Napolitano, Andrew
===
at what point did he bail on djt?
anomalous on roger stone? pals?
jones infowars?
---
---
MMA
January 26, 2026, edition of Newsmax'sNational Report
SHAUN KRAISMAN (HOST): That was DHS Secretary Kristi Noem after federal agent shot and killed Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse at Minneapolis. The Department of Homeland Security said the agent acted in self-defense after attempting to disarm Pretti. The shooting comes amid an ongoing surge in immigration enforcement across the city of Minneapolis, in Minnesota, as well the state.
Judge Andrew Napolitano is our senior judicial analyst, joining us on set. There is a lot to examine, and for many on social media -- look, let's just have a frank conversation. It's an open and shut case for many people out there. And it shouldn't be, right, because they've seen the video, they've made their decisions. It's such a polarized topic at this point. So here's some of the video that we're seeing here. And it seems to show that an agent, again, going to secure the gun. If you watch this, it appears that maybe they secured the gun before shots were fired. [IN ONE VID WE SEE COP HIT HIM IN HEAD MULT X W CAN?!] But again an investigation is playing out. You heard DHS's side. You've obviously heard the rhetoric that has come out thus far. But overall, analyzing this situation, what is this investigation going to entail? Is it more than just the video?
ANDREW NAPOLITANO (SENIOR JUDICIAL ANALYST): Well, yes, it's more than just the video. It's the forensics of the angles of the ten bullets that entered his body. The bullets entered his body from his back because he had been temporarily blinded by pepper spray and was on his stomach on the frozen earth. The investigation will also interrogate eyewitnesses, and more importantly, it will interrogate the agents who were there. What were their mental impressions at the time? Why did they decide to shoot somebody after they had disarmed him and who was already on the ground? To me, their shooting is indefensible, but I understand that there's going to be an investigation --
KRAISMAN: Right.
NAPOLITANO: A federal investigation, not a state investigation, which will bring us to what I know you want to talk about next. Can the feds keep this information, killing on a street by police of a citizen away from the state whose principal job is to maintain safety on the streets? That will be litigated in a federal court, probably in the next half hour or so, whenever the court starts in Minnesota.
But a couple of things are clear. One is that Secretary Noem did not have all the facts before her when she made that statement. He was not brandishing the gun. The gun was on his person lawfully. And then it was removed before he went down and before he was killed. So I don't know what the threat was. She said he was shot defensively. I don't know what the threat was that these people felt, which is why their interrogation of him is important.
:{---
mma
JUDGE NAP PUSHES BACK ON NEWSMAX ATTACKS ON MARK KELLY: "THIS IS NOT SEDITION"
01/06/26
https://www.mediamatters.org/newsmax/newsmaxs-senior-judicial-analyst-says-sen-mark-kellys-speech-not-seditious-not-sedition-not)
---
---
MMA
12/02/25 9:44 PM EST
12/02/25 6:24 PM EST
12/02/25 5:59 PM EST
12/02/25
---
---
...mma 220?
In 2013, Jackson sentenced former member of Congress Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) to 30 months in prison and fined him $750,000after a jury convicted him of illegally using campaign funds. Prosecutors had recommended Jackson Jr. spend four years in prison, meaning Jackson sentenced him to 63% of the time prosecutors requested. While senior officials of the Justice Department interfered in the sentencing recommendation against Stone, when the sentencing hearing took place, newly assigned prosecutors to the case ended up defending the initial recommendation of seven to nine years. Jackson sentenced Stone to 40 months in prison, or 37-47% of what prosecutors asked for. Stone was fined $20,000.
False information about how Jackson would conduct the hearing for a new trial was also broadcast on Fox News by its chief legal analyst Andrew Napolitano. During a February 25 appearance hours before the hearing, Napolitano joined Fox & Friends and characterized the hearing as “secret” while claiming Jackson “won’t give a reason why” and saying, “You combine secrecy and silence and that is a recipe for totalitarianism.”
The publicly available docket for Stone’s trial shows that wasn’t the case:
[doc]
as the docket text explains, a public hearing and a sealed hearing was scheduled for February 25. After the public hearing, where members of the public could sit in the courtroom, Jackson cleared the room, but said that audio of the hearing would be available in a listening room. The purpose of this move was solely to protect the publishing of the names and physical characteristics of members of the jury, who had been gathered at the courthouse for potential questioning. The public was still free to listen to and evaluate the substance of the hearing. The transcript of the hearing will also not be sealed and will only be redacted in instances of personal information. (In any case, the jury foreperson, who was questioned, had previously publicly identified herself in a social media post, and the media subsequently reported her identity.) Jackson also offered a rationale for her decision, contrary to what Napolitano claimed was happening.
As reported by CNN, “Jackson read one of the President's past tweets attacking the Stone jury forewoman, as well as commentary from InfoWars' Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson from Fox News, to a federal courtroom, in deciding to hear testimony from jurors while protecting their identities after Stone asked for a retrial.” Indeed during the trial, Jones’ far-right conspiracy theory Infowars outlet, where Stone previously worked as a show host, led a campaign to out juror identities while making disparaging remarks about them. During the trial, Jackson said that those efforts put peoples’ safety at risk.
The attacks from conservative media against Jackson are intertwined with Trump’s own attacks against the judge. While the hearing was underway, Trump shared on Twitter a Fox News article about Jackson that Napolitano had tweeted, adding, “A total miscarriage of justice!”
The article in question was published on February 22 and in itTrump-supporting lawyer David Schoenargued that Jackson should be removed from the case because at sentencing she offered generic praise of the jury’s work -- the same legal argument that Stone’s lawyers used in a filing that Jackson would dismiss days later in a “sharply worded order” that “dressed down Stone's defense team for using the court's docket to air what she said were meritless claims that she is biased against him.”...
---
Newsmax legal analyst Andrew Napolitano was stunned by a sudden turn in the Trump administration’s case against former FBI Director James Comey.
On Monday, a judge ordered the prosecution — led by Lindsey Halligan — to hand over records relating to grand jury proceedings in the perjury case against Comey. In a scathing opinion, Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick cited “government misconduct” and “fundamental misstatements” that could “compromise the integrity of the grand jury process.”
Halligan’s appointment by President Donald Trump was the subject of controversy earlier in the year. Despite being tasked with such a massive case, she has never prosecuted a federal criminal case before. Her relevant background largely focused on real estate law.
In response to the judge’s order, Napolitano claimed such a measure was “very, very rare.” He continued:
..MEDIAITE 11 25
---
mma
May 21, 2025, edition of Newsmax's Chris Plante: The Right Squad
:{:{CHRIS PLANTE (HOST): Vice President of the United States JD Vance says it's time for the American people to get what we voted for, an administration that protects American sovereignty. I believe we voted for that. In an interview with, of all people, The New York Times—why would you do that? They've got a columnist there, Ross Douthat is his alleged name. And JD Vance, vice president, says you cannot have a country where the American people keep on electing immigration enforcement and the courts tell the American people they're not allowed to have what they voted for. }:
That's where we are right now, JD Vance said. He continues talking to Ross Douthat, The New York Times. Success to me is that we have established a set of rules and principles that the courts are comfortable with, and that we have the infrastructure that that allows us to deport large numbers of illegal aliens, because illegal aliens are illegal. When large numbers of illegal aliens come into the country. But I think whether we're able to get there is a function, of course, of our efforts, but also the courts themselves, JD Vance said. And the vice president continued, I think that you are saying, and I know this is inflammatory, but I think you are seeing and an effort by the courts to quite literally overturn the will of the American people.}:
And honestly, I think we're seeing that at every turn, aren't we? With some Biden appointee or Obama appointee and even Clinton appointees overturning the executive branch, which was just voted into office by 77 million Americans. And it's — you know, this is — it smells like 1861 around here.
TONY SHAFFER (GUEST): Are you against the administrative state, Chris? How dare you? How dare you, sir? It's insane that we have people who are not elected who somehow believe that they can use whatever loophole. And I'm not a lawyer, but I pretended to be one in front of the Iowa Supreme Court one time. And that's a story for another day. And I got away with it. It was legal. But I think that's the issue that the legality of these rulings — and I heard Judge Napolitano earlier on the network today talk about, you know, well, they're taught in law school that that that basically any ruling has to equally apply across the board. But the problem is, this: no judge actually was elected by all the people of the United States, and therefore his actions have been outweighed — basically inappropriate level of influence over this fact. So I think he's right. And I think Congress — it's time for Congress to do something to limit the power of the judges.
---
---
fox News analyst destroys Barr’s ‘absurd’ desire to charge rioters with sedition: ‘A bridge too far’
David Edwards / Raw Story September 17, 2020
Fox News judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano, a former judge, on Thursday pushed back against Attorney General William Barr’s call to charge violent protesters with sedition. According to The Wall Street Journal,…
==
---
---
no lnx an 320
Here’s why Trump slammed Fox News for being too ‘politically correct’
Fox News
Written by Matthew Rozsa / Salon March 6, 2020
President Donald Trump blasted Fox News while appearing on the right-leaning network, telling its highest-rated host Sean Hannity that the cable channel invites “inappropriate” guests who criticize him in a desire to be “politically correct.”
:{:{}:
}:
“They put people on I think are inappropriate and say very, very false things, and people don’t challenge them. I think they’re trying to be very politically correct or ‘fair and balanced,’ right, is the term,” Trump told Hannity during a phone interview.
:{:{}:
}:
After Hannity agreed with Trump’s opinion, the president added: “I think they hurt themselves, if you want to know the truth.”
Earlier in the interview, Trump complained to Hannity that “the media is all on [the Democrats] side” with the exception of “yourself” and other Fox personalities, including Fox News host Mark Levin and Fox Business host Lou Dobbs. Trump also mentioned Rush Limbaugh, a radio host who the president incorrectly identified as working for the Fox networks.
Trump has a history of attacking Fox News after the network invites guests who are critical of the president or releases unfavorable poll numbers about him. During a rally in Colorado last month, Trump criticized Fox News and Fox Business Network host Neil Cavuto, saying “they had this woman on Neil Cavuto who doesn’t treat us good” and that Cavuto himself is “not too good.”
That comment referred to A. B. Stoddard, a RealClearPolitics associate editor who claimed that Trump performed poorly during the presidential debates in the 2016 cycle. Trump incorrectly claimed in a tweet that he “won every one of my debates,” even though respondents in post-debate polls picked Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton as the winner of those contests.
The president also attacked Fox News in November for releasing a poll, which found that nearly half of Americans wanted him impeached and removed from office.
“You’re reading the wrong polls. I have the real polls,” Trump told reporters outside the White House. “I have the real polls. The CNN polls are fake. The Fox polls have always been lousy. I tell them they ought to get themselves a real pollster. But the real polls — if you look at the polls that came out this morning — people don’t want anything to do with impeachment. It’s a phony scam. It’s a hoax.”
A spokesperson from Fox News pointed Salon to an earlier statement by the network saying “our polling unit has long been held in high regard for being a nonpartisan source of research.”
Trump criticized Fox personalities Andrew Napolitano, Shepard Smith (who left in October) and others one month earlier after Fox News released a poll showing an increase in support for his impeachment and removal from office.
“From the day I announced I was running for President, I have NEVER had a good @FoxNews Poll. Whoever their Pollster is, they suck. But @FoxNews is also much different than it used to be in the good old days,” Trump tweeted at the time.
The president then launched a series of personal attacks at Fox News personalities whose opinions he views as unfavorable, including Judge Andrew Napolitano.
“With people like Andrew Napolitano, who wanted to be a Supreme Court Justice & I turned him down (he’s been terrible ever since), Shep Smith, @donnabrazile (who gave Crooked Hillary the debate questions & got fired from @CNN), & others, @FoxNews doesn’t deliver for US anymore,” Trump added. “It is so different than it used to be. Oh well, I’m President!”
Fox News anchor Bret Baier,responding to a presidential attack in 2019 after the network released an unfavorable poll about Trump’s chances in the 2020 election, said that “we have a news side and an opinion side. The opinion folks express their opinions. We do polls. Our latest poll had the Democratic candidates head-to-head, several of them ahead of President Trump. And this poll tracks exactly what the Real Clear Politics average of polls — even a little the other way — and this poll matches what we are seeing out there.”
Fox News senior political analyst Brit Humeexpressed similar thoughts earlier that year when Trump attacked the network for hosting a town hall event with former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who at that time was running for president.
“Say this for Buttigieg. He’s willing to be questioned by Chris Wallace, something you’ve barely done since you’ve been president,” Hume wrote on Twitter.
He added, “Oh, and covering candidates of both parties is part of the job of a news channel.”
You can watch the full interview below via YouTube:
===
---
https://www.vox.com/2019/10/1/20893112/fox-news-trump-identity-crisis-ukraine-whistleblower-chris-wallace-andrew-napolitano
no lnx many, vid
48 hours illustrating how Trump’s abuse-of-power scandal has split Fox News
Hannity is pushing Clinton conspiracy theories while the network’s top judicial analyst talks about impeachment.
By Aaron Rupar@atrupar Oct 1, 2019, 12:30pm EDT
Sean Hannity at the Republican National Convention.
[pix Fox News personality Sean Hannity at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio, on July 18, 2016. Benjamin Lowy/Getty Images
What a difference a few hours makes.
Had you tuned in to Fox News for Monday’s edition of Sean Hannity’s show, you would’ve been treated to President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, pushing nonsensical conspiracy theories about prominent Democrats colluding with Ukraine after the 2016 presidential election to dig up dirt on Trump — claims that were met with zero pushback from Hannity.
Aaron Rupar
@atrupar
Giuliani begins his Hannity interview by pushing a conspiracy theory about Obama and Hillary Clinton colluding with Ukraine to dig up dirt on Trump in January 2017 -- which doesn't make much sense since the presidential election had come and gone by then
Embedded video
But had you been watching Neil Cavuto’s late-afternoon show earlier that day, you would’ve seen Fox News senior legal analyst Andrew Napolitano making a case for Trump’s impeachment.
Aaron Rupar
@atrupar
Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano: "The president of the United States using foreign governments to influence domestic politics -- that was the fear of the framers when they put that impeachment clause in the Constitution."
Embedded video
To be clear, none of the above is especially new. Hannity has been the staunchest of staunch Trump backers for years, while more establishment conservative figures like Napolitano and Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace have established reputations as bastions of rationality amid the surrounding sea of MAGA on their network.
But the juxtaposition between Monday’s versions of Cavuto and Hannity illustrates the split that Trump’s abuse-of-power scandal and the growing support for Trump’s impeachment has wrought at Fox News. The network has spent years serving as something akin to an unofficial arm of the Trump campaign, but it reportedly has started thinking about life after Trump, at least behind the scenes.
The split between daytime and primetime burst into public view
While Fox News has a well-earned reputation for riding the Trump train, network personalities like Napolitano and Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace haven’t been shy about occasionally criticizing Trump. But now, with a presidency seemingly on the line, the stakes are a bit higher.
Primetime hosts like Hannity and Tucker Carlson along with Fox & Friends are still doing everything possible to spin for the president — including, in Carlson’s case, devoting part of Monday’s show to pushing conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton — but any criticisms of Trump made elsewhere on the network are increasingly being interpreted as veiled shots at other Fox News personalities. For instance, Wallace went viral last Thursday for sounding off about the “astonishing” and “deeply misleading” talking points being used by Trump’s defenders in the wake of the whistleblower report that accused Trump of abusing his office during his dealings with Ukraine.
Aaron Rupar
@atrupar
Here's Fox News' Chris Wallace saying that "the spinning that's been done by the president's defenders over the last 24 hours since this very damaging whistleblower complaint came out ... [is] not surprising but it is astonishing and I think deeply misleading." ??
Embedded video
Trump — who has been slowly souring on Fox News for weeks now, in part because it won’t rig polls for him — indicated on Sunday that he’s especially sensitive to even the mildest criticism coming from network personalities. After chief national correspondent and occasional Fox & Friends host Ed Henry did an interview with right-wing pundit Mark Levin in which Henry gently pushed back on Levin’s pro-Trump talking points, Trump became so incensed that he started retweeting any and all anti-Henry tweets he could find, including one posted by a parody account that makes fun of him for disliking sharks.
Aaron Rupar
@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
The President of the United States retweeted a parody account that makes fun of him for disliking sharks
Notably, however, Trump has had nothing to say about Wallace’s remarkably hard-hitting interview with White House adviser Stephen Miller on Fox News Sunday a few hours later — one in which Wallace demolished Miller’s talking points and wouldn’t let him get away with deflections that are standard fare on Hannity.
Aaron Rupar
@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
"This is an exercise in obfuscation" -- Stephen Miller has no response when Chris Wallace presses him about why Trump went against his own Pentagon & State Department and withheld Ukrainian aid
Embedded video
(Trump has posted many tweets over the years praising Wallace but attacked him for interviewing Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg in May, writing, “Fox is moving more and more to the losing (wrong) side in covering the Dems ... They forgot the people [who] got them there. Chris Wallace said, ‘I actually think, whether you like his opinions or not, that Mayor Pete has a lot of substance ... fascinating biography.’ Gee, he never speaks well of me — I like Mike Wallace better.)”
Again, Wallace conducting a tough interview with a Trump administration official is far from unprecedented. But the split between Fox News’ daytime and primetime burst into public view last week when afternoon host (and arguably the network’s most outspoken Trump critic) Shepard Smith feuded for two days with Tucker Carlson, a primetime host who, like Hannity, reliably defends the president. The conflict erupted after Smith’s show featured commentary from Napolitano last Tuesday in which he suggested Trump’s dealings with Ukraine amounted to crimes.
Carlson fired back that night by giving former prosecutor and frequent Fox News primetime guest Joseph diGenova a platform to bash Napolitano, calling him “a fool.” Smith responded the next day by characterizing diGenova as “a partisan guest” and criticizing Carlson for not defending his colleague. According to Vanity Fair’s Gabriel Sherman, thefeud only came to an end after network brass admonished Smith to stop attacking Carlson or risk losing his show.
If Sherman’s reporting is correct about Carlson effectively winning that feud, he and diGenova weren’t able to savor it for long. In yet another stark illustration of how complicated the dynamic at Fox News has become, Wallace reported on the same edition of Fox News Sunday in which he interviewed Miller that diGenova has been “working off the books” with Giuliani to help Trump dig up dirt on Joe Biden — a revelation diGenova has since admitted to. And yet Wallace, while breaking that news, failed to mention that despite his secret work for Trump, diGenova and his wife, Victoria Toensing, have made over 90 Fox News appearances this year alone.
Fox News execs are reportedly tiring of Trump’s act — but you wouldn’t know it from watching the product yet
The split that erupted in front of cameras last week reportedly reflects behind-the-scenes tensions. In his Vanity Fair piece, Sherman reports that Lachlan Murdoch, eldest son of Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch, has recently “been holding strategy conversations with Fox executives and anchors about how Fox News should prepare for life after Trump.”
Those conversations have apparently been expedited by the whistleblower complaint and the broader abuse-of-power scandal, which Sherman reports that even Hannity is concerned about:
Sean Hannity told friends the whistle-blower’s allegations are “really bad,” a person briefed on Hannity’s conversations told me. (Hannity did not respond to a request for comment). And according to four sources, Fox Corp CEO Lachlan Murdoch is already thinking about how to position the network for a post-Trump future. A person close to Lachlan told me that Fox News has been the highest rated cable network for seventeen years, and “the success has never depended on any one administration.” (A Fox Corp spokesperson declined to comment.)
But whatever private concerns Hannity has, they haven’t yet manifested themselves on his show, which remains all Trump talking points all the time — even if he seems to be a little less enthusiastic about the act than he used to be.
Aaron Rupar
@atrupar
Replying to @atrupar
I gotta say, Hannity's heart doesn't really seem to be in this
Embedded video
If Sherman is right about network brass siding with Carlson instead of Smith, that indicates that higher-ups aren’t dismounting the Trump train just yet. Ultimately, viewers will know that Fox News is really changing when primetime hosts either start criticizing the president or are replaced with hosts who will — and we aren’t anywhere near that point yet.
==
https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2019/11/11/fox-news-andrew-napolitano-major-president-donald-trump-critic/2563315001/
no lnx
Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano emerges as one of President Trump's bluntest critics
David Bauder Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) — More than two decades into his career as a commentator at Fox News Channel, Andrew Napolitano reached a milestone of sorts when he was called a “fool” on his own network.
Not to his face, of course. But Tucker Carlson guest Joseph diGenova’s dismissal of Napolitano for saying that soliciting campaign aid from a foreign government is against the law illustrates the awkward place that the former New Jersey Superior Court judge finds himself in at Fox during the Trump era.
Napolitano, who joined Fox News in 1998, has emerged as one of Donald Trump’s bluntest critics on a network where the president expects to hear encouragement.
Napolitano has defended an impeachment inquiry that many Trump supporters call unfair,noting it follows rules written by Republicans. He said the White House counsel’s arguments against the process were “profoundly misguided,” and described Trump’s since-withdrawn proposal to host a summit of world leaders at his Miami resort as a constitutional violation “about as direct and profound ... as one could create.” He has questioned how seriously Trump takes his oath of office, and said he governs like a mafia don.
[This Nov. 27, 2018 file photo shows Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano hosting the inaugural broadcast of "Liberty File" on the new streaming service Fox Nation, in New York.]
The commentator’s assertion that Robert Mueller had found 10 instances of obstruction of justice that could have resulted in a criminal indictment if Trump hadn’t been president earned him an angry tweet from the White House.
“He’s beginning to sound like Judge Shepard Smith,” said Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the conservative Media Research Center.
It was Smith, the since-departed Fox News anchor who occasionally fact-checked claims by Fox opinion hosts, who came to Napolitano’s defense after diGenova’s remark on Sept. 24. Smith called the attack repugnant.
“It just sort of rolls off my back,” Napolitano said in an interview. “I realize that when you’re in this business — and I’m on the opinion side, not the news side — that it’s going to ruffle some feathers. I never take it personally.”
He suspects his opinions have cost him airtime on Fox, although he says it can be cyclical. While he appears regularly on the “Fox & Friends” morning show, he’s invisible on the prime-time opinion shows hosted by Carlson, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham. Many of his commentaries appear online, taped on the plaza outside of Fox’s Manhattan headquarters.
Does he think some of his colleagues resent his opinions? “I don’t think so,” Napolitano said. “I think they’re mature enough to respect intellectual honesty.”
His commentaries are a frequent topic on Fox News message boards. “I wonder what changed him or if he was just faking it before?” one viewer wrote. “Either way, I don’t like this version of Nappy.”
Fox did not make an executive available to talk about Napolitano, but issued a statement saying his legal insights “have become a critical element in our breaking news coverage.”
It’s been a long journey at Fox for Napolitano, who was brought into the fold by the late chairman Roger Ailes, who once ordered the legal commentator to dye his hair after he lost 75 pounds.
He’s been praised by the likes of Glenn Beck, who suggested Napolitano replace him when Beck lost his show at Fox, and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who said he had “an amazing legal mind.” Yet he was also brought on to “The Daily Show” six times as a guest by fellow New Jersey resident Jon Stewart.
==
https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/trump-is-seriously-pissed-at-fox-news-believes-the-network-has-screwed-him-on-impeachment-report/
no lnx
...fox News’ evening opinion hosts — including Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity — have been relentless Trump cheerleaders, mindlessly echoing Trump’s talking point that the impeachment efforts of House Democrats are nothing more than a shameless partisan attack and are devoid of merit. But Napolitano and Wallace, although right-of-center politically, have delved into the actual facts surrounding Trump, impeachment and the Ukraine scandal — and Trump isn’t happy about it.
Sherman explains, “The network’s legal commentator, Judge Andrew Napolitano, declared Trump’s defiance of Congress ‘an impeachable offense’ — a position that directly contradicted the House Republicans’ handpicked witness, George Washington University law scholar Jonathan Turley. Trump has also been engaged in a running war with Fox News anchor Chris Wallace; after Trump tweeted last month that Wallace was ‘nasty,’ fellow Foxer Neil Cavuto rushed to Wallace’s defense.”
Trump, in response, has bashed Fox News on Twitter for being — as he sees it — an inconsistent part of his right-wing anti-impeachment defense team. Sherman notes that on December 8, Trump tweeted, “Don’t get why @FoxNews puts losers on like @RepSwalwell (who got ZERO as presidential candidate before quitting), Pramila Jayapal, David Cicilline and others who are Radical Left Haters? The Dems wouldn’t let @FoxNews get near their bad ratings debates, yet Fox panders. Pathetic!”...
==
https://www.alternet.org/2019/12/our-reality-tv-president-wants-a-show-trial-in-the-senate/
==
https://www.alternet.org/2019/06/fox-news-andrew-napolitano-explains-why-the-census-ruling-is-a-significant-defeat-for-trump-personally/
bad for djt b/c can't be adjudicated in time for 2020?!
==
Fox Business VideosOctober 22, 2019
Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano discusses the State of New York’s lawsuit against Exxon Mobile and the longterm effect of state attorneys general looking for wealth transfers.
==
NAPOLITANO: [The Church] provided the moral basis for the liberation of Eastern Europe. Is the Pope going to provide the moral basis for, what, regulating the pollutants in the environment?
I don't know if he is going to compel Catholics to certain agreement with him, he really doesn't have authority to do that. Is he, I think, going to suggest that government has the duty to the keep the environment clean because that will help save the poorest among us...
If the pope is going to say Catholics have to get behind the left on global warming, that would be absurd and it would cause a schism in the Church
==
escalator?
President Trump tweeted that former CIA analyst Larry Johnson has accused the United Kingdom's intelligence agencies of "helping [the] Obama Administration Spy on the 2016 Trump Presidential Campaign." Trump was apparently tweeting in response to a segment he watched on One America News Network, a far right news channel that traffics in conspiracy theories.
The conspiracy theory that Trump resurfaced this week helped cause an international incident between the United States and the United Kingdom in 2017.
Larry Johnson is a conservative conspiracy theorist notorious for pushing racist smears about former first lady Michelle Obama. In 2017, Johnson argued that "there was some collusion overseas" between U.S. intelligence and a U.K. security agency, and that British intelligence fed information about Trump to Obama-era CIA Director John Brennan. None of these allegations are true.
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano shared the theory on two Fox News shows in 2017. Then-White House press secretary Sean Spicer cited Napolitano's conspiracy theory in a press briefing, suggesting that one of the United States' strongest allies was illegally spying on Trump on behalf of then-President Barack Obama.<
After The New York Times confirmed Media Matters' discovery that Johnson was one of Napolitano's sources for the conspiracy theory, Fox News suspended Napolitano "indefinitely," which turned out to be about two weeks. President Trump ducked all responsibility, blaming Fox News.
Now, two years later, the president is pushing the same conspiracy theory that previously damaged the U.S.-U.K. alliance, and which the British government has recently denounced as "utterly ridiculous."
---
https://www.alternet.org/2019/02/here-are-4-political-wild-cards-on-fox-news-who-have-actually-stood-up-to-gop-propaganda/
One of the most Orwellian mottos in the history of cable news is undoubtedly “fair and balanced,” which was Fox News’ motto until 2017 (when it was replaced with “most watched, most trusted”). Clearly slanted to the far right, Fox News was never known for its fairness or its balance. A more honest motto for Fox News would be “all conservative all the time.” But in one sense, Fox News has been as unfair to conservatives as it has been to liberals and progressives: it tends to dictate how they should think.
Realistically, no one expects Fox News to treat liberals and progressives—or even centrists—fairly. That isn’t their market or their audience. But the most frustrating thing of all is Fox News’ expectation that conservatives think a certain way. During the George W. Bush years, right-wingers who were critical of the Bush administration were routinely demonized at Fox News (former Rep. Ron Paul, for example). And in the Donald Trump era, the vast majority of coverage at Fox News is overtly pro-Trump.
Nonetheless, Fox News will, on occasion, feature some people on the right who are genuinely analytical and don’t simply recite official Republican Party talking points. Here are some of the less dogmatic right-wing voices at the cable news outlet.
1. Chris Wallace
Republicans who appear on Fox News typically receive softball questions from most of the employees, but a major exception is Chris Wallace (the 71-year-old son of the late Mike Wallace). Wallace can be a combative interviewer, and Stephen Miller (a Trump senior advisor) got a first-hand demonstration of that this month when Wallace grilled him unmercifully about Trump’s emergency declaration on the U.S./Mexico border. And Wallace was no less combative with AM talk radio host Rush Limbaugh, calling him out on Feb. 17 for giving Trump a pass on executive orders despite having repeatedly lambasted President Barack Obama for executive overreach.
Wallace told Limbaugh, “I understand that you like what President Trump is doing, and you didn’t like what President Obama was doing. And that’s the concern here, is that to the degree you give the president more and more powers—yes, you’re going to get things from one president you like, but you’re going to get executive powers from another president that you don’t like.”
2. Judge Andrew Napolitano
During George W. Bush’s years as president, Fox News’ coverage was overtly favorable to the Patriot Act and other post-9/11 legislation. But unlike Fox News’ Sean Hannity, Judge Andrew Napolitano was never a robotic mouthpiece for the Bush Administration. Napolitano, alibertarian, considered the Patriot Act unconstitutional, and philosophically, he had a lot more in common with Ron Paul or 2012/2016 Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson than he did with former Vice President Dick Cheney.
In the Trump era, Napolitano has continued to serve as a legal analyst for Fox News, and the contrast between Hannity and Napolitano can be shocking. Hannity, a Trump sycophant, has jumped through hoops to defend Trump’s decision to make an emergency declaration to force funding of a U.S./Mexico border wall. But Napolitano, in contrast, considers the move unconstitutional.
When the judge appeared on “Fox and Friends” on January 8, he explained that an “emergency declaration allows him to mobilize assets, but it doesn’t allow him to take or occupy property. And it doesn’t allow him to spend money that Congress hasn’t authorized.” Napolitano has also asserted that bypassing Congress to fund a border wall is not the action of a president, but a “prince.”
3. Lisa Kennedy Montgomery
Gen-Xers still think of Lisa Kennedy Montgomery as “Kennedy from MTV”: back in the 1990s, she was an MTV veejay. But these days, the 46-year-old Montgomery is primarily focused on politics—and she is more likely to comment on Robert Mueller’s Russia probe or GOP tax policy than on Pearl Jam, Courtney Love or the Stone Temple Pilots. Politically, Montgomery is definitely right of center. But despite being a registered Republican, Montgomery has a lot more in common with the Libertarian Party than she does with Hannity. Montgomery is pro-choice on the abortion issue, supports same-sex marriage, dislikes the Christian Right and opposes the War on Drugs. But Montgomery (who hosts “Kennedy Nation” on the Fox Business Channel and often appears on Fox News’ “Outnumbered”) is also a hardcore fiscal conservative who opposes universal health care, calls Seattle a “socialist hellhole” and favors privatizing Social Security and Medicare—or, as liberals and progressives accurately call it, letting banksters bleed those programs dry.
4. Shepard Smith
Shepard Smith infuriated his most buffoonish colleague at Fox News, Sean Hannity, when, in 2017, he debunked the Uranium One/Hillary Clinton conspiracy theory that Hannity and President Trump were happy to promote. According to the theory, Clinton was bribed to approve the merger of the mining company, Uranium One, and the Russian nuclear energy organization Rosatom when she was secretary of state under President Barack Obama. The bribes, conspiracy theorists claimed, included $145 millionto the Clinton Foundation. But Smith totally tore apart this conspiracizing — noting that the FBI, after an extensive investigation, found that there was no evidence of bribery. Further, Smith noted, Clinton didn’t personally approve the merger herself.
“The Clinton State Department had no power to approve or veto that transaction,” Smith noted. “It could do neither.”
The backlash against Smith was swift, with some Fox News viewers asserting that he belonged at MSNBC or CNN instead. And in an interview with Time Magazine’s Daniel D’Addario, Smith distanced himself from Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson and other “opinion programming” at Fox News.
Smith told D’Addario, “I get it that some of our opinion programming is there strictly to be entertaining. I get that. I don’t work there.” And Hannity was furious, describing Smith as “clueless” and “anti-Trump.”
==
---
AN
Fox News finished the week of Dec. 17 in second place in the cable news ratings race — the week the conservative network, which is known for its relentless support of President Donald Trump, spent significant airtime and webspace criticizing the nation’s leader.
MSNBC topped Fox News for the first time in that time period since 2000, according to a press release, which cited data from Nielsen. Olympic programming was excluded in the research.
Over the week of Dec. 17, Fox News turned from serving as a refuge for the president into one he came to slam as “Fake News!” Trump last week was criticized on “Fox & Friends,”his favorite morning show— though it’s possible the president’s soft spot for the show has sunk — as well as on FoxNews.com and on-air by Judge Andrew Napolitano, a longtime friend of the president and a Fox News personality.
On “Fox & Friends,” host Brian Kilmeade ripped into the president over his abrupt announcement that he wants to withdraw all 2,000 U.S. troops from Syria— a decision Kilmeade warned would allow the Islamic State group, also known as ISIS, to re-establish its reduced power. Kilmeade, who often defends Trump on television, compared Trump’s announcement to Obama’s attempts to get troops out of Iraq: “He is doing exactly, if not worse, than what President Obama did.”
The president appeared to be tuning in as he expressed his frustration on Twitter not long after Kilmeade’s outburst. He said, “I’ve done more damage to ISIS than all recent presidents….not even close!"
Over on FoxNews.com, a headline read: “Trump is about to repeat Obama’s mistake in the Middle East.”
“When your enemies are cheering,” wrote former George W. Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen, “you have made a mistake.”
During an appearance on “Shepard Smith Reporting” with Fox News host Shepard Smith, Judge Andrew Napolitano, a longtime friend of Trump and a Fox News contributor, told anchor Smith that the White House occupant could already be under secret indictment for allegedly conspiring with Michael Cohen, the attorney who spent many years working as Trump’s personal “fixer,” to break campaign finance law during the 2016 presidential campaign in order to hush up women with whom Trump may have had affairs.
“There’s ample evidence — this doesn’t require too much analysis — to indict the president,” Napolitano told Smith. “The question is, do they want to do it? The DOJ has three opinions on this: Two say you can’t indict a sitting president, one says you can. But all three address the problem of, what do you do when the statute of limitations is about to expire? All three agree in that circumstance you indict in secret, keep the indictment sealed and release it the day he gets out of office. You can’t let a person go scot-free because they happen to be in the White House.”
When Smith asked whether Napolitano was saying that the president had already been indicted, the judge responded: “that I don’t know about, but he could be, because we don’t know what’s been sealed.”
The news about Fox News declining ratings also come in the same week that hostTucker Carlson faced an advertiser exodus in response to the controversial remarks he recently made about immigration— specifically, that it makes the U.S. “poorer and dirtier.” Carlson’s comments were widely criticized, and several people threatened to boycott his advertisers. More than a dozen removed their ads from Carlson’s show in response. As of this writing, at least 16 companies have pulled advertising from “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” according to The Hollywood Reporter.
---
==-
heard bit where govt is listening to your cell phone 24/7?
Dangerous to Be Right When the Government Is Wrong
Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump’s nominee to replace the retired Justice Anthony Kennedy on the U.S. Supreme Court, has been receiving a lot of praise from the far right along with plenty of criticism from liberals and progressives. Social conservatives are hoping that Kavanaugh—a far-right social conservative and a “strict constructionist” or “originalist” comparable to the late Antonin Scalia—will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade if confirmed by the U.S. Senate. And Kavanaugh’s nomination has drawn praise from the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America and other Christian Right groups. But not all right-wingers are happy with the nomination, including Fox News’ Judge Andrew Napolitano and commentator Ben Shapiro.
In contrast to Sean Hannity and others at Fox News, libertarian Napolitano has never been a Republican party liner. Philosophically, Napolitano has a lot more in common with former Rep. Ron Paul or former New Mexico governor and 2012/2016 Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson than he does with Sen. Orrin Hatch or Sen. Lindsey Graham. And Napolitano has made it clear that Kavanaugh isn’t someone he would have nominated.
Interviewed by the libertarian Reason Magazine’s Nick Gillespie in July, Napolitano declared, “I was very disappointed with the appointment of Kavanaugh because I believe he comes from the heart and soul of the Washington establishment.”
Napolitano told Gillespie that although Trump campaigned on “draining the swamp” in 2016—“the swamp” being Trump’s term for the Washington, DC establishment—Kavanaugh is as establishment as it gets.
The judge went on to explain why he considered Kavanaugh problematic from a 4th Amendment standpoint. Kavanaugh, Napolitano told Gillespie, “believes that the 4th Amendment does not apply to the NSA, that it only applies to law enforcement.”
Kavanaugh, Napolitano said, is much too quick to “find creative ways” to “justify police excess.”
Michigan Republican Rep. Justin Amash has expressed 4th Amendment concerns about Kavanaugh as well. On July 10, Amash tweeted, “Kavanaugh is not another Gorsuch—not even close. Disappointing pick, particularly with respect to his #4thAmendment record. Future decisions on the constitutionality of government surveillance of Americans will be huge. We can’t afford a rubber stamp for the executive branch.”
Although most of the right-wing criticism of Kavanaugh has come from libertarians, one theocratic social conservative who was initially critical of Trump’s pick was former Pennsylvania Sen. RickSantorum—who, ironically, has been a big Trump supporter despite allegations that Trump had extramarital affairs with a porn star (Stormy Daniels) and a Playboy model (Karen McDougal) and paid them hush money to keep quiet. Santorum said of Kavanaugh, “He is from Washington. He is the establishment pick. He is the Bush pick. It just seems like Trump, in this case, just bowed to the elite in Washington. I think that’s going to rub a lot of people the wrong way.”
Shapiro, like Napolitano, considers Kavanaugh sympathetic to the Affordable Care Act of 2010, a.k.a. Obamacare—which he believes Kavanaugh upheld in the case Sissel v. Department of Health and Human Services. And Shapiro has joined Napolitano in criticizing Kavanaugh as an establishment nominee who is weak on the 4th Amendment.
Shapiro said of Kavanaugh, “He is more of a law-and-order, sort of William Rehnquist type of judge….(Kavanaugh) is not a big fan of a lot of these sort of civil libertarian decisions that some on the right are fond of.”
On Fox News, Shapiro told libertarian Lisa Kennedy Montgomery, “I’ve got problems with Kavanaugh in general. He’s being pushed very hard by a lot of folks from Team Bush, who knew him way back when and are very fond of him. He’s kind of the D.C. insider pick.”
...?
AN
==
Fox News's senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano, a former New Jersey Superior Court judge, may face ethics violations for claiming without proof that President Barack Obama had ordered surveillance of Donald Trump during the 2016 election, according to a new report.
According to a report in the New Jersey Law Journal, Napolitano could face censure for making the claims -- which have been denied by U.S. and British intelligence officials -- in his column and on-air at Fox.
In a March 16 column for Fox News, Napolitano wrote that three unnamed British intelligence sources told him that the U.K.'s foreign intelligence unit, the Government Communications Headquarters, had "most likely provided Obama with transcripts of Trump's calls," but he offered no proof of the allegation.
The FBI and NSA have denied there is any information that supports Napolitano's claims, and the GCHQ issued a statement saying that "recent allegations made by media commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano about GCHQ being asked to conduct 'wiretapping' against the then President-Elect are nonsense. They are utterly ridiculous and should be ignored."
Fox removed Napolitano from its air, and issued its own statement that termed Napolitano's claims "commentary" rather than reporting.
"Fox News cannot confirm Judge Napolitano's commentary," said Fox News anchor Shep Smith. "Fox News knows of no evidence of any kind that the now president of the United States was surveilled at any time in any way, full stop,"
Napolitano has not appeared on-air at Fox since making the claim.
The New Jersey Law Journal reports that Napolitano quit the bench in 1995 after a dispute with the New Jersey Supreme Court over earning outside income, but is still licensed to practice in New Jersey and New York.
The report said that because Napolitano still uses the title of "Judge" on-air, he is "holding himself out in his professional capacity" and could therefore be subject to violations of both New York and New Jersey rules of professional conduct.
Those rules forbid attorneys from engaging "in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation."
Napolitano is of counsel at the New York firm ofMintz & Gold, where focuses on complex litigation, white-collar criminal defense and appellate work.
==
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/10-reasons-to-be-worried-that-andrew-napolitano-is-advising-donald-trump-on-supreme-court-nominations/
==
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Napolitano
Andrew Peter Napolitano (born June 6, 1950) is the Senior Judicial Analyst for Fox News Channel, commenting on legal news and trials, and is a syndicated columnist whose work appears in numerous publications, such as Fox News, The Washington Times, and Reason. Having served as a New Jersey Superior Court Judge, he now teaches constitutional law as a Distinguished Professor at Brooklyn Law School. Napolitano has written nine books on constitutional, legal, and political subjects.
Contents
Early life and judicial and academic career
Napolitano was born in Newark, New Jersey. He is a graduate of Princeton University and Notre Dame Law School. He was admitted to the New Jersey bar in 1975.[3] After law school, Napolitano entered private practice as a litigator. Napolitano first taught law for a brief period in 1980–1981 at Delaware Law School (then-Widener). Napolitano sat on the New Jersey bench from 1987 to 1995, becoming the state's youngest then-sitting Superior Court judge.
As a judge, Napolitano issued several notable decisions. In State v. Barcia, Napolitano found that random DWI roadblock checkpoints were unconstitutional under both the Federal and New Jersey state constitutions, and sustained a motion to suppress drug and drug paraphernalia evidence found at such a stop.[4] In the case In re K.L.F., Napolitano found that New Jersey’s Frivolous Pleading Statute could be applied against the state as well as private litigants whose claims were frivolous.[5] In Cusseaux v. Pickett, Napolitano decided that a woman who was abused and mistreated by her husband has a civil cause of action against her abuser for the resulting battered woman syndrome.[6]
He resigned his judgeship in 1995 for private practice. He later pursued a writing, teaching, and television career. He also served as an adjunct professor at Seton Hall University School of Law for 11 years from 1989–2000. Napolitano is a distinguished visiting professor at Brooklyn Law School where he teaches courses on advanced and introductory constitutional law and jurisprudence, and has begun a renewed endeavor to developing his natural law jurisprudence.
Media career
Before joining Fox as a news analyst, Napolitano was the presiding judge for the first season of Twentieth Television's syndicated court show Power of Attorney (2000–02), in which people brought small-claims disputes to a televised courtroom. Differing from similar formats, the plaintiffs and defendants were represented pro bono by famous attorneys. Napolitano departed the series after its first season.
From 2006 to 2010, Napolitano co-hosted a talk radio show on Fox News Radio with Brian Kilmeade titled Brian and the Judge. Napolitano hosted a libertarian talk show called Freedom Watch that aired daily, with new episodes on weekdays, on Fox Business Channel. Frequent guests on Freedom Watch were Congressman Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell. Napolitano has promoted the works of Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises on his program. The show originally aired once a week, every Wednesday at 2:00 p.m. on Fox News' Strategy Room.
On September 14, 2009, it became a show that aired three to four times a week. On June 12, 2010, it debuted as a weekly show on Fox Business. The show was one of several programs dropped in February 2012, when FBN revamped its entire primetime lineup.[7]
Napolitano regularly substituted for television host Glenn Beck when Beck was absent from his program. After Beck announced that he would be leaving Fox News, he asked Napolitano to replace him.[8] Napolitano regularly provides legal analysis on top rated shows both Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network, such as The Kelly File, The O’Reilly Factor, Varney & Co., The Fox Report with Shepard Smith, Fox & Friends, and Special Report with Bret Baier.
Politics
Political stance
Napolitano is a well-known libertarian who is a strong advocate of constitutional protections against government encroachment on natural and legal rights, as well as a strong advocate of broad constitutional liberties themselves. Napolitano has demonstrated affinity for many libertarian thinkers, such as John Locke, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, Robert Nozick, Randy Barnett, Ayn Rand, and Ludwig von Mises, and a broad array of libertarian ideas aimed at a minimal state aimed at the preservation of personal liberty. Napolitano is noted for stalwartly disagreeing with conservatives on questions of personal freedom, national security, and equality, while also engaging in full-throated defense of more conservative ideas of economic freedom and scope of government.
Specific positions
Napolitano describes himself as pro-life and holds that abortion "should be prohibited."[9] He reasons while a woman has a natural and undeniable right to privacy in her personal choices, the rule of necessity causes the right to life of the fetus, which he believes to begin at conception, to take priority for the duration of gestation. Napolitano believes the Supreme Court's ruling on inter-racial marriage in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia set a precedent that would also require state recognition of same-sex marriage.[10] He also opposes capital punishment: "I don't believe that the state has the moral authority to execute."[11] Napolitano is also a believer in the separation of Church and State.
With respect to both Presidents Bush and Obama and their handling of civil liberties in the War on Terror, Napolitano is a strong critic. In both his recent scholarly work, appearing in the New York University Law School Journal of Law and Liberty, and in his book Suicide Pact, Napolitano delivered detailed criticisms of the actions of both Presidents and their parties with respect to torture, domestic spying, unilateral executive action, and encroachments on political power.
Two weeks after a segment on Geraldo Rivera’s program in 2010 about how the collapse of the 7 World Trade Center appeared more consistent with controlled demolition than collapse, Napolitano made comments on the Alex Jones show that have been interpreted as sympathetic to 9/11 truthers.[12] The extent to which his statements expressed sympathy with those who were skeptical of the events, finding them “hard to believe” because of Geraldo’s program, rather than acceptance of a conspiracy theory, has been a topic of debate.[13] His most extensive work on the topic of 9/11, Suicide Pact, does not express any sympathy with the position, nor have any of his public statements since.[original ^research?]
In February 2014, Napolitano expressed disdain for Abraham Lincoln on Fox News. He explained that "I am a contrarian on Abraham Lincoln." Slavery in the U.S., according to Napolitano, while one of the most deplorable institutions in human history, could have been done away with through peaceful means, which would have saved the bloodiest conflict in American history. At the same time, Napolitano also argued that states in which slavery was legal did not secede out of fear of abolitionism: "largely the impetus for secession was tariffs."[14] In his recent book Suicide Pact, Napolitano focused his criticism of Lincoln on the precedent set by his specific constitutional violations, such as his unilateral suspension of the right to habeas corpus and his institutionalization of military commission systems for civilian crimes.
Napolitano believes that President Obama’s recent Executive Order on immigration is an unconstitutional use of executive power. He argues that as the president’s exercise of prosecutorial discretion is directly opposite to the will of the United States Congress, it cannot be sustained as an exercise of prosecutorial discretion pursuant to an act of Congress, but rather is an independent presidential act.
Judicial philosophy
Judge Napolitano ascribes to a natural law jurisprudence that is influenced with a respect for originalist ideas and method. He has expressed strong sympathies with the Randy Barnett new originalist vein of originalism, as it incorporates the Natural Law through an original understanding of the Ninth Amendment. He has published a favorable column on Barnett’s idea of a constitutional presumption of liberty.[15] While Napolitano’s academic work as of late has tended to focus on issue-specific concerns of the Natural Law and rights,[16] he aims to more fully develop a jurisprudential theory around his conception of the demands of the Natural Law.
Napolitano’s philosophy generally has a strong originalist bent, while not accepting the limitations of the older types of originalism espoused by Robert Bork and Justice Antonin Scalia with respect to the Constitution’s open-ended provisions like the Ninth Amendment. Napolitano finds such limitations too restricting on a judge’s ability to apply the Natural Law to decide cases where the liberty of the individual is at stake. Napolitano is a strong believer in economic liberties and argues that the decision Lochner v. New York was overruled in error in the West Cost Hotel case, as the Contracts Clause and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process clauses protect a sphere of personal economic liberty.[17]
Napolitano’s Natural Law jurisprudence incorporates some Living Constitutionalist decisions, such as Brown v. Board of Education and Loving v. Virginia as proper expressions of the Natural Law in terms of personal autonomy and equality. While not ascribing necessarily the reasoning underlying the Supreme Court’s decisions in the area, Napolitano finds that there is a natural right to privacy.
Napolitano’s recent academic and popular work has work asserted that, similar to Randy Barnett’s presumption of liberty, there is a bias in favor of freedom incorporated into the Constitution for when courts are faced with a question of liberty versus security.
In September 2015, Napolitano was the featured speaker at a conference held by the conservative, government watch-dog group Judicial Watch.[18]
Personal
Napolitano splits his time living in Manhattan and Newton, New Jersey where he owns a farm that produces maple syrup.[19] He has been associated with many popular and political figures, such as Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Ralph Nader, Mike Lee, Geraldo Rivera, George Will, Nat Hentoff, Bill O’Reilly, Alan Colmes, Sean Hannity, and Nick Gillespie.
Napolitano's partner[citation ^needed] James C. Sheil died on March 19, 2013.[20] In the Acknowledgements section of his book Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty, Napolitano states: "... my happy dreams turned dark last year when Jim Sheil, my alter ego to whose memory this book is dedicated, died suddenly on March 19th 2013, as we were working on this book. Jim and I shared much of our lives with each other. Among that which we shared was a love of the printed word. Yet our philosophies and politics were like oil and water."[21]
Napolitano has stated that he is not related to former U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, whom he sometimes jokingly calls "Evil Cousin Janet".[22][23]
Napolitano is a vegetarian.[24]
Bibliography
Books
- Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks its Own Laws (2004) ISBN 9780785260837
- The Constitution in Exile: How the Federal Government Has Seized Power by Rewriting the Supreme Law of the Land (2006) ISBN 9781595550705
- A Nation of Sheep (2007) ISBN 9781595551924
- Dred Scott's Revenge: A Legal History of Race and Freedom in America (2009) ISBN 9781418575571
- Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History (2010) ISBN 9781418584245
- It is Dangerous to be Right When the Government is Wrong: The Case for Personal Freedom (2011) ISBN 9781595554130
- Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom (2012) ISBN 9781595554215
- The Freedom Answer Book: How the Government Is Taking Away Your Constitutional Freedoms (2013) ISBN 9781400320295
- Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty (2014) ISBN 978-0718021931
Academic Works
- "The News Person's Shield Law: A Welcome Acceptance by the Federal Courts of an Important State Privilege", New Jersey Lawyer Magazine, Vol. 113, pp. 13–7 (November 1985).
- "Whatever Happened to Freedom of Speech? A Defense of 'State Interest of the Highest Order' as a Unifying Standard for Erratic First Amendment Jurisprudence", Seton Hall Law Review, Vol. 29, pp.1197–276 (1999).
- "Liberty v. Tyranny: A Constant Struggle", Regent University Law Review, Vol. 22, pp. 291–99 (2010) (Keynote Address: Media and the Law Symposium: When Does Regulation Go Too Far?).
- "A Legal History of National Security Law and Individual Rights in the United States", New York University Law School Journal of Law & Liberty, Vol. 8, pp. 396–555 (2014).
==
fired?
no diff between 2 parties? war on drugs
The 5-Minute Speech that Got Judge Napolitano Fired from Fox News
Posted on February 17, 2012 by WashingtonsBlog
==
Fox Pox
Andrew Napolitano, 59
In a recent Washington Post article, a media analyst contended that Fox News was at a crossroads. He said the network was in danger of losing its credibility as a newsgathering operation because of far-right conspiracy-mongers like host Glenn Beck.
But Beck is not the only one weakening Fox's credibility. Another hot contender in the far right-wing advocacy department is Fox's "senior judicial analyst" — Judge Andrew Napolitano.
Napolitano, a former state judge in New Jersey, appears on several Fox shows and is broadcast on any given day over the television, radio and the Internet. He was scheduled to be the keynote speaker this past February at the first annual Tenth Amendment Summit in Atlanta, but was snowed in and never made it. He missed out on rubbing elbows with neo-Confederates, conspiracy theorists and antigovernment Patriot activists.
It seems the TV judge is vying to become a fixture on the far-right lecture circuit. He was also scheduled to address the 2010 New Hampshire Liberty Forum, a gathering of self-described "pro-liberty activists" who are striving to "cut the size and scope of government by about two-thirds or more."
Napolitano has joined other conspiracy theorists in falsely claiming that efforts to expand affordable housing through the Community Reinvestment Act were responsible for the crash of the economy in 2008. He called Sarah Palin's baseless accusation that Obama was trying to set up "death panels" a "legitimate concern." He falsely suggested that Obama bribed a congressman to change his vote on health care by appointing his brother to an appeals court.
Napolitano joined Fox in 1998. He appears daily on "The Big Story with John Gibson," co-hosts "Fox & Friends" once a week and is a regular on "The O'Reilly Factor." Napolitano taught constitutional law and jurisprudence at Seton Hall Law School for 11 years. He was the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of New Jersey and served on the bench from 1987 to 1995. He returned to private practice in 1995 and began his career in broadcasting that same year.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/summer/meet-the-patriots/the-enablers
---