Warren and Harris reiterated the protesters’ narrative in two separate tweets on the five-year anniversary of the shooting, using the moment to call for action against systemic racism and police violence....Fine line?! That's written as if Warren and Harris were speaking out right after the death, before the investigation. But they wrote this week — both calling it "murder" — 4 years after the investigation concluded that the killing was justified. They're not walking a fine line. They're crudely, clumsily groping for black voters. It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing.
The tweets expose the fine line that Warren, Harris, and others calling attention to police brutality have to walk. Individual police shootings and killings can and do help draw attention to genuine, broader issues surrounding police violence and systemic racism. But because the original narrative around the shootings can simply turn out to be wrong as we get more evidence, there’s a risk that attaching calls for reform too much to individual shootings and killings can backfire....
I looked on Twitter to see if Harris had addressed her credibility problem. She tweets a lot but has nothing new since the WaPo fact-check went up at 3 a.m. She should respond. Quickly. In the meantime, in the category of racial politics, she's got this:
Trump’s vilified minorities and immigrants since the day he stepped down that escalator and announced his candidacy.— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) August 12, 2019
Dude’s gotta go.https://t.co/3iiA9Owl8g
I would have written "stepped onto that elevator," but I'm not going to criticize "Dude's gotta go," because Trump himself uses casual, slangy lingo. They say it's not "presidential," though.
Posts
116 comments:
Cynical, damagaing, patronizing, and Democratic.
I blame the Obama DOJ. They came to the right conclusion, but were too scared to publicize it.
It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing... and not much of a surprise.
Althouse you misunderstood the title. Its missing a word. The original title was:
"explained away"
They're not confused, just comfortable with the narrative. As are their audience.
It's not a play for black votes as much as votes for that comfort. We can be trusted with the narrative.
Like Biden, Harris and Warren promulgate the TRUTH.
FACTS be damned.
They really do think blacks are so easily manipulated. As if responsible black people would ever want the likes of a Michael Brown anywhere near their neighborhood.
Did soap opera women believe the tabloids, back in the day? Not exactly. They knew it was an extravagance for them but always entertaining.
Axios is a left-wing site. They realized that if they titled all their left-wing propaganda as "Explaining" things they could get some boobs to buy the bait. Its like when the WaPo 'factchecks' something. They aren't "fact-checking" they're running the old "We're leftists but we pretend to be "objective journalists" Scam.
Blacks are easily manipulated because it's a better narrative than the alternative. That they're not being discriminated against.
Could not be better said Ann
Note that Vox's only concern with Warren and Harris pushing this outright lie is that it might end up harming The Cause.
You don't have to manipulate Blacks. They vote 80-90% D - NO MATTER WHAT. They're manipulating white women - especially the NPR - soccer mom crowd.
Go read that second report in detail. The claim of wide spread discrimination is based on 6 emails and tightening down on car violations. A complete farce and CYA document.
Just as she and Beto, Booker, and Biden continue to push the lie that Trump condoned white supremacy after Charlottesville, when it's been demonstrated over and over that he did no such thing.
Warren and Harris are just terrible people.
So are democrats in general at this point.
James K said...
Just as she and Beto, Booker, and Biden continue to push the lie that Trump condoned white supremacy after Charlottesville, when it's been demonstrated over and over that he did no such thing.
Exactly.
Democrats are just terrible people.
Wow that was terrific Ann. No word play, just plain writing and to the point. Bravo.
There's even a positive in standing by obvious false facts. This is how much we can be trusted to stay in that world.
Some dubiously false fact would have no impact.
What is interesting about this is that there are policies and initiatives that could be advanced to change the situation in places like Ferguson. Economically moribund with parasitical local government. But no. Racist, bad police, the same old tropes.
There seems to be some desperation, maybe the Democrats are getting indications that they are going to have to compete for the black vote. I hope so. It would force a big change in both parties for the good.
The Trump vision for blacks is identify as American, not black. Then you fit in wherever you fit in, but it's real fitting in.
Scott Adams's diagnosis (dia.gnosis) is that they want to avoid cognitive dissonance.
My version is that they can't find their feet in the real world. It's a foreign land. So they avoid entering it.
What Otto said.
Also, racism is bad, particularly when acted on.
Acting on one's own racism by viciously and falsely accusing others of racist crimes is equally bad.
"It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing."
Keep this thoughtcrime up and you may end up becoming a conservative.
Next step: Buying a firearm, just because the lying know-it-alls say that you should not.
Why should truth matter?
These are power struggles with few constraints left, and the stakes are incredible.
Its been that way for many years now.
Indeed, the post-shooting events of 2014, for the most part, were the result of a deliberate, well organized propaganda effort.
Warren and Harris. We haven't heard from Beto or Bernie. Maybe they were too clever to use the word "Murder".
Like the Gospels have five versions of the same story, somewhat incompatible with each other, just so that the literal story isn't mistaken for the real message.
The literal story isn't important in Ferguson and should positively be ignored in favor of its point.
Sort of a gospel.
All this is deliberate, calculated, and done with malicious intent.
They're shameless. They're Democrats. But I repeat myself...
Its not about being "Conservative" or "liberal" its about telling the truth.
Which to the Democrats doesn't matter anymore. There was no "MURDER". And Blacks aren't going to vote for Harris and warren because they lie about it.
It's a shot across the bow. Either you believe Blacks have the right to assault and beat whites, or White-Hispanics, at will, or you vote Republican.
They're crudely, clumsily groping for black voters. It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing.
..and it works.
The Mueller "probe" failed them.
The economy is booming.
"White Supremacy" is all they got and they know deep down that blacks have been convinced by Affirmative Action that they are inferior. That's why African blacks don't buy the victim thing,. Only American blacks, after 50 years of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, think they need white leftists to succeed.
Does the officer have a case? I’d sue and ask for a written apology.
Warren was a Harvard Law professor. Harris was the California AG. They know better.
Vox is simply doing the work to which the NeverTrumpers and LLR's can't get around.
To be fair, there is an incredibly fine line between being a Progressive and being a lying sack of shit.
I think what Vox is getting at is that, in their view, Progs can be forgiven if they veer over that line in hot pursuit of the greater good, the line being imperceptible to most people.
The real story of Ferguson is about 20 people - most of them black - lied or hallucinated about what happened. The claimed they saw the Police kill Mike Brown when he had his arms up and yelled "Don't shoot".
Except almost all of them weren't able to see or hear what they claimed. Because they were in the wrong place when it happened. Some of them just flat out lied. Like Mike Brown's "Friend".
"Warren was a Harvard Law professor. Harris was the California AG. They know better."
Yeah, its like Stalin. Chairman of Politburo and yet insisted on show trials and shooting people. He knew better.
Desperate Democrats do desperate things.
I wonder why Kamala Harris would need to pander for black votes after the last debate?
"It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing."
Thank you.
I've seen several democrat spokespeople on this (e.g. just saw Richard Fowler), and the standard approach is to admit at the beginning of the interview that it wasn't murder, and then proceed to spend the rest of the interview negating that admission with vague answers and negative head shaking.
It's reprehensible.
Has Joe Biden spent any time this week discussing how he, a smart white VP, convinced Harry Truman to drop the bomb on the Japanese?
"Cynical, Damaging, and Patronizing"
Isn't that the name of the law firm Warren worked for? I mean, until they found out she wasn't a real Indian.
Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris’s controversial Michael Brown tweets, explained:
They lied.
The question no reporter will ask at a press conference.(if elected will they agree to match Presdident Trump on the number of press conferences), "are you going to govern in office, the same way you are running for office? Using lies?
"...explained."
Or, rationalized, recast, obfuscated, fudged, minimized, justified, refracted, sublimated, transfigured.
Add your own verb here. Make it good one, I know you've got them.
Anyone else watching the Perseid meteor shower?
You understate. They are reprehensible liars telling destructive lies. This particular lie is one of the most corrosive of the past decade. It got and will get people killed.
Bob Boyd said: "To be fair, there is an incredibly fine line between being a Progressive and being a lying sack of shit."
Is it actually a line, or is it more like an infinitesimal?
Asking for a mathematical friend. He's into continuity in a big way.
cloudy and rainy here in NE iowa
"Anyone else watching the Perseid meteor shower?"
Not with a full moon.
AA: Thanks for putting this so clearly. It is insulting (the soft bigotry of low expectations) to think that black voters can be swayed by these transparent appeals. Black voters will vote for the Democrat in large numbers, no matter who the Democrat is. But black voters are not mindless idiots who will swing to the most extreme "anti-white" candidate.
Here is proof, in case you needed it, that President Trump is gaining approval in the black community.
The flak is most intense over the target.
'Anyone else watching the Perseid meteor shower?'
There are several boats heading out in an hour or so. We don't have much 'light pollution' around here, but a nearly-full moon will dampen the show. Nonetheless, we'll persist... :)
Lincolntf: Alas not I. It is clouding up here in Jersey.
The Quadrantiids are often readily visible here, but you have to be willing to stand in the dark on one of the coldest nights of the year, since they come in January. Too old and lazy to do that now, but I saw them once driving down to the shore before dawn on a photographic expedition. A kind of bonus.
Is it actually a line, or is it more like an infinitesimal?
It's a distinction without a difference.
And I bet those two are just fine with the look away re the "witnesses" that perjured themselves.
I'm in NC, I've seen just one "shooting star" so far, but I'll keep looking for a while.
What Sean said.
Cynical, damagaing, patronizing, and Democratic.
I'd add - purposeful deception, to keep people angry and in line.
Isn't it sad and pathetic that pandering to black voters = lying to them.
For Progs there is always something more important than the truth.
Dennis Prager: "Truth is not a left wing value."
They are both bad people.
End of story.
What's really sad and pathetic is the people who know it's a lie, but choose to accept it anyway because it feels so good to believe something bad about somebody else.
It's the same feeling enjoyed by chronic gossips.
A classroom example of a Big Lie repeated with passionate pretense until it becomes the Biden Truth. And then there is nothing to stop fake justice which is actual murder of the innocent. And whose method was that?
Two presidential candidates lie about a police officer. Why - they know most Americans did not read the report.
I'd think Darren Wilson should sue them.
My response to this post:
Exactly right, Althouse. Well said.
Flashback to: The entire Democratic hack press did the "hands up don't shoot" lie on Q for the masses. and the lie spread like wildfire.
RAchel Maddow interviewed Brown's convenience store theft accomplice and ignored all the other eye witnesses. She interviewed Brown's liar accomplice as many times has she interviewed Adam Schit and Michael Avenetti.
oops
What Ann said.
Cynical, damaging, patronizing.
All those things and more.
I assume that when the NYTimes and WaPo report the Warren and Harris claims they'll include the "without evidence" phrase they love to use whenever Trump says something.
Right?
Right?
Seems like the left is going all in with this "truth vs facts" thing.
Didn't AOC spill the beans on this a couple of weeks ago?
Now Biden, Warren and Harris.
Don't think it will work, but it's all they have.
Right you are Ken.
You'd think that such an obvious lie would backfire on them, but it won't happen. It's not a gaffe but an outright lie. There should be some outrage but the media will ignore it. No late night comedian will include it in his jibes. When is the last time you heard anything about Smollett or the DA who dropped all charges against him?
Anyone who admits voting Democrat is dead to me.
"Hands up, Don't Lie!"
Just as a matter of curiousity, can anyone here remember the last time a black politician lost support in the black community for being too anti-white. They can't even denounce Robert Mugabe or Winnie Mandela.
Well the best part of this is it will ensure I will never vote for these shitbirds who would so quickly throw law enforcement under the bus even after a thorough investigation had cleared them of any wrongdoing. I can never vote for people like that. Ever.
Trump can retweet their comments, with this: "Senators Harris and Warren are claiming a massive coverup by the Obama Justice Department. I will be asking AG Barr to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate racism in the department from 2009 to 2017."
"They're not walking a fine line. They're crudely, clumsily groping for black voters. It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing."
Right. But not just groping for black voters: tarring the country as racist to the core. That's what progs do. That's who they are. At what point, Althouse, will you decide that progs have done enough damage, and that none of them should get close to power ever again?
I wish I could believe along with some of the commenters here that telling lies to stir up racial resentments among blacks works only because the media hide the truth. Then I remember the OJ Simpson trial.
Blogger Gordon Scott said...
Trump can retweet their comments, with this: "Senators Harris and Warren are claiming a massive coverup by the Obama Justice Department. I will be asking AG Barr to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate racism in the department from 2009 to 2017."
Would that happen before or after Trump retweets an allegation that the 42nd President of the United States was responsible for arranging the murder of Jeffrey Epstein under the nose of Trump’s own Attorney General?
Blogger Automatic_Wing said...Note that Vox's only concern with Warren and Harris pushing this outright lie is that it might end up harming The Cause.
At least Vox didn't seem to spin this to justify Harris and Warren's tweets. I give Vox credit for that. This might be the first time I have read a Vox article and didn't call BS.
Not only should Warren and Harris be sued for slander, there should also be ethics complaints filed against them before their respective state bars.
"Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris’s controversial Michael Brown tweets, explained."
See Althouse, they're not lies, just controversial.
And Vox can even explain them.
Those who liked the tweets can skip to the next article.
But it works.
"Would that happen before or after Trump retweets an allegation that the 42nd President of the United States was responsible for arranging the murder of Jeffrey Epstein under the nose of Trump’s own Attorney General?"
Yeah, Yeah.
Damn that slacker Barr.
Meanwhile, all quiet chez Clintons.
One reason I don't trust Snopes (Ann is mostly favorable) is they will not conclude the Mike Brown "hands up, don't shoot" narrative is false. Snopes are cowards in debunking the current urban myths, if those myths will get them in trouble with the Left.
Hands up, don't shoot is FALSE.
Eh, you should see what Beto is doing.
Neither the Missouri state government for the Federal government ever said how far Michael Brown ran toward police officer Darren Wilson, but I determined -- and illustrated -- the distance from witness statements.
My blog article determining the distance.
One illustration
Another illustration
I could not find any Snopes discussion of “Hands up, don’t shoot.”
Is there a Snopes link we should look at?
Snopes debunks a number of rumors about Mike Brown that his detractors have stirred. Nobody really cares about these absurd rumors. The main narrative, "hands up, don't shoot" adopted by people seeking power in government, they refuse to address.
Drago said...
Vox is simply doing the work to which the NeverTrumpers and LLR's can't get around.
Max Boot called even NRO white supremacists. Even the LLR's are turning on each other now.
It isn't that they aren't trying to do the work. It is that the masks are off and they can't do the work.
Because nobody listens to them and they are completely worthless people.
You can also search what Snopes says about officer Darren Wilson, the man who shot and killed Mike Brown. Pathetic search for the truth.
Blogger Limited Perspective said...
Snopes debunks a number of rumors about Mike Brown that his detractors have stirred. Nobody really cares about these absurd rumors. The main narrative, "hands up, don't shoot" adopted by people seeking power in government, they refuse to address.
Oh, okay; that is what I thought. You are angry at Snopes for not doing the story at all. Not that they published any inaccuracies.
There is a rather good Wikipedia page for “Hands up, don’t shoot.” And it rather clinically (and rightly!) debunks the original hysteria over “Hands up don’t shoot.” Maybe Snopes thought the story was done and they had nothing to add.
Oh, okay; that is what I thought. You are angry at Snopes for not doing the story at all. Not that they published any inaccuracies.
Lies by omission.
Buck Sexton
Verified account @BuckSexton
Aug 10
Buck Sexton Retweeted Ryan Saavedra
Maybe William Barr is also tied to the imaginary hackers who broke into her blog 10 years ago with a time machine to write homophobic trash under her byline.
Sadly, the FBI has yet to find the perpetrators.
Ryan Saavedra
Verified account @RealSaavedra
MSNBC’s Joy Reid appears to suggest that Attorney General William Barr might be connected to Jeffrey Epstein’s death
The three Black liars -- Dorian Johnson, Piaget Crenshaw and Tiffany Mitchell -- were not independent witnesses.
They knew each other. Johnson and Crenshaw lived in the neighborhood and had socialized with each other. Crenshaw and Mitchell were co-workers and had driven to the location in one vehicle. Crenshaw introduced Johnson to Mitchell right after the incident.
The three discussed the incident with each other before they began their public statements.
All three were in the vicinity when Wilson was shooting Brown, but none of the three happened to be looking at Wilson and Brown when the shooting happened.
After the shooting happened, the three got together and discussed it, and they simply supposed that Brown was standing still, holding his hands up and trying to surrender. After their discussion, all three simply pretended to the public that they actually had seen their false supposition happen.
All three of them were lying that they had seen the shooting, but their lies matched because they had agreed on their false supposition.
The three were not reliable witnesses. All three were scatter-brains who were dishonest, reckless and tendentious in their statements.
All three were also rather stupid. I studied all their statements that were available. They could not tell their stories in detail. Their answers to investigators' questions were rambling, vague and contradictory. They talked like scatter-brains -- stupid people who do not think and talk coherently.
When they appeared on television, they impressed much of the television audience. There, though, they were allowed to respond to questions in their rambling manner.
It was different when they responded to detailed questions from investigators who were informed by other eyewitnesses and by physical evidence. Then the three did not make any sense, and the reckless falseness of their statements became obvious to all the investigators -- and to the grand jury.
My blog about the investigation
Those lies set a city ablaze, and it added to the dry leaves that triggered the police shootings in 2016.
"It's cynical, damaging, patronizing, and effective".
FIFY.
I didnt do any deep dives in the brown case, but i did do a deep sive into sanford the precursor
Two of the witnesses were White guys. I did not tell the story about them in my blog, but I will summarize it here.
Before the incident, one of the White guys was negotiating a drug deal with Brown. Then Brown and Johnson went to get some lunch at McDonalds. During that walk, they stopped at the store where Brown stole some stuff and assaulted the store clerk.
While Brown and Johnson were on this lunch trip, one of the White guys sat in his truck and got high on a drug. It's likely that the drug was a free sample provided by Brown. This one White guy was waiting for Brown to return from the lunch trip, and then the one White guy and Brown intended to conclude their drug deal.
When the shooting happened, the other White guy happened to see part of it and started yelling. The one White guy who was sitting in his truck and getting high then jumped out of his truck and got excited and joined in the yelling about what was going on.
The investigators decided that both these White guys were not reliable.
The one White guy who was involved in the drug deal with Brown simply did not see any of the incident, because he was sitting in his truck and getting high. During the investigation, he did not tell the truth, because he was involved in drug dealing with Brown.
The other White guy, who actually did see a tiny moment of the shooting did not see enough to be helpful. This other White guy was afraid of the drug-dealing White guy, and he quit his job on the following Monday in order to get away from him. He was afraid for his life.
Neither of the two White guys ever have been publicly identified. The investigators concluded that both of them were unreliable witnesses and discounted their statements.
When LLR Chuck is not busy defending every lefty democrat and media person in sight, he will refer frequently to far far left lawfare sites and go to bat for fake "fact check" entities which are nothing more than leftwing media people flying under a false banner.
That's what makes LLR Chuck such a principled "conservative".
"It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing."
More to the point, it is, or if it isn't it should be, criminal.
You wonder why there is so much hate in this country?? Just listen to the lying these candidates are doing to "GET WHITEY" The Lying Propaganda Media have been spreading these lies for years, and now the left wing candidates are using it to divide people more. WAKE UP.
Another glimpse of how how extreme the mainstream left is.
It's cynical, damaging, and patronizing.
It's damaging to what? If America isn't that the goal?
Not only should Warren and Harris be sued for slander,
They'd likely lose the suit but the left media would damage itself further trying to cover for them.
Why not seek restraining order or disbarment?
from Latin pro bono publico ‘for the public good’.
Does it have to be officer ?
Of necessity restraining order -- ex parte?
!Amirite!
I would have written "stepped onto that elevator.”
@Althouse, and you’d have Ben wrong. Trump kicked off his campaign by riding down an escalator, not an elevator.
The cop's innocence is far better established than irreversible global warming. They are both innocence deniers.
These kind of false narratives have ruined a city. Now Harris and Warren want to take it national.
Post a Comment