Fred Wellman, MeidasTouch, Jim Stewardson, or anyone else who dares to speak the truth, the strategy is clear: silence the critics of Trump World by any means necessary, ” he wrote.

“Thankfully, the lower court — and now the DCA — disagreed. Free speech isn’t a one-way street, no matter how hard Flynn and his ilk try to rewrite the rules.”

Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: info@floridaphoenix.com.

---

src?

Legal Warfare: MSNBC Host Nicolle Wallace Scores Small Victory in Ret. General Michael Flynn's Defamation Lawsuit

nicolle wallace wants ret general michael flynns defamation lawsuit tossed pp

Source: MSNBC;mega

Douglas Montero

:{April 1 2024,

MSNBC and TV talker Nicolle Wallace convinced a federal judge to move the bombshell lawsuit filed by former U.S. National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, RadarOnline.com has learned.

Wallace and Andrew Weissmann, a legal analyst for the network, were sued by Flynn after they accused the retired general of allegedly playing a role in the January 6 insurrection and lying to the FBI during the Russian election interference investigation in a 2023 podcast show.

According to court obtained by RadarOnline.com, Wallace and Weissmann, argued that Flynn filed the lawsuit in his home state of Florida which doesn’t have jurisdiction over the case since the podcast was broadcast from New York City.

MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace was sued by retired Lt. General Michael Flynn.

“This Court does not have jurisdiction over Wallace and Weissmann or venue over Plaintiff’s claims, and this action belongs in New York in any event,” the motion to dismiss stated.

“Individual Defendants live and work in New York. They have no substantial connections to Florida. They recorded a podcast in New York for MSNBC, which is also headquartered in New York. They did not conduct any activities in Florida that gave rise to the underlying causes of action. The challenged statements relate to Plaintiff’s conduct in Washington, D.C.

“In sum, the State of Florida has nothing to do with [Flynn’s] claims,” the court documents stated.

trump advisor michael flynn blame jews deportation concentration camps jpg

Source: MEGA

The former National Security Advisor claims he was defamed in a 2023 podcast.

Flynn filed a 13-page federal lawsuit in Tampa just one month after Wallace and Weissmann, former prosecutor and top deputy to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, allegedly bad-mouthed him during the podcast titled: “Prosecuting Donald Trump.”

“These are insidious lies,” Flynn declared in the lawsuit. “Defendants were aware these statements were false but still chose to smear General Flynn to advance their careers as partisan political pundits.”

The lawsuit also claimed the talking heads “publicly impugned General Flynn’s reputation, using his platform on MSNBC, along with political pundit Defendant Nicolle Wallace, to claim that General Flynn plotted an insurrection and that he in fact was guilty of the bogus charge of lying to the FBI.”

Never miss a story — sign up for the RadarOnline.com newsletter to get your daily dose of dope. Daily. Breaking. Celebrity news. All free.

---

msnbc

trump's defamation case against ABC after Carroll verdict can proceed

A federal judge in Florida discussed the differences between "rape" and "sexual abuse," the latter of which Trump was found liable for in New York.

July 24, 2024,

By Jordan Rubin

After Donald Trump was found liable last year for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll, the federal judge overseeing that New York case explained that the jury had essentially found that Trump had raped her, as that term is commonly understood. Nonetheless, a federal judge in Florida has allowed Trump’s defamation claim against ABC and George Stephanopoulos to proceed, based on the anchor’s use of the term “rape” to describe the jury’s verdict.

Here’s why.

As a refresher, the Carroll jury found that Trump had sexually abused and defamed her, but it didn’t find that Trump had raped her. The New York federal judge who presided over that case, Lewis Kaplan, downplayed the distinction when he rejected Trump’s challenge to the jury’s multimillion dollar award as excessive, reasoning that just because the jury declined to find that Carroll had been raped under New York law, that didn’t mean she failed to prove Trump raped her “as many people commonly understand the word.” Kaplan likewise rejected Trump’s defamation claim against Carroll for her saying that he had raped her.

This new decision stems from Stephanopoulos’ March interview with Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., in which he questioned her support for Trump despite him being “found liable for rape.” Stephanopoulos repeated that phrase several times during the interview. ABC and Stephanopoulos argued that the former president’s defamation claim is foreclosed by the New York court’s findings. But on Wednesday, Chief Judge Cecilia Altonaga of the Southern District of Florida rejected the defense motion to dismiss Trump’s case. (If Altonaga’s name sounds familiar, that may be because the George W. Bush appointee reportedly urged U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon to step aside from Trump’s classified documents case.)

In Trump’s defamation suit, Altonaga distinguished Carroll’s claim that Trump had raped her from Stephanopoulos’ characterization of the jury verdict as having found that Trump had raped her. The judge determined that a reasonable jury could interpret the anchor’s statements as defamatory.

Yet, she made clear that she wasn’t necessarily agreeing that Trump had been defamed; rather, the judge’s legal determination was that the defense didn’t present a strong enough argument to dismiss Trump’s case at this stage of litigation.

“Defendants may very well convince a reasonable factfinder to follow Judge Kaplan’s reasoning or to adopt other reasoning leading to the conclusion that Stephanopoulos’s statements were not defamatory,” Altonaga wrote, adding that a jury that views the segment may find sufficient context to conclude Trump wasn’t defamed.

In some respects, the ruling is like another recent Trump defamation win in Florida. In that state court case, he beat a motion to dismiss his claim against Pulitzer Prize Board members and staff, related to a statement about his 2016 campaign’s ties to Russia. As with the Carroll-related claim, the rejection of that motion to dismiss doesn’t mean that Trump will ultimately prevail — only that his case can proceed.

---

[### Judge says Maddow, other MSNBC hosts made 'verifiably ...

Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com › media › judge-says-maddo...](https://www.foxnews.com/media/judge-says-maddow-msnbc-hosts-verifiably-false-about-doctor-suing-defamation)

Jul 10, 2024 — NBC faces a defamation lawsuit after a judge ruled that MSNBC hosts made “verifiably false" statements about a doctor performing unnecessary ...

[### Rachel Maddow, other MSNBC hosts face $30M ...

New York Post

https://nypost.com › 2024/07/11 › media › rachel-mad...](https://nypost.com/2024/07/11/media/rachel-maddow-other-msnbc-hosts-face-30m-defamation-trial-from-ice-doctor-they-called-uterus-collector/)

Jul 11, 2024 — A defamation lawsuit against NBCUniversal is headed to trial after a Georgia judge ruled that Rachel Maddow, Nicolle Wallace, ...

---

===

---

November 6, 2024, edition of MSNBC's Deadline: White House

NICOLLE WALLACE (HOST): We're back with Ian, Angelo and Tim. I mean, I don't want to embarrass you, but we have been talking a little bit about how crippling it is to contemplate, Angelo, that the substance of Project 2025 — I feel like one of the great accomplishments of the summer was that because of your work and some great work in The New York Times and other places and Taraji P. Henson, Project 2025 was front and center before the country. And I'm sure no one read all 900 pages but you. But I read a couple hundred. And it's scary, you know, S-H-I-T. And people voted for Trump knowing about Project 2025. Tell me where your thoughts are today about that.

ANGELO CARUSONE (MEDIA MATTERS PRESIDENT): I think one of the tie-ins with the early discussion about democracy too is many of people voting for Trump also thought they were voting for democracy, in a way. Because in this — and part of the, one of the signature cruxes of Project 2025 is this idea that we're going to go in, execute schedule F, which is the ability to fire tens of thousands of federal employees, and obviously that, for Project 2025 that's about giving the effort control. It's sort of removing all the potential obstacles, as they see it, and you can then put in your people and move forward, move fast.

But for one of the audience — for the larger right-wing audience and national audience, I mean, we have a country that is pickled in right-wing misinformation and rage. And one of the stories that they've heard, not for one year but for eight years, is that there is a deep state, a universe of people in government that are out there that have the real power. They're the ones with the real power. They're taking power away from you, the individual. And the only person that can give you back that power is Donald Trump. He's going to — and that's why they hate him so much, because he's going to come in and he's going to get rid of them once and for all. He's not going to be duped again like last time. And he's going to give you back your power.

And so, yeah, there's a lot of policies to it and it's all scary, and we can get into it. But at its core, this is a discussion about democracy. I'm not so blinded to think that they all are deeply pro-democracy. Many of them don't believe in democracy as a principle and they want something more autocratic and authoritarian. But there's another part, a much larger part, that actually believe that a vote for Donald Trump is a vote for democracy because they have validated and internalized the idea that there's an anti-democratic secret cabal that is actually preventing their desires and exercise of democratic power from being implemented and put in place, and that only Trump can restore their power.

And that's the part that's so frightening about this, is that it not just means that Project 2025 becomes more of a reality, and that a lot of the things we see of it, going after opponents and everything else, in their minds, in many people's minds, that will be acceptable because those — they have it coming to them. And the through line, the foundation upon where all of this is, is a large right-wing misinformation engine that has created an environment where, and a lens through which people see the world that is not the way that it is. And so, that's how you get so many people going out there and saying, “Oh well, he does it because he has to,” or “he's not really going to do those things,” or “he's going to do them, but they have it coming to them.” Because they are also in belief that they're being democratic and defending the system.

WALLACE: What is the role of the fear that a document like Project 2025 creates, just to sort of come back to the beginning of obeying in advance —

CARUSONE: Yeah.

WALLACE: I mean, friends in same-sex marriages are frightened that their families will be destroyed. Friends who have worked in DOJ, in places that maybe weren't in the crosshairs last time, had nothing to do with Russia, are afraid they'll be dismissed as people like Jeffrey Clark take over. People who serve in the military around the world are frightened that they'll be given illegal orders and are too far down the food chain to know how to deal with them or who to — I mean, what happens now, Angelo?

CARUSONE: Yeah, I mean, when Ian was talking before, that's all my brain could go to, was exactly the question that you just asked which is, one of the things that Project 2025 talks about early on, aside from getting rid of all this personnel and replacing them, is that you have to immediately weaponize the DOJ in order to shock and awe people, that you take a bunch of grand swift actions, mass arrests, mass prosecutions, harassments. And the goal isn't to get all those people ultimately in prison or something. It's to show a force very early on that we mean business, in hopes that most people do the natural thing, the thing that comes instinctually, which is to duck and cover. There's a reason why, it's so concerning about anticipatory obedience because it does speed up the process of giving authoritarians more power. And they're very open about it in Project 2025. That's the tactic. It's not just about revenge, although that's a part of it. It's also about sending a message that this is the new order and everybody else best get in line.

And that is an intention of that very first few months, is to execute that shock and awe thing. It was one of the first things Steve Bannon said last night, that they're coming for you, FBI. They're coming for you, deep state. He listed the places they're going to go after. And it's to show that nobody's safe, to get in line. So teachers, librarians, educators, they will all be systematically targeted and identified. It won't just be government bureaucrats, who do very good work. It'll also be anyone that they've identified as sort of a vanguard of this culture war that they've oriented around. And it's really is — to your point, it's to get everybody else to have to press the question, “Is this worth it or is it better for me to just go along to get along?” And that's what they want to instill right away because you get rid of the personnel, you change that norms, and then you drive forward with the larger anti-democratic agenda. And that's the reality that we are heading into. It doesn't have to be. We're going to have to fight. We have to stiffen our spines and put some bulwarks in. There's a lot of work to be done. But that's why they're doing it and that's the intention.

mma 10 24

October 8, 2024, edition of MSNBC's Deadline: White House

NICOLLE WALLACE (HOST): The Trump campaign in the final four weeks is amplifying content that is against FEMA, the White House, and the local residents, the very people he's trying to win over. This feels like hyperspiral to something different than what we've been covering for nine years.

ANGELO CARUSONE (GUEST): Yeah, I think that's right. And I appreciate that you acknowledged that this is different. And the last discussion when Vaughn was sort of talking about, you know, in a way that part of this is sort of, you know, sowing the seeds, incubating narratives that they can pluck back up if the election doesn't go their way and point to — that's all being sown right now.

And I think one of the things that's different and why this is so scary from my perspective is that you know, one of the things that Rupert Murdoch acknowledged right before January 6, 2021, was that Fox News was the only entity that could've corrected the record about who won the election. And ultimately they decided not to issue any statements or do any reporting saying that Trump lost in that time period, then we have January 6. But he was right back then. In 2021, that was true, that you could actually — because of where Fox was positioned, if they told the truth, a large enough segment of that audience would have consumed it, and it would have had a neutralizing effect.

What you ask what the difference is and note that — this is the difference. The difference is that no longer is there a single entity in sort of that fortress of lies — I love that description — that Trump is behind that can actually penetrate that and neutralize those lies. It's scattered them out. So if one of them decides to go rogue, the effects of it are really limited. And, you know, 60 Minutes said no fact-checking, but the part I marveled at is that Laura Ingraham fact-checked Donald Trump during that rally when he said that Vice President Harris hadn't been in North Carolina, and she had to correct him in the real-time and say, well, actually, she's there right now.

And of course, that doesn't land, that doesn't have the same penetrating effect, because of exactly what you acknowledged, this is different. That the seeds are being sown across multiple social media platforms and the position that X has is in many ways the position that Fox News had a few cycles ago. They're simply too big, too influential, and too many narratives have been seeded there and incubated that it'll be impossible to singularly swab them down. Even if Fox News turned on a dime, my assessment is that it wouldn't really have much of an impact in terms of, you know, that fortress of lies.

WALLACE: So where are we then, Angelo?

CARUSONE: We are in a, you know, increasingly difficult place, and that's the part that I find so scary. There are a lot of — lot of antibodies in the system, and I'm not a medical professional, but, to me, I look at misinformation in many ways that, it follows a lot of similar patterns that public health does. It's viral, that's why we call it viral when something goes viral, right? Because it follows very similar behaviors.

The only way to really deal with misinformation is not to correct it on the backend, especially nowadays when there's so little faith in institutions, is that you have to have antibodies in the systems. You have to have some trusted sources, and you have to have some friction in the system, some mechanisms that slow it down from spreading, so that good information can get out there and get in front of it.

And that's the thing that is really scary from my perspective. Forget about the lack of antibodies. A lot of the friction that had been in the system is not only being removed, but it's actually being accelerated. So that all of the platforms are not just letting this stuff happen, they're helping boost it and saturate it and amplify it, in ways that have also not existed in previous cycles.

So the opportunism to exploit that vulnerability is great, both from foreign adversaries and from the Trump campaign. And because it is no longer something that they're building on the fly, challenging the election is their plan B. They have been planning for this. That's what makes this so different. We are in a really scary position.

WALLACE: It feels like that's the conversation we have to have next, like, tomorrow, because that is being seeded. And I guess the last thing I would say that I learned from both of you is that despair and hopelessness is their tactic, so the real antibody is us. We are the answer. We are the answer. And our faith and our ability to vote and reject it, that's the answer, that's what they're most afraid of. So all of it is designed to make us think that it's impossible, but it's definitely possible.

7 23 no lnx an

US corporate media accused of 'normalizing the hate group' Moms for Liberty

Brett WilkinsandCommon DreamsJuly 04, 2023

ABC News this week joined other U.S. corporate media outlets in being accused of "normalizing" Moms for Liberty after publishing what one critic called a "puff piece" on the right-wing group that's behind a wave of school book bans and is linked to the neofascist Proud Boys and the Qanon conspiracy theory.

On Saturday, ABC News published an article by Brittany Shepherd titled "Moms for Liberty Are Fired Up in Philadelphia" as the self-described "parental rights" organization held its annual conference in Pennsylvania's largest city, where crowds of protesters turned out to denounce the group's bigotry.

"They call themselves joyful warriors—but this group of conservative moms are mad," Shepherd wrote in her lede.

Author and Daily Beast columnist Wajahat Ali called the article "shameful."

"Moms for Liberty is linked with the Proud Boys, a chapter quotes Hitler, they are behind book bans, they are funded by right-wing groups and... ABC News calls them 'joyful warriors,'" Ali tweeted. "The whiteness of it all is exhausting."

Historian Kevin Kruse wondered, "Did ABC let Moms for Liberty write this puff piece themselves?"

Brandon Wolf, press secretary for the LGBTQ+ advocacy group Equality Florida, noted that a Moms for Liberty chapter in Indiana included a quote from Adolf Hitler in its inaugural newsletter. The chapter chairperson subsequently apologized.

Founded in Florida in 2021 to oppose Covid-19 lockdowns and mandates, Moms for Liberty quickly gained a reputation for its anti-LGBTQ views and its harassment of school officials in service of the organization's far-right agenda.

The group—which says it has more than 115,000 members in 245 chapters in 45 states—wants to erase mention of LGBTQ+ rights, systemic racism, diversity, and other "woke" topics from school curricula.

Moms for Liberty—many of whose chapters are linked to extremist groups like the Proud Boys and Three Percenters as well as the Qanon conspiracy theory—has spearheaded a successful movement to ban books, especially ones with LGBTQ+ and racial themes, from school libraries across the nation.

The American Library Association said earlier this year that it had recorded 1,269 demands to censor books from various groups and individuals in 2022, compared to 729 challenges counted in 2021.

In her article, Shepherd wrote how the Moms for Liberty conference "showcases how local issues like education can have tremendous, galvanizing national influence, as Gov. Ron DeSantis, former President Donald Trump, and former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley tried to woo nearly 700 attendees."

The article continued:

Several key breakout sessions at the center of the group's mission, such as "Protecting Kids from Gender Ideology" and "Getting Flipped School Boards To Take Action" were kept behind closed doors, with media access barred. But still, the enthusiasm at open events was palpable, nearly bouncing off the ballroom walls.

The piece does note that Moms for Liberty is designated an extremist group by the Southern Poverty Law Center for spreading "hateful imagery and rhetoric against the LGBTQ community."

However, two paragraphs later Shepherd wrote that "Republicans will need this group to make up any lost ground" from last year's midterm elections.

In a Friday interview by MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace, extremism expert Kristofer Goldsmith urged viewers to spread the world about who Moms for Liberty are and what they stand for.

"We are talking book burning. We're talking about racism and we're talking about persecuting the LGBTQ community. These are the Proud Boys with a wig and lipstick," Goldsmith said. "That is all that they are. And because of the words 'Moms for Liberty,' not a lot of people are going to understand that."

"So folks watching this need to be evangelists, right?" he added. "You need to get out online and talk to your friends about what Moms for Liberty is, and help them understand that they are a pipeline into the most radical of extremism in this country."

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

'Shocking': Scholars condemn Philadelphia Museum for hosting Moms for Liberty event ›

Top Democrats ignorant of 'extremist' Moms for Liberty despite warnings the group is dangerous ›

'Treacherous march of normalization': ABC News slammed for 'puff piece' on Moms for Liberty ›