Bob Unruh began a March 6 WorldNetDaily article this way:
When Abigail Spanberger, a far-left Democrat, was elected governor in Virginia no one was surprised when she acted like a far-left Democrat, instantly demanding redistricting to benefit her party, a massive list of tax hikes to fund her agenda, and more.
In fact, those tax hikes were proposed by legislators, not Spanberger, and many of them didn’t pass and weren’t endorsed by her. But Unruh is here to complain that the truth will be told about the Capitol riot:
But now her party, through Democrat Dan I. Helmer of Fairfax in the state legislature, is pushing the boundaries so far that it is raising a warning from constitutional expert Jonathan Turley.
His counsel and advice on constitutional questions has been requested, and used, by Congress over the years.
And his warning about the latest Democrat stunt concerns schools and free speech.
It’s because Helmer wants to control the words that teachers use when teaching about the nation’s history, including the “protest-turned-riot” at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
In fact, Hemler’s demands, in a proposed state law would prohibit “any such program of instruction, any accompanying curriculum or instructional materials, or any instruction provided by a teacher as a part of such program of instruction” that describes, portrays or presents “as credible a description or portrayal of the actions precipitating or involved in the January 6, 2021, insurrection as peaceful protest” or “state, suggesting, or presenting as credible a statement or suggestion that there was extensive election fraud that could have changed or actually changed the results of the 2020 presidential election.”
Of course the facts are that that election was under the undue influence of two major factors never before seen in an American election: the $400 million handed out by Mark Zuckerberg to local election officials who often used it to recruit voters in Democrat districts and the decision by the FBI to interfere by falsely calling the scandalous information about the Bidens contained in a laptop computer abandoned by Hunter Biden as Russian disinformation, when the bureau knew it was factual.
One subsequent survey said had that interference not occurred, and that information about the Bidens been reported like other issues, the election outcome could have, in fact, been different.
We’ve documented how WND in general and Unruh in particular have lied about the Zuckerberg money; in fact, the money was available to all who wanted it to hold an election during a pandemic, numerous Republican-controlled counties got money, and Unruh provided absolutely no evidence that any money specificially targeted Democrats. Unruh also fails to offer the source of his so-called “survey” about that purported “interference” (as if encouraging people to vote is “interference”). Indeed, Unruh has a habit of whitewashing the Capitol riot.
Unruh went on to whine:
Hemler goes further, however, than just banning reasonable opinions about those events.
His bill “requires any such program of instruction, any accompanying curriculum or instructional materials, or any instruction provided by a teacher as a part of such program of instruction to describe the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the United States Capitol as an unprecedented, violent attack on U.S. democratic institutions, infrastructure, and representatives for the purpose of overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election.”
Unruh didn’t explain why deliberatly spreading lies about the 2020 election is merely “reasonable opinions.” Instead, he complained further:
Turley explained in his influential column that parents who want to send their children to Virginia public schools “would have to accept this form of indoctrination as part of their children’s education.”
That’s even though, the legal scholar and law professor explains, the Democrats’ characterization of events as an “insurrection” “is historically and legally false.”
[…]He noted that Democrats since the events have claimed that the protest that turned into a riot in which a police officer shot and killed an unarmed protester were “insurrection.”
“Yet, ‘insurrection’ and ‘sedition’ are legal terms. They have a meaning. The FBI investigated thousands after January 6th and charged hundreds. Not one was charged with insurrection or conspiracy to overthrow the country. The vast majority are charged with relatively minor offenses of trespass or unlawful entry or property damage- the type of charges that are common in protests and riots,” Turley pointed out.
Unruh offered no evidence to back up his claim that what happened on Jan. 6 was a “protest that turned into a riot,” and no evidence is provided for Turley’s claim that the riot does not meet the legal definition of an insurrection, so we are not allowed to refer to it as such.
Unruh tried one more shot against the state legislator: “Helmer’s extremism long has been established. After all, one of his political ads in 2018 compared President Trump to Osama bin Laden.” By contrast, Unruh has never conceded that his employer repeatedly likened President Obama to Hitler and other Nazis.