Seth Abramson: Did Sean Hannity say B-52's about to strike Iran when airliner was shot down?

[Dennis Donovan]

Link to tweet

Seth Abramson ✔ @SethAbramson

I've seen the claim several places, but does anyone have video or a reliable news source confirming Trump adviser Sean Hannity said on-air, online, or on radio that Iran was about to be hit by B52s shortly before an Iranian battery allegedly mistook an airliner for a US warplane?


Seth Abramson ✔ @SethAbramson

(I ask because no country, having been told by the leader of a geopolitical foe that it could be bombed at any time, would fail to monitor the communications of a top adviser to that leader who happened to be *on-air* at the time of a potential airstrike. So this *does* matter.)

1:23 PM - Jan 9, 2020

On edit: Yes, yes he did:

Link to tweet

Seth Abramson ✔ @SethAbramson

VIDEO/ OK, here it is...and...{*sigh*}... JFC—I hate this. It's bad. Bad because he did what folks said, there's no doubt Iran was watching, and based on the Trump-Hannity history of near-daily contact it's possible his source for this fake news was POTUS.

&feature=youtu.be …

1:29 PM - Jan 9, 2020

More from Seth (since the OP was posted):

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[jpak]

1. There were B-52s deployed to Diego Garcia recently

Air Force Sends B-52 Bombers to Diego Garcia Amid Middle East Buildup: Report

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/01/06/air-force-sends-b-52-bombers-diego-garcia-amid-middle-east-buildup-report.html

The U.S. Air Force is sending six B-52 Stratofortress bombers to Diego Garcia, a military hub that acts as a strategic location for operations in both the Middle East and the Pacific.

Citing a U.S. official, CNN on Monday reported that the Cold War-era bomber will be "available for operations against Iran if ordered."

However, the latest "deployment does not signal that operations have been ordered," CNN reported.

"For operational security, we are not discussing forces flowing into or out of the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility at this time," Pentagon spokeswoman Cmdr. Rebecca Rebarich told Military.com in response to a request for comment.

<more>

[dewsgirl]

2. I feel like we need new emojis for this epic disaster.

😳

[Dennis Donovan]

3. This is so dark...

[Pacifist Patriot]

14. I can't wrap my head around it.

Worse than a rejected Hollywood script.

[blm]

26. ✔️

[HubertHeaver]

4. The six B-52s he mentioned were actually on their way to Diego Garcia.

Actually they can hit anywhere in the world from stateside bases. Moving to a forward location is not necessary but it is a threatening gesture.

Edit: I should have read the first post before replying. I listened to Hannity's somewhat garbled ranting and disagreed that he said the bombers were on the way to Iran. Good example of why one needs more than one information source.

[Dennis Donovan]

5. He announced that "52" F-35's were on their way to bomb targets in Iran.

52? Where had I heard that before?

Seth thought he mentioned B-52's, but the video shows Hannity announcing, as fact, that the F-35's were on their way.

[HubertHeaver]

6. I just listened to the blowhard again.

He said the 6 B-52s were on their way to the region and that 52 F-35s had launched. He didn't say where they were going. The implication was they were Iran-bound but he did not state that specifically.

[Dennis Donovan]

7. Yeah, the B-52 comment was vague, but not the "52 F-35's" being launched. n/t

[Ford_Prefect]

20. They do not have 52 fully functioning F-35s that can be put in the air in combat at one location.

Bloody plane still cannot be used in combat unless weather conditions are 10 x perfect and they have a flock of f-15's to do the real heavy lifting.

Point is the comment could not be true operationally. So it had to be fake news.

[Blue_true]

25. The workhorses in any attack on Iran would likely be the F-18 and F-22,

particularly the F-22, which has some stealth capability.

But on Hannity. Trump said that he would destroy 52 sites in Iran, then on the night Iran was on high alert, Hannity vaguely says that 52 F35s had launched. It makes sense that the Iranians would be trigger happy upon hearing Hannity, given what Trump had said.

[HubertHeaver]

37. Perhaps it was one (1) F-35 they tried to launch 52 times.

You know how it is...sometimes ya just can't get it up.

[EndlessWire]

44. HaHaHa!! n/t

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

38. the 52 F35's he was likely referring to

Was the exercise the Air Force did on Monday. They launched 52 F35A's from Hill AFB in Utah.

[link:https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a30432841/f-35-elephant-walk/|]

[link:|]

[dpibel]

10. At 0:33

He says six B-52s are "on their way to the region."

True, not saying the B-52s were headed for targets. But rather a fine distinction in such a vomit of bellicosity.

[AtheistCrusader]

19. He said the F-35's launched in succession, in a show of force.

A part of a planned exercise.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/world/2020/01/07/US-Air-Force-launches-52-f-35s-in-rapid-succession-as-part-of-planned-exercise.html

[DesertRat]

8. People need to watch the video. Hannity has the blood of those passengers on his hands

[renate]

9. I've spent about 30 seconds in the past 3 years watching Fox, if that

Wow. I can see how the country has become so divided. That absolute confidence could be pretty convincing to people who 1) think it's illegal for a "news" channel to lie and 2) have been trained to follow blindly.

Anyway--I'd love to hear from a military person about this. Could what Hannity said be perceived by the Iranian military as the equivalent of "Incoming!" or was he saying that things could escalate over days? Because if it's the former... that's pretty damning.

[sarisataka]

23. I can guarantee

The people operating the SAM were not watching Hannity.

Someone in the "military" probably was watching as the open intelligence gathering groups love the US media. That said they would also know he is a blowhard and would not have information on an active mission in real time.

I can picture an Iranian officer telling his troops Hannity says American B-52s are on the way and some private responding "Who the fuck is Hannity?"

[FakeNoose]

11. Sean Hannity just started WWIII single-handedly

Gee, thanks Hannity! Iranian drones are on their way to your house and they're loaded with nukes.

[alwaysinasnit]

12. He must have been briefed on what to say. He was just the mouthpiece to set the bait.

[FakeNoose]

15. I'm sure you're right about that

... however he's still the public face & mouthpiece for the orange anus in the White House.

[alwaysinasnit]

16. Yup, all roads lead back to the orange anus and his lickspittle lackeys.

[rickyhall]

13. I'd love to see Dumbass Hannity wearing orange instead of worshiping Orangeman.

[PurgedVoter]

17. Crying fire in a movie theatre

Trump just blew up a man. He has as mentioned bombing and using nuclear weapons.
Someone allowed Hannity to know the threatening relocation of US military equipment.
Hannity announced threatening maneuvers in a manner that would reasonably strike fear into those who are trying to protect their homeland.
Trump and Hannity of course are delighted to try and sound macho while striking fear into people they care nothing about.

A blip on the radar and a delay on identification and anyone under the circumstances might pull a trigger fearing an attack from America.

Trumps guilt, 100% and he could not care less. Hannity's guilt, 100% and he would only care if it hurt his ratings. The poor man who pulled the triggers guilt, a questionable number based on the information he had at the time. That man will probably be haunted the rest of his days.

With Trump at the wheel, we are a terrorist nation. We are using terror as a weapon. We may use words like shock and awe, but it all comes down to the use of terror as a means.

[wnylib]

18. So, in other words, through Hannity, Trump

set up the situation that caused the Iranians to shoot down a commercial passenger plane.

Next question is whether the hype about American bombers was meant to intimidate Iran with bluff about an imminent US attack on Iran, knowing that Iran would be monitoring Hannity. So was the shoot down an unexpected consequence? Did it work so well that Iran reacted by shooting down the plane? And I have to also ask the nearly unthinkable -- Did Trump and Hannity anticipate the danger to commercial passenger flights and hope to achieve what happened in order to kill innocent Iranians and simultaneously make Iran look bad for killing its own people? Is it even possible that Trump could have known there was a flight due to leave that night or is that too far fetched?

Whatever the case, the Trump/Hannity hype is responsible for the crash. If they deliberately set up a plane to be shot, both of them should be delivered to Tehran for justice.

[ArcticFox]

22. I'd guess there's several flights leaving most nights

I'm sure they never thought about rhe potential for Iran to short down a passenger plane. I find it hard to believe even now. But if that's what happened, I would not be surprised if some would take glee..

[sarisataka]

24. I thought Trump was stupid

But if he can set up a situation where during an Iranian strike on Iraq, he has Hannity make a vague reference to B-52s on the way to Iran and knows that will cause Iran to shoot down an airplane over Tehran, that is some prescient genius.

[Blue_true]

28. I don't think any of it was related.

Iran just happened to be launching a missile strike when Hannity implied that US warplanes had launched (without more specific detail), giving the specific number of 52 that Trump had mentioned a few days earlier.

I disagree with you. If I were an Iranian commander of a surface to air missile crew, if I heard a guy who my nation's intelligence agency showed TALKED directly to Trump, if I saw a big blip that looked like a B-52 or B-2, I would take minimal chances for allowing a strike on my country by waiting. If our own Navy can shoot down a commercial airplane that was coming toward a Carrier group by mistake, why do you think the Iranians would be any less prone to do the same thing?

[wnylib]

41. Not sure why you said that you disagree

with me. There is nothing in what I said to disagree with. I was just posing questions, not making statements.

The questions were, Was the Hannity broadcast meant to intimidate Iran with bluster? To impress Trump's base with how tough he was in dealibg with the situation? Is there a possibility that the broadcast was meant to make Iran edgy enough to fire at any planes in the area?

If none of the above, then what on earth was the purpose of such bragging about US power?

[Blue_true]

42. It has been a well know item of knowledge that Trump and Hannity

speak directly to eachother. Why would foreign intelligence operatives know that and communicate it to people in their country. Hannity repeated a number that Trump used relative to Iran and he talked about instruments that Trump indicated would be used. What is it that you don't get about why what Hannity said would not cause an incident in a place where military people were already on edge?

[wnylib]

43. If Iranians were already on edge, which

I'm sure they were, then wouldn't Hannity's broadcast increase the already existing tension, leading to the shooting down of a passenger plane? Due to the tensions the accident might have happened snyway. But Trump's threats, repeated by Hannity, surely heightened the tension even more.

[Blue_true]

45. I think that Trump's threats increased the hair-trigger aspect of things.

If you were a commander charged with being the leading-edge protection for your country, would you take a chance on a given unknown? A threat had been made by a powerful adversary, no sane commander would have taken a chance and let the country get bombed.

Trump's loose words killed the people in the recent shot down airliner, as well as the one the US Navy accidentally shot down earlier.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

21. Sorry Dennis, been out of pocket. Does this mean WE

Shot airliner down or Iran did? I'm confused. And Iranians took this info from Hannity and thought the airliner was a bomber?

Please elaborate for the dense

[Blue_true]

31. It looks like Iran shot down the plane by mistake.

Just like our own Navy shot down a commercial airliner under similar circumstances (on high alert due to a foe talking shit), then why would ANYONE claim that Iran should be better? Hannity mentioned a number, 52, Trump had a couple of days earlier said that was the number of Iranian cultural sites that would be targeted. If a missile crew was protecting the air near one of those sites and indirect word of what Hannity said came to the commander, the crew would immediately start scanning the ski for a big target that may be a bomber. How can anyone be casual about the mistake our Navy, the best in the world by far, made and out the other side of the mouth blame Iran for doing the very same thing under very similar circumstances?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

32. Thanks for update! You know what the worst thing is...is

hearing that Hannity could have indirectly caused this and normal news is 10 steps behind. Just heard CNN say a "trigger happy" person shot plane down.

Trump part to blame for this. His fucking loose lips. I didn't think I could hate him more, but found out I can.

[Turbineguy]

27. This would be a problem

for Fox News if the timings worked out.

I'm sure the shoot down was not planned by trump or hannity. But people who cause accidents are still liable even if it was not on purpose.

It would not be the first time Fox News influenced military action. But this time with such devastating consequences. No doubt trump and the republicans will be hard at work protecting their propaganda outlet from accountability.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

33. I don't know if I'd be "sure"....trump hates Ukraine. So true

that when you have a pathological liar as "president". When it matters you can't believe him.

[MerryBlooms]

29. Skeevy little fooker.

[Initech]

30. How much is Fox News running the country right now?

How does freaking Sean Hannity get that kind of information?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

35. Late night unsecured cell phone calls from Blotus

Trump can not keep secrets. And won't follow protocols from the past. This guys gonna really trip up sometime this year. Wish we still had hundreds upon hundreds of good investigative reporters.

[ecstatic]

34. Lock him up!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

36. In the insane asylum wing and allow press

To publish his pic everyday

[Dennis Donovan]

39. kick - more info added

[Dennis Donovan]

40. AZcentral: Media coverage of the missile attack

https://www.azcentral.com/story/entertainment/media/2020/01/07/how-fox-news-msnbc-cnn-covered-iran-missile-attack/2839877001/

<snip>

When news commentators arrive, the tone shifts

<snip>

Then there is Sean Hannity.

To the surprise of no one, Hannity immediately started making threats, saying bombers were on the way to the region and sounding like a schoolyard bully, gloating about how Mullahs better hide in their bunkers and refinery workers might want to change jobs pretty quick. He could not have sounded happier.

This is a problem.

When it comes to reporting the news, and when reasonable people like Chris Wallace weigh in on Fox News, it actually contributes to the conversation. When Hannity brags about potential bloodshed it isn’t just dispiriting in comparison. It’s dangerous.

It’s one thing to defend Trump’s lies about the biggest inauguration in history or whatever. It’s another to openly campaign for more attacks — and we know how Trump watches Hannity.

Networks started sending emails bragging that they broke the story first, but in an age of live-tweeting, does that even matter anymore? Tuesday night was a reminder that, for all of the technical advances, we are in uncharted territory, with Trump's fast and loose association with the truth. No matter what side of the aisle you support, healthy skepticism is crucial.

</snip>