Just before this clip started, Ruth Marcus, the woman seen in the clip had said "No election can be fair in Donald Trump's mind unless Donald Trump wins it."





This smug little motherfucker Jonathan Capehart needs to have the taste slapped out of his mouth. This prancing little fanny bandit cried on air the day after Trump was elected, and he pulled this shameful shit on the third anniversary of J6:




I'm always amazed when Capehart appears on my screen and it doesn't immediately burst into flames. He claimed that he and his "husband" feared for their lives after Trump was elected. Faggoty little sack of shit. Just get on with it and put on a dress, Nancy.

Hewitt had simply had enough of the bias of his fellow "journalists". You can see in the last line of the article below that Hewitt was headed towards the door for about a year.

Longtime Washington Post columnist Hugh Hewitt quits newspaper

Longtime Washington Post columnist Hugh Hewitt quit the newspaper on Friday, he told Fox News Digital.

Hewitt, a conservative who hosts a nationally syndicated radio show, had been a contributing columnist for the newspaper since 2017 and has written hundreds of pieces.

"I have in fact quit the Post but I was only writing a column for them every six weeks or so," Hewitt told Fox News Digital, adding he'd recently offered to write another pro-Trump column for the paper ahead of the election. He informed editorial page editor David Shipley on Friday morning.

His last piece was published on Tuesday, where he called on the MAGA movement to evolve if Trump was elected president again. He was a rare pro-Trump voice at the liberal outlet, whose opinion roster and editorial board lean sharply to the left, but his pieces touched on a wide variety of topics.

Hewitt quit after a clip of him went viral earlier on Friday when he walked off the Washington Post's online show, "First Look," with liberal columnists Jonathan Capehart and Ruth Marcus on its "Washington Post Live" platform. It came during a discussion of former President Trump's rhetoric around election integrity.

"Does it seem like Donald Trump is laying the groundwork for contesting the election by complaining that cheating was taking place in Pennsylvania?" Capehart asked Marcus. "By suing Bucks County for alleged irregularities, and this is on top of his continual assertion that if he loses, it's because of cheating."

Marcus said Trump had been preparing to blame an election loss on cheating for months.

"No election can be fair in Donald Trump's mind unless Donald Trump wins it," Marcus said.

As Marcus went on, Hewitt tried to interject, but Capehart snapped, "Let Ruth finish, Hugh."

"Well, I’ve just got to say, we’re news people, even though it’s the opinion section," Hewitt said. "It’s got to be reported. Bucks County was reversed by the court and instructed to open up extra days because they violated the law and told people to go home. So that lawsuit was brought by the Republican National Committee, and it was successful. The Supreme Court ruled that Glenn Youngkin was successful.

"We are news people, even though we have opinions, and we have to report the whole story if we bring up part of the story," Hewitt added. "So, yes, he’s upset about Bucks County, but he was right and he won in court. That’s the story."

After a brief pause, Capehart said, "I don't appreciate being lectured about reporting when Hugh, many times, you've come here saying lots of things that aren't based in fact."

Hewitt stood up and said, "I won't come back, Jonathan. I'm done. I'm done. This is the most unfair election ad I've ever been a part of. You guys are working. That's fine. I'm done."

With that, he left, leaving a blank corner of the screen while Capehart went back to Marcus to talk about her column saying the stakes of the election were democracy and "decency."

But then Marcus' screen froze, and further technical difficulties derailed the show from there.

Reached for comment, a Washington Post spokesperson didn't respond to a question about Hewitt's exit but said, "As the newsroom’s live journalism platform, Washington Post Live is known for its dynamic conversations and thought-provoking perspectives on top issues of the day, such as this morning's "First Look" program."

Hewitt's leaving the Post comes on the heels of the decision, at the behest of owner Jeff Bezos, not to endorse a candidate for president this year. The Post's abdication set off an uproar among staffers and readers, leading to resignations and hundreds of thousands of canceled subscriptions.

Bezos also has reportedly called for having more conservative opinion writers, so Hewitt's departure is a blow to that goal.

The Post was set to endorse Kamala Harris – it hasn't backed a Republican for president since it began regularly offering White House endorsements in 1976 – before Bezos pulled the plug, citing efforts to rebuild trust with readers skeptical of the media.

Not a regular columnist for the newspaper, Hewitt had written only seven pieces for the Post in 2024 after penning 48 pieces for it alone in 2023.

Loved it. This clip shows a bit more of that interaction on the front end and the back. The part where Capehart has a bunch of technical malfunctions right after Hugh says screw you guys and leaves is just the chef's kiss.

https://x.com/BrentHBaker/status/1852343512156520799

Good for Hugh Hewitt!!
Calling these leftists out on their BS is a big part of "eternal vigilance".

Capehart is Don Lemon 2.0, just an insufferable sanctimonious twit. Good for Hugh for not putting up with the stream of nonsense.

The sooner Capehart can be run out of the 'news business' the better off the industry will be as some sanity & balance will return. He and Marcus, along with the Raddatz's, Blitzer's and giant laundry list of 'reporters' exemplify the EXACT type of swamp creature that people have been railing-on about Washington media. These people live in multi-layered bubbles, lecturing and pontificating their 'opinions' AND they're all married to one-another, their lives are a giant echo-chamber.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Good for Hugh Hewitt!!
Calling these leftists out on their BS is a big part of "eternal vigilance".

That's what I thought as well. Good for him. You have to call out these MFers more.

Keep in mind that Hugh Hewitt is just doing this now, not before during the many, many times he had an opportunity. It was his first straw, not his last. Bill Barr pulled this on Trump. And see what happened?

You will not see true colors come out just now.

What are you trying to say?

Challenging the outright media lies, bias and omissions should be happening every day. I am suspicious of the guy, and the timing. Does this person have a long history of standing up for balanced coverage and "journalistic standards" at the Washington Post? The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Do you really know what you're talking about?

You know what they say about opinions. Everyone has one.

So, you're not familiar with the particulars. You're just criticizing the man and expressing suspicion because he doesn't rise to some vague standard you have. Armchair quarterbacking at its finest.

This guy has been in the midst of all of the media lies, at the Post, and throughout his career. He sees it every day. He works with those people and their kind every day. So he has a hissy fit one day and makes a scene. I saw the clip a few times. I read an article. That probably makes me as familiar as most. A lot of people in the swamp are repositioning themselves a bit these days as a hedge against Trump winning. And I was referencing nonexistent "journalistic standards." lol

Is there anything that's good enough for you, or may I expect your fabulous input on anything you think you can shit all over?

So, do you believe my suspicion is unfounded or not? Or do you wish to continue to criticize me personally instead?

I think you're going to turn out to be one of those people who criticize those involved in incidents or events such as this one, setting yourself apart from everyone else by finding the worst in positive things.

Oh, OK, Hewitt took a stand, but he should have already done so, so no credit for his actions, and no credit for being a conservative voice at a notoriously leftist news outlet because, hey, what kind of whacky shit is that, huh?

With regards to criticizing you personally, I don't see how I could address your comments without doing so.

Somehow, I was able to avoid criticizing you, keeping the focus on topic. To me, all of the personal criticism BS is noise. If Hugh Hewitt had earned the right to be placed on a pedestal, I wouldn't object.

I do not believe he would have brought up the 'role of the journalist' if this is something that he was not struggling with himself. I found myself confounded at a colleague a few days ago because they perceived something and they were wrong. But there was no convincing them of their wrongness. Upon reflection, I asked myself, how often am I wrong and just did not realize it.

It sure seemed like he was fed up with the whole thing. He seemed to give them one last chance to just 'agree' that yes, sometimes the claims of election fraud were correct. But they could not even do that. so he was done.

What I would be curious, is what it was that truly pushed him over the edge. Was it the "I dont like being lectured" comment?

quote:

Originally posted by Nick42:
This guy has been in the midst of all of the media lies, at the Post, and throughout his career. He sees it every day. He works with those people and their kind every day. So he has a hissy fit one day and makes a scene. I saw the clip a few times. I read an article. That probably makes me as familiar as most. A lot of people in the swamp are repositioning themselves a bit these days as a hedge against Trump winning. And I was referencing nonexistent "journalistic standards." lol

Hugh Hewitt? Swamp?

You are absolutely clueless

There is probably a lot more to the story about how he had just parted ways with the Washington Post. He could have easily been on edge going into the interview.

quote:

Originally posted by Nick42:
Somehow, I was able to avoid criticizing you, keeping the focus on topic.

That's because my comments, unlike yours, were not calculated to find something negative in a clearly positive event. I am being critical of you, personally, because you came in here, criticizing someone who took a stand against the left, and all this "doth protest too much" shit was beyond the pale. I am criticizing you, personally, because your earned it and deserved it.

Because of recent exchanges you and I have had, you know who I am with regards to this forum, and I'll tell you that I don't appreciate it when people are contrary for the sake of being contrary, and this is especially so when they pull this crap in one of my threads, and I don't like being around people who find the worst in things.

You can enjoy a long and satisfying tenure here, but not if you make a habit of what you've done in this thread.