GOP Senate group run by Sen. Moran lapses into 9/11 trutherism

Will the Republican party’s lapse into 9/11 trutherism be covered by the mainstream media?

It probably should, no?

In a stunning development, the official Republican party organ in charge of whipping US Senate campaigns, the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), is using its Twitter account to promote the notion that 9/11 was an inside job.

The NRSC is chaired by Republican Senator Jerry Moran of Kansas.

NRSC Communications Director Brad Dayspring yesterday used his Twitter account to direct people to a GOP Web page that included the following absurdly-offensive assertion about the World Trade Center’s collapse on September 11, 2001:

“There’s some evidence that were charges planted in the buildings that brought them down.”

GOP Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas.

GOP Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas is the chair of the organization that lapsed into 9/11 trutherism.

In fact, there is no credible evidence that September 11 was an inside job.

And the accusation, in addition to being false, also tends to be anti-Semitic — it often is couched within another lie, that “New York Jews” were forewarned of the attacks, and that many of them didn’t show up to work at the World Trade Center that fateful day. It’s simply not true.

The GOP Web page which writes that “there’s some evidence that were charges planted in the buildings that brought them down” is run by America Rising, the lead GOP political action committee, launched last year by Mitt Romney’s former campaign manager, Matt Rhoades.

It is unclear at press time whether Mitt Romney agrees that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated by President Bush and Vice President Cheney, who then forewarned the Jews.

Now that I’ve had my fun, what’s really going on here is that the Republican party is desperate to take back the US Senate in this November’s election.

So, in order to beat the sitting Democratic Senator from Colorado, Mark Udall, the NRSC and America Rising decided to trump up a 9/11-truther charge against Udall.

How did they do it? The same way I trumped up the same charges against the NRSC and America Rising. They simply took a “quote” from the Senator, and asserted that he agreed with the substance of the quote because he repeated the quote.

Specifically, Udall was at a town meeting in 2007 when some nut job in the audience suggested that 9/11 was an inside job. Udall repeated the question, then rebutted it. Here’s Udall’s refutation, that the NRSC and America Rising don’t bother quoting:

UDALL: I would tell you this, I think we should exhaust every possibility to understand what happened whether there was a structural incident (INAUDIBLE) National Institute of Standards and Technology which we should all be very proud, it’s one of the federal (INAUDIBLE) driving our economy. They’ve been charged with investigating what happened to the steel beams and why the buildings came down. In my readings of their reports, I’ve seen nothing to suggests that there was that kind of pre-placed charges in the building. When it comes time (INAUDIBLE) asked the question. I have to tell you, my wife, public service as a private citizen, when conspiracy theories surface I almost always go first to the stupidity theory? and I think that the key point here is regardless how the buildings came down, we were attacked on 9/11, we were attacked.

But that wasn’t enough for the NRSC and America Rising. They used Udall’s quote of the quote as “proof” that he endorsed the substance of the quote.

Here’s the NRSC communications director:

Okay, I’m game. So the fact that America Rising quoted the quote of the quote, and that the NRSC is promoting America Rising’s Web page quoting the quote of the quote, is “proof” that both America Rising and the NRSC are “lapsing into 9/11 trutherism.”

I wonder what Mitt Romney has to say about his brush with 9/11 trutherism? Perhaps someone should ask him.

CyberDisobedience on Substack | @aravosis | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

20 Responses to “GOP Senate group run by Sen. Moran lapses into 9/11 trutherism”

  1. L_L_L_L says:

    Dear John,
    Let’s be clear on your position in support of the government’s narrative.

    1. You support the continued classification of 28 pages in the

    the report called the “Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After
    the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001”that according to those who have read it (Senators and Congressmen) implicates the Saudis as the ones who provided intelligence and funding to the hijackers. I guess to avoid being a truther you would like this information to remain classified even thou it better informs Americans regarding the attacks of September 11th and what they were all about. I guess you don’t care about who funded or provided intelligence support to the hijackers. You must just not want to know.

    2. As a supporter of NIST’s official narrative regarding WTC7 that was released (2008) after Mr Udall’s comments (2007) you believe in the invisible collapse… like you would a unicorn or magical pixie dust. If I were to be Jonathanesque about it I could question your belief that man landed on the moon or add you to the group that believes aliens walk among us due to your belief in this invisible, unprovable fairy tale collapse.

    Yes, no one can see your official internal collapse. No one can measure the internal collapse, and the magical internal collapse cannot be reproduced in the real world. That’s your side. The NIST organization had nothing scientific to support the invisible internal collapse in the real world so they supported this hypothesis with a computer simulated collapse. Of course the computer collapse does not look like the one we can observe in the video but so what. After they released this all in 2008 they made the input data for that computer model secret (July 2009) so the computer model could not be validated. That is your side; the collapse that cannot be seen, measured or reproduced in the real world supported by an unscientific computer model. Hey but don’t let asking any reasonable questions about that seep in as you want to avoid Trutherism at all costs.

    The people you make fun of , “Truthers”, have a video of WTC7’s collapse that looks like a controlled demolition. They scientifically take measurements of the video and determine the roofline is descending at Freefall (NIST includes this in their report NCSTAR 1A pages 44,45,46). We all know that buildings can be brought down in the same way as we seen in the video by demolition, it has been proven 100s of times. These scientists came to the obvious conclusion that this building (with 52 perimeter and 24 interior columns after the tower collapses) could not suffer the observed, sudden, total, global, symmetrical collapse at freefall acceleration without demolition.

    Funny how for the CD side anyone can observe the video and anyone can take the measurement (like something real) while on the official side you cannot see their collapse or measure the collapse or reproduce it in the real world (like something fake) and yet it is the controlled demolition side that is supposed to be a Conspiracy Theory.

  2. goulo says:

    FWIW, I coincidentally just ran across:

    Top NSA Whistleblower: We Need a New 9/11 Investigation Into the Destruction of the World Trade Center
    (to avert knee-jerk reactions: no, it’s not talking about Snowden, but William Binney):

    “Binney joins many high-level officials – including military leaders,
    intelligence officials and 9/11 commissioners – who are dissatisfied
    with the 9/11 investigations to date.”

    (linked from Bruce Schneier’s security blog entry about William Binney explaining NSA surveillance) :

  3. gratuitous says:

    What? Ask a “respected” Republican about whether or not he agrees with the nutcase ramblings of another Republican? Never gonna happen. Republicans aren’t asked to condemn each other or distance themselves from their lunatic fringe. It’s just stuff that somebody in the party says, and doesn’t really attach to anyone else.

    Now, let’s listen as Fox tells us all about some obscure Democratic functionary in East Bumblefuck whose kooky belief must now be part of the party platform because – Democrat!

  4. goulo says:

    Agreed; it is confusingly hard to tell who really said what, and who is misrepresenting whom, and how many levels of quoting/repeating are going on.

  5. onebrownmouse says:

    oh and if you have the actual transcript — “Specifically, Udall was at a town meeting in 2007 when some nut job in the audience suggested that 9/11 was an inside job. Udall repeated the question, then rebutted it.”

    then you are also lying as no one except Udall brought up an “inside job”– only Udall. Why did you edit out the entire statement from the sane woman who asked the question? It was Udall trying to create the ‘conspiracy’.

    And if you haven’t seen 911 Explosive Evidence–maybe a little science would be good for you?

  6. onebrownmouse says:

    The video was intentionally edited in a fashion that could not be used as a credible source on purpose – so they had to contact the source for the original and that was 6 years ago. The poster has never voted a name next to the letter ‘R’. Look at the videos– they flog any politician or government official who causes harm to Americans.

    The intent was not to pass Udall as a truther, but as another politician who is full of doublespeak and BS. At least CNN asked for (but did not receive) the entire video unedited. Because the video in its entirety could be his demise.

    And I love how the Dems have declared their attempt at a preemptive attack over possible release of a contentious town hall that ended up being Udalls last for 7 years, successful.

    And I find it funny Udalls commercial camera didn’t pick up all the sound that a non commercial camera did. There is no (inaudible) from the audience camera in the unedited meeting.

    And I love how the Udall supporters simply accept the transcript Udall provided as complete–no one questions what was edited out or what was deemed “inaudible”.

  7. SkippyFlipjack says:

    This post was too meta-meta for me.

  8. Silver_Witch says:

    Perhaps had you been inside the buildings hit by the planes you would have seen the bodies, etc….scattered around.

  9. Silver_Witch says:

    Can we start a tweeting campaign of our own repeating this on Fox or something???

  10. doug105 says:

    You forget how dumb some voters are: My opponent is a homosapien is all it takes.

    I ask you, my fellow Americans: is this the kind of person we want in public office to set an example for our youth ? Of course, it’s not surprising that he should have such a typically pristine background — no, not when you consider the other members of his family:

    His female relatives put on a constant pose of purity and innocence, and claim they are inscrutable, yet every one of them has taken part in hortatory activities

    The men in the family are likewise completely amenable to moral suasion

    My opponent’s second cousin is a Mormon

    His uncle was a flagrant heterosexual

    His sister, who has always been obsessed by sects, once worked as a proselyte outside a church

    His father was secretly chagrined at least a dozen times by matters of a pecuniary nature

    His youngest brother wrote an essay extolling the virtues of being a homosapien

    His great-aunt expired from a degenerative disease

    His nephew subscribes to a phonographic magazine

    His wife was a thespian before their marriage and even performed the act in front of paying customers

    And his own mother had to resign from a women’s organization in her later years because she was an admitted sexagenarian

    Now what shall we say of the man himself ?

    I can tell you in solemn truth that he is the very antithesis of political radicalism, economic irresponsibility, and personal depravity. His own record proves that he has frequently discountenanced treasonable, un-American philosophies and has perpetrated many overt acts as well.

    He perambulated his infant son on the street

    He practiced nepotism with his uncle and first cousin

    He attempted to interest a 13-year-old girl in philately

    He participated in a seance at a private residence where, among other odd goings-on, there was incense

    He has declared himself in favor of more homogeneity on college campuses

    He has advocated social intercourse in mixed company — and has taken part in such gatherings himself

    He has been deliberately averse to crime in our streets

    He has urged our Protestant and Jewish citizens to develop more catholic tastes

    Last summer he committed a piscatorial act on a boat that was flying the American flag

    Finally, at a time when we must be on our guard against all foreign “isms”, he has coolly announced his belief in altruism — and his fervent hope that some day this entire nation will be altruistic !

    I beg you, my friends, to oppose this man whose life and work and ideas are so openly and avowedly compatible with our American way of life. A vote for him would be a vote for the perpetuation of everything we hold dear.

    The facts are clear; the record speaks for itself.

    Do your duty.

  11. Ronnyraygun666 says:

    I don’t want to turn this into a 9/11 discussion, but look at the debris after the Malaysian crash in Ukraine. There were bodies and luggage that were easily identifiable. On 9/11, three planes supposedly crashed, all the bodies were vapourised (!) or disappeared down mine shafts or into tiny holes in the Pentagon.

    Come on!!

  12. Ronnyraygun666 says:

    Look no further than the neocons.

  13. Tom Tallis says:

    If it was an inside job, there’s no one more likely to have been involved than Moran and the Republican party.

  14. Dave of the Jungle says:

    I have the impression that most of the people associated with this blog think that facts matter.

  15. caphillprof says:

    Campaign lies are constitutionally protected. You can try to defend them with truth. Or you can fight fire with fire and turn your opponent into a homosexual pedophile who burns the American flag

  16. B00Z says:

    This blog has historically taken the stance that the 9/11 Commission Report is the Bible regarding 9/11.

  17. 2karmanot says:

    And Bigfoot is really Elvis in hiding.

  18. Ronnyraygun666 says:

    I agree. Nothing about 9/11 holds up to close scrutiny.

  19. karlInSanDiego says:

    Are you high? This isn’t about BS birth certificate theories. It’s about an explanation of what happened that day with tons of holes in it. If you are sure that NIST and the 9/11 Commission were right, you probably still believe there was WMD in Iraq, that inspectors weren’t in Iraq prior to our attack, that Yellow Cake and aluminum tubes were a real threat, and that the preemptive strike wasn’t all orchestrated for some other reason than protecting us. Everything we were told about 9/11 was a fabrication, and you question those who dare to question it, as nutjobs. Get over being sure of yourself and how dumb everyone is who understands that it wasn’t a clever attack from a few weak minded terrorists.

© 2021 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS