The times did it again, the left can't stop lying

The New York Times published an editorial Wednesday evening about the attack on Republicans earlier that day in which it claimed falsely that Sarah Palin incited the 2011 Tucson shooting, and that the killer had political motives.

The Timeseditorial, “America’s Lethal Politics,” will appear in the print edition of Thursday’s newspaper. It argues that political violence will continue unless President Donald Trump and the Republicans stop opposing gun control.

Along the way, the Times claims [original link]:

 Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, when Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl, the link to political incitement was clear. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.

However, there was no evidence of political “incitement.” First of all, the Tucson killer, Jared Loughner, was mentally disturbed and had no political motivations. As even the left-wing HuffPost reiterated Wednesday: “People said Jared Lee Loughner was motivated by politics. Reporting proved them wrong.” Second, Sarah Palin’s map was virtually identical to those used by Democrats for years, depicting targets atop contested congressional districts.

 At the time, Palin called the false accusations against her a “blood libel,” and for good reason: it was a slander imputing responsibility to her for the deaths of innocents, with the sole purpose of punishing her for her beliefs.

The Times goes on to argue that “there’s no sign of incitement as direct as in the Giffords attack” in Wednesday’s shooting.

That statement is so completely false that it calls to mind George Orwell’s observation about journalism during the Spanish Civil War: “I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie.”

 There is no evidence whatsoever of political incitement in the Giffords case, while there is overwhelming evidence that James T. Hodgkinson, the now-deceased attacker at the baseball diamond, nurtured a vicious hatred of Trump and Republicans and was a fan of left-wing media. And according to eyewitnesses, he asked whether the players were Republicans or Democrats before attacking.

That is not conclusive evidence of incitement — at least, not yet — but it is more persuasive than in any other recent case.

The Times‘ false equivalence between the two shootings provides a sick excuse for what Hodgkinson did by making it appear to be partially Republicans’ fault. That is worse than “fake news.” It is an effort to exploit a horrific act of violence for the purpose of stoking political divisions, reinforcing the hysteria in which Hodgkinson was steeped.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-j...against-sarah-palin/

 

 

The stupidity of liberals, ability to ignore their ignorance

 

Original Post
jtdavis posted:

Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.

That is in your post. Sarah Palin posted that. Are you trying to justify it?

Democrats used targets:

DCCC-target-map

https://startthinkingright.wor...rgets-on-their-maps/

And I might add that Republicans or their surrogates never created a play that depicted the assassination of Obama.

Trump Assassination Play Is Sponsored By The New York Times

http://bigleaguepolitics.com/t...ored-new-york-times/

jtdavis posted:

Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.

That is in your post. Sarah Palin posted that. Are you trying to justify it?

The bogus claim that a map of crosshairs by Sarah Palin’s PAC incited Rep. Gabby Giffords’s shooting

https://www.washingtonpost.com...m_term=.71394e907fae

Liberals  Anarchist

 

jtdavis posted:

It can't be proven or disproven that the idiot was or wasn't influenced by the posting, but it is proven that the post was made.

----Loughner was a registered Independent, but, unlike James T. Hodgkinson, he didn’t leave behind an obvious political motive. His ideologies are fairly complicated, but, as CBS News noted in 2011, a former friend “wrote he (Loughner) had once been ‘very liberal’ and added, ‘he was leftwing when I knew him in hs & college, 3 years ago. So he may have changed, who knows.'” He did share some fringe views of both the extreme left and right, though, but was mentally ill and was angry at how Giffords responded to a question he asked at one of her events.

----Bryce Tierney, a friend of Loughner’s, told Mother Jones that Loughner “held a years-long grudge against Giffords and had repeatedly derided her as a ‘fake.’ Loughner’s animus toward Giffords intensified after he attended one of her campaign events and she did not, in his view, sufficiently answer a question he had posed.” The question? “What is government if words have no meaning?”

----At the time, CNN’s Jake Tapper poked holes into the argument that the Palin map inspired Loughner.
 

There’s no evidence that the shooter even heard of Sarah Palin. And Palin aide Rebecca Mansour in a podcast interview says the image was not violent,” he said during an interview.” He added, “The shooter’s motives remain unclear. One acquaintance from 2007 described him as liberal. Democrats say, regardless, the rhetoric has to be civil.”

http://heavy.com/news/2017/06/...ube-lee-sarah-palin/

There is no known link to Sarah Palin, but there is no doubt that he was bat-scat crazy. 

jtdavis posted:

Jt, again, what does it matter? The left incites violence against Republicans all the time and you justify it.

Name when I've justified the violence.

You're doing it right now on this thread. You're trying to deflect by dragging up the false story about Palin. 

jtdavis posted:

You're doing it right now on this thread. You're trying to deflect by dragging up the false story about Palin. 

It is not false

JT, the NYT withdrew the story and added that it was in error. 

I gave  a link where most of the left, even the HuffPo berated the NYT for their lying article.  Now, you're just exhibiting the invulnerable ignorance of the extreme left. 

jtdavis posted:

Jt, again, what does it matter? The left incites violence against Republicans all the time and you justify it.

Name when I've justified the violence.

Other than when the anarchist blocked traffic and you wanted to hose 'em, name when you've opposed it.

 

This silly witch hunt against liberals is just that---silly. The truth is that there is a LOT wrong with both parties & one is probably not much, if any, better than the other. That being said, one can always spot a Fox Watcher who has been brainwashed into being nothing more than a political moron, dutifully spouting the made-up garbage they hear on Faux News.

And yes, Caribou Barbie Palin most assuredly DID inflame the shooter of Gabby Giffords, getting a child killed in the process. She showed a map with target crosshairs right over Giffords home town and mentioned Giffords by name. The nutcase shooter (another right wing nut) publicly admitted that he went there to kill Giffords after seeing Palin on TV. 

Please stop getting your so-called "facts" from Fixed News. If you can't or won't obtain your news from legitimate sources, here's a thought: It's better to be silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt. 

babyboomer posted:

 here's a thought: It's better to be silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt. 

Then I'd suggest babybozo sthu, if you can't tell the difference between
Fox and cnn, msnbc, nyt, wapo, nbc, abc or the west coast. But stupid
people can be fun at times, like closing time and where fake news comes
from when they haven't a clue.....
babyboomer posted:

This silly witch hunt against liberals is just that---silly. The truth is that there is a LOT wrong with both parties & one is probably not much, if any, better than the other. That being said, one can always spot a Fox Watcher who has been brainwashed into being nothing more than a political moron, dutifully spouting the made-up garbage they hear on Faux News.

And yes, Caribou Barbie Palin most assuredly DID inflame the shooter of Gabby Giffords, getting a child killed in the process. She showed a map with target crosshairs right over Giffords home town and mentioned Giffords by name. The nutcase shooter (another right wing nut) publicly admitted that he went there to kill Giffords after seeing Palin on TV. 

Please stop getting your so-called "facts" from Fixed News. If you can't or won't obtain your news from legitimate sources, here's a thought: It's better to be silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt. 

Since we can't hear you, the stoopid garbage you typed says a lot about your Intelligence Quotient. Give us proof that a liberal loon would go to a conservative loon's website and post some factual evidence. The acquaintances of Loughner say the man was a liberal, hardly someone who would be tainted by Palin.

Baby needs his huggies changed, they and he are full of it.

=====================================

"The New York Times  is getting a lot of justified criticism for an editorial trotting out a long-debunked theory that a map circulated by Sarah Palin had inspired the shooter who critically wounded then-Congresswoman Gabby Giffords in 2011".

As The Washington Examiner points out: "There is no proof that the Tucson shooting was inspired by the crosshairs map. There's no evidence Loughner ever saw the map or even followed Palin. The shooter reportedly didn't watch television, he didn't read the news and he didn't listen to talk radio.

"'He didn't take sides. He wasn't on the Left. He wasn't on the Right,' said Loughner's high school friend Zach Osle.

"Lastly, Loughner's obsession with Giffords dates back to at least 2007, before Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., introduced Palin to the nation as his vice presidential nominee."

Yes, the Washington Examiner is considered conservative, but the facts are the facts.

--------------------------------------------------

Tierney tells Mother Jones in an exclusive interview that Loughner held a years-long grudge against Giffords and had repeatedly derided her as a “fake.” Loughner’s animus toward Giffords intensified after he attended one of her campaign events and she did not, in his view, sufficiently answer a question he had posed, Tierney says. He also describes Loughner as being obsessed with “lucid dreaming”—that is, the idea that conscious dreams are an alternative reality that a person can inhabit and control—and says Loughner became “more interested in this world than our reality.” Tierney adds, “I saw his dream journal once. That’s the golden piece of evidence. You want to know what goes on in Jared Loughner’s mind, there’s a dream journal that will tell you everything.”

---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.politifact.com/pund...cited-shooting-rep-/

No evidence Sarah Palin’s PAC incited shooting of Rep. Gabby Giffords

jtdavis posted:

Again, to quote my earlier post. It can't be proven that the target that Palin posted influenced the idiot shooter, it can be proven that she or her PAC posted it and she approved of it. What part of that can you morons not grasp?

Only a moron can't grasp Palin didn't cause anyone to be killed.
Only a moron believes everything the moron media tells them and
is too happy to believe it. I should say only the idiots are taken in
by the lying liberal BS because they know the liberal naïve, gullible
and simple minded snowflakes will eat anything they are told by
their masters, the socialist underworld.. Everyone knows that except
the morons... 
jtdavis posted:

Kraven, are you saying that the target was not posted?

Jeff, you're almost as dumb as crash, a location was posted, not a
target, no one was trying to incite a murder. If you want to believe
otherwise, do so, but keep it to yourself, it has been done to death
and only a double stupid idiot would keep trying to push that lie.

From one of the most liberal sites in existence, The washington post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...m_term=.4d2310d22cf3

 

 

“Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs. But in that case no connection to the shooting was ever established.”
— New York Times editorial board, June 14

This quote is from a corrected version of a New York Times editorial that had falsely claimed that the gunman in the 2011 Giffords shooting was politically incited by Palin’s political action committee. Many readers asked about the uncorrected version, which initially claimed “the link to political incitement was clear” between the gunman’s actions and the map portraying crosshairs, including one over Giffords’s congressional district in Southern Arizona.

On Jan. 11, 2011 — three days after the shooting — The Fact Checker called this charge “bogus.” Alas, this debunked talking point still exists.

jtdavis posted:

If you tell the same lie 3 times, some people will believe it. If y'all deny something 3 times, y'all claim it didn't happen. It's in print, keep disbelieving.

Who's lying besides you? Is that what you're doing, telling the lie so many times you think others will believe you? Are you saying the articles from the lefty news outlets are lying? The NYT retracted their lie, yet you keep passing it around. She never targeted giffords to begin with, the demoslops have their target maps, and the shooter had a problem with giffords BEFORE Palin ever even ran for VP. You are pathetic, and again this is why I have no respect for you as a person or poster. You are the typical, lying, fake news spreading demoslop. Contact the lefty WP and tell them they're lying.

On Jan. 11, 2011 — three days after the shooting — The Fact Checker called this charge “bogus.” Alas, this debunked talking point still exists. (Because of demoslops like jt)

 Then drop huffpo a line.

As even the left-wing HuffPost reiterated Wednesday: “People said Jared Lee Loughner was motivated by politics. Reporting proved them wrong.” Second, Sarah Palin’s map was virtually identical to those used by Democrats for years, depicting targets atop contested congressional districts.

jtdavis posted:

If you tell the same lie 3 times, some people will believe it. If y'all deny something 3 times, y'all claim it didn't happen. It's in print, keep disbelieving.

Obviously Jeff you can not, will not or ever comprehend it,
so believe whatever you want to believe. You aren't wired
for that level of information..
Kraven posted:
jtdavis posted:

If you tell the same lie 3 times, some people will believe it. If y'all deny something 3 times, y'all claim it didn't happen. It's in print, keep disbelieving.

Obviously Jeff you can not, will not or ever comprehend it,
so believe whatever you want to believe. You aren't wired
for that level of information..

Yep, he's not wired for common sense.

jtdavis posted:

I asked for a yes or no. What he posted was maybe and snot.  Can you read?

Again, the congressional seats were targeted, not the people. Can't you think? From her own words: "Remember months ago "bullseye" icon used 2 target 20 Obamacare-lovin incumbant seats?

 

jtdavis posted:

"Don't retreat, instead- RELOAD!" was how Palin introduced the map to her Twitter followers. 

Could this be true???

And the wording used on the web page prefacing the page with "bullseye" symbols:

Don’t Get Demoralized! Get Organized! Take Back the 20!

With the president signing this unwanted and “transformative” government takeover of our health care system today with promises impossible to keep, let’s not get discouraged. Don’t get demoralized. Get organized!

We’re going to reclaim the power of the people from those who disregarded the will of the people. We’re going to fire them and send them back to the private sector, which has been shrinking thanks to their destructive government-growing policies. Maybe when they join the millions of unemployed, they’ll understand why Americans wanted them to focus on job creation and an invigorated private sector. Come November, we’re going to print pink slips for members of Congress as fast as they’ve been printing money.

We’re paying particular attention to those House members who voted in favor of Obamacare and represent districts that Senator John McCain and I carried during the 2008 election. Three of these House members are retiring – from Arkansas’s 2nd district, Indiana’s 8th district, and Tennessee’s 6th district – but we’ll be working to make sure that those who replace them are Commonsense Conservatives. The others are running for re-election, and we’re going to hold them accountable for this disastrous Obamacare vote. They are: Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ-1), Harry E. Mitchell (AZ-5), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8), John Salazar (CO-3), Betsy Markey (CO-4). Allen Boyd (FL-2), Suzanne M. Kosmas (FL-24), Baron P. Hill (IN-9), Earl Pomeroy (ND-AL), Charlie Wilson (OH-6), John Boccieri (OH-16), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-3), Christopher Carney (PA-10), John M. Spratt, Jr. (SC-5), Tom Perriello (VA-5), Alan B. Mollohan (WV-1), and Nick J. Rahall II (WV-3).

We’ll aim for these races and many others. This is just the first salvo in a fight to elect people across the nation who will bring common sense to Washington. Please go to sarahpac.com and join me in the fight.

Stand tall, America. Real change is coming!

https://www.facebook.com/notes...-the-20/373854973434

Not exactly violent is it?

 

Sarah Palin has sued The New York Times for defamation.

The former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate filed a lawsuit against the Times on Tuesday alleging that a recent editorial falsely portrayed her as responsible for inciting the 2011 shooting of Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords.

 

"Today, Sarah Palin took a stand against The New York Times Company by filing a lawsuit which seeks to hold The Times accountable for stating that Governor Palin is part of a 'sickeningly familiar pattern' of politically motivated violence and that she incited the horrific 2011 shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords," lawyers for Palin said in a statement.

Palin is seeking more than $75,000 in damages, according to the lawsuit.

The Times editorial, published in the wake of the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise earlier this month, accused Palin of "political incitement" ahead of the 2011 Giffords shooting, the lawsuit says. The editorial wrongly claimed an ad from Palin's political action committee put "Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs," according to the lawsuit.

The Times issued a correction a day later, noting that "no such link was established" between Palin's ad and the shooting, and that the ad in question "depicted electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath stylized cross hairs."

Still, the Times said that the error did not "undercut or weaken the argument of the piece."

Related: 'We're sorry': New York Times issues correction to editorial after controversy

Palin's lawyers say otherwise. In the lawsuit, they claim that "the Times conduct was committed knowingly, intentionally, willfully, wantonly and maliciously, with the intent to harm Mrs. Palin, or in blatant disregard of the substantial likelihood of causing her harm, thereby entitling Mrs. Palin to an award of punitive damages."

Reached for comment, a Times spokesperson told CNNMoney that the paper intended to defend itself against Palin's claims.

"We have not reviewed the claim yet but will defend against any claim vigorously," the spokesperson said.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/2...mp;utm_term=july2017

 

Bestworking posted:

Palin isn't suing for enough. They gave the freaking illegal with the muzzie lawyer $190,000 in a BS lawsuit in another state, Palin has a solid case and should get 100 times more than an illegal POS.

When I first this I thought the amount was too small, make'em
pay till it hurts for their lies might slow it down.

We will see how this plays out - JT

You betcha!

MSM is deserting you, JT, just like those middle class blue collar workers did during the election.

Sarah Palin Sues New York Times, Claiming Editorial Defamed Her

That's the NYT headline, but it needs work

Sarah Palin Sues New York Times, Claiming Editorial Defamed Her outright lied about her attempting to make her complicit in an attempted murder.

First, we have the NYT perps confession of guilt with a knowingly woefully inadequate apology followed by, to prove just how stupid we are, we are going to still stand by our remarks all to make it easier to sue us.  To wit:

The Times later issued a correction, saying that there was no established link between political statements and the shooting and that the map circulated by Ms. Palin’s PAC had depicted electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath the stylized cross hairs.

and we had no idea there were liberals who would read our bs and believe it to the extent they would foam at the mouth again and again over the names in the stylized cross hairs.

In a statement, a spokeswoman for The Times said, “We have not reviewed the claim yet but will defend against any claim vigorously.

Meaning our ass is in a deep deep hole and we're going to keep digging.  Why?  Because we're liberals and that's what we do.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...-new-york-times.html

Then comes the WaPo

Sarah Palin files convincing lawsuit against the New York Times editorial board

dragging CNN's Tapper into the middle of it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...m_term=.9205df083be8

We will see how this plays out - JT

Without NYT, WaPo, CNN, and Tapper to slap Palin around, I guess it's going to be up to you JT.

My money's on Caribou Barbie. 

You betcha!

 

jtdavis posted:

I wish I knew you, I'd love to bet a dollar on this. Not for the money, but for the joy of rubbing it in.

What would you "rub in" exactly? The NYT admitted the story was BS and printed a retraction and an apology. Do you understand the meaning of retraction and apology? As far as betting with you, I know you'd just run and never pay.

jtdavis posted:

I wish I knew you, I'd love to bet a dollar on this. Not for the money, but for the joy of rubbing it in.

Well you were wrong about your sure thing hilda and about
a hundred other things, so don't shoot another hole in your foot.

The way the world works now, even if Palin has a case, a New Yawk liberal judge will probably toss the case. Remember Trump's immigration order that went to the 9th Circuit Court. It wasn't just the Marx brothers, I think the whole loony family got in on that deal. Jt would probably get your dollar Gifted, but not for the right reasons.

Stanky posted:

The way the world works now, even if Palin has a case, a New Yawk liberal judge will probably toss the case. Remember Trump's immigration order that went to the 9th Circuit Court. It wasn't just the Marx brothers, I think the whole loony family got in on that deal. Jt would probably get your dollar Gifted, but not for the right reasons.

He wouldn't get my dollar because Palin has won already.  She may not get paid, but she was vindicated and the NYT shown for the liars they are. That's why I said there is  nothing to "rub in" unless we choose to rub it in on Jt how the liberals were once more caught in a web of lies.

Add Reply

Likes (0)

×
×
×
×