१७ जून, २०१७
"Any future references to this talking point by politicians or political groups will receive Four Pinocchios."
The WaPo Fact Checker lets the NYT off with a warning in "The bogus claim that a map of crosshairs by Sarah Palin’s PAC incited Rep. Gabby Giffords’s shooting."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४३ टिप्पण्या:
I'd like to see Palin sue them for libel and she may be working on the idea.
How many years ago was that shooting?
That is laughable coming from WaPoo.
NYT and WaPoo racing to the bottom.
Unnamed sources say that the NYT is lawyering up.
A small sign of decency.
I'm with the NYT. It's a known fake fact so it's just a performance to bring it up. There's a 4th wall.
It doesn't slander Palin because it's not saying she shot anybody, just speculating on causality. Causality is a butterfly effect. Who's to say that Palin didn't affect something which affected something else and so forth through six degrees of separation to the shooter.
Althouse is as responsible as Palin under the butterfly effect.
WAPO is just shaming the NYT for ruining the brand. Too late.
It was an icon commonly used for registration marks in printed matter; not "crosshairs."
Will nobody take us seriously? - WaPo
The real intent of this new and highly publicized policy is to insulate the MSM, the WaPo in particular, from charges that their rabid anti-Trump rhetoric had anything to do with the radicalization of Hodgkinson.
Since one our left-wing political teammate - James Hodgkinson - shot several innocent Republican softball players - we are journalistically obliged to dredge up an unrelated terrible incident to falsely blame one of our political opponents, Sarah Palin, in order to deflect any umbrage directed at our side.
Yes, it sounds convoluted, but that is how we roll at the Times.
Also, gun control because....guns are mean.
The Radicalization of Emily (1964)
Umbrage.
Curiously, you can't direct shadows with mirrors.
Democracy dies in umbrage.
"It was an icon commonly used for registration marks in printed matter; not "crosshairs."
I am trying to get the same marks out of a pdf version of my medical history book to convert it to Kindle, which has to be in Word.
They are printers marks.
Ssshhh, you're giving the game away and opening us up to lawsuits.
Every successful shooting or killing of an elected federal official in the last hundred years:
1) Steve Scalise, by a Bernie Sanders supporter targeting Republicans.
2) Gabrielle Giffords, by a paranoid schizophrenic who worried about a government conspiracy to perform mind control by manipulating English grammar.
3) Larry McDonald, by Soviet fighter jets.
4) Ronald Reagan, by a lunatic who wanted to impress Jodie Foster.
5) Leo Ryan, by Jonestown cultists.
6) John Stennis, by a mugger.
7) RFK, by a Palestinian terrorist.
8) JFK, by a Marxist.
9-13) Five congressmen of both parties, by Puerto Rican independence terrorists.
14) Huey Long, by the son-in-law of a judge Long was trying to remove from office.
As usual my non-sequitur - the two millionaire heads of the NYT and WP are collaborating in CYA mode. Heading off litigation.
The press is systematically destroying itself. The bloggers announced a dozen years ago that they were here to fact check their asses. But the press has doubled down on a hard 16 against a dealer face card.I
I am hoping Sarah Palin extracts her pound of flesh and accepts no settlement offers. Do not let go that wounded beast.
Gabby Giffords’s shooting.
She's special!
That's why the murders of Christina-Taylor Green, Dorothy Morris, John Roll, Phyllis Schneck, Dorwan Stoddard and Gabriel Zimmerman are called the "Gabby Giffords’s shooting".
A warning to the NYT but everyone else is a liar? The fact checker dies in darkness.
"The WaPo Fact Checker lets the NYT off with a warning." A fake check of a fake fact. The only thing real in prog world is their utter commitment to the pursuit of power and more power.
Adam Schiff (D- corrupt liar) is a walking 4 Pinocchio.
Rene Saunce gets the original credit for being first to post about this particular depredation of the New York Times, with a link.
And hours later, David French used his very best French to disembowel the New York Times Editorial Board in this online column:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448664/new-york-times-steve-scalise-shameful-editorial
I don't view any of this through any Trump-hued lens. The New York Times was doing stuff like this long before Trump. And the National Review was taking down the Times long before Trump. All that Trump added to the debate was confusion, more hyperbole, a gross amount of inaccuracy, and new questions to be answered by Republicans about how can they defend stuff that Trump is putting out.
I don't have any problems defending the stuff that David French is putting out.
"Any future references to this talking point by politicians or political groups will receive Four Pinocchios."
But not this actual use of it. It won't receive any Pinocchios at all.
Shouldn't a fact checker (at a newspaper) who is fact checking external claims hold other newspapers to a much higher standard than, say, a politician? Oh wait, I forgot. Spock has a beard in this universe. Never mind.
Good job WaPo!
"The real intent of this new and highly publicized policy is to insulate the MSM, the WaPo in particular, from charges that their rabid anti-Trump rhetoric had anything to do with the radicalization of Hodgkinson."
They can no more stop themselves from shitting their bed than they can stop themselves from breathing. I delight in the Left's incontinence.
Professional Courtesy.
I hope she sues.
This crap needs to end.
The pro-democrat hack press think they can lie lie lie. I think she should sue them into the ground.
Inga: "Good job WaPo"
And very timely! Only years after it would have been appropriate.
But then, dem election requirements necessitated letting the smear "slide" for awhile.
Exactly.
Alex Jones turned his conspiracy theories towards the left recently. but the left were perfectly fine with Alex Jones' 'Bush knew! 9/11 inside job' lies.
It took two--count 'em, two--corrections for the NYT to get its facts right. Effing hilarious. And the act of journalistic malpractice that required those corrections (probably to avoid a libel suit)? That received only a friendly warning from WaPo's fact checker, because they're shocked--shocked--to find that dissembling is going on in here!
Rob -
The NYT knew they were lying. The pro-Democrat hack press don't care at all about intellectual honestly, they care about scoring wish-fact points for team corruptocrat.
Corrections can be buried later on page 39D.
"It took two--count 'em, two--corrections for the NYT to adjust the narrative enough to create plausible deniability.
FIFY
WaPo fact-checker is so counter-intuitive.
"This column is checked for accuracy, the rest of the paper? Not so much."
Hey, that would have been great if they maybe said that back then.
Poor WaPo, the Internet never forgets.
Left Bank of the Charles said...
A warning to the NYT but everyone else is a liar? The fact checker dies in darkness.
6/17/17, 9:47 AM
Hey, if Dyson can suck Maher's dick, surely Bezos can give Slim a reach around...
About fucking time, MSM!
A step in the right direction, I suppose. Hope some right wing nut doesn't upset things by murdering Schumer, Pelosi, Fienstien, Harris, Clinton or any other dem.
Would be terrible to see their head explode on TV while giving a speech, shot with a high powered rifle by some alt right wanting to even the score.
Of course, the guy would be a hero to other crazies, and some mostly sane people thinking what goes down, comes around.
Collect all 1,000 Pinocchios and get free™ woodworking kit!
I haven't heard much about Sarah Palin before this f*ck-up by the NYT. I suspect she'd like the publicity that a libel suit against the Times would generate, and she'd also like the money from the settlement. I hope she sues and doesn't settle low. The Times' commentary was inexcusable. All they had to do was attribute the slur to "present and former" federal officials and they'd have been home free.
The NYTs and WaPo knew exactly what they were doing. 3 days coverage of shooting GOP Congressmen out of news cycle, Palin-Trump controversy bumped them out of news cycle.
Mass assassination attempt of GOP Congressmen? If it happened to Dems there would be 24/7 coverage, punditry, analysis, push polls etc for WEEKS if not months.
We got played.
*not my insight, credit to Prof Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा