NPR Retracts Report That Labelled Louisville Woman As “Right-Wing” Extremist In Fleeing Armed Protester

Louisville Metro Police Department

NPR is being hammered this week for its reporting on right-wing extremists attacking peaceful protesters.  The news organization previously showed images of a female motorist who struck a protester on Wednesday as an example of “Right-wing extremists are turning cars into weapons.”  Despite the video released quickly by the police (and the fact that police found she was fleeing a protester with a gun and did not charge her),  the woman was described as part of a pattern of protesters being innocently mowed down.  These cases often raise difficult legal questions in torts on issues of defamation and false light (combining two of the favorite subjects of this blog: media and torts).

Despite my great respect for NPR as a news organization, I have recently criticized NPR for the accuracy of reporting.  To its credit, NPR admitted the error in this case. That is more than some other media outfits. For example, the Washington Post has never corrected a false reporting of the actual holding of a court in a column by Jennifer Rubin.  Of course, Trump cannot sue over the erroneously description of a court ruling, even one that is expressly contradicted by the opinion itself.

According to local media accounts, the woman was surrounded by protesters around 8:30 a.m. and she was blocked by a protester later identified by police as Darius S. Anderson, 21, who stood in front of the car.  The police said that protesters “began to reach into her car, scratching her vehicle window … and assaulting her, pulling her hair (pulling out a dreadlock) causing pain to victim.”  She said that a gun was pulled out and that she fled, striking a man.  The protesters pursued her and,, when she stopped for a red light, Anderson allegedly approached her car, racked a handgun and pointed it at her.  Louisville Metro Police detective said he saw Anderson pass the handgun to Brioanna Richards, 19, “who then hid the gun in a vehicle … to conceal evidence of the crime. ” Both Anderson and Richards were arrested at the scene.

NPR however offered a different take.  It included a picture of the incident in a tweet stating “Right-wing extremists are turning cars into weapons, with reports of 50 vehicle-ramming incidents since protests erupted nationwide in late May.” The linked story was titled “Vehicle Attacks Rise As Extremists Target Protesters,” and also featured an image of the incident.

After various commentators lashed out at NPR for the error, it removed the image and published a note, which reads, “A previous version of this post and story included a photo of a protester being struck by a car in Louisville, Kentucky. The photo, chosen by editors, does not appear to be an example of the assaults described in the story, and has been replaced.”

An apology would have been nice for the woman but many have asked whether NPR can or should now be sued.  That bring us, thankfully, to the area of torts. There is no question that labeling a woman as an example of right-wing extremists mowing down peaceful protesters is defamatory as well as other potential torts. Those torts include false light where an image or association with story creates a false account.  The Kentucky Supreme Court adopted the tort of false light invasion of privacy in 1981. See McCall v. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co., 623 S.W.2d 882 (Ky. 1981). Such a claim requires (1) that the false light in which she was placed would be highly offensive to a reasonable person; and (2) that the statement placing the plaintiff in a false light was published with knowledge that the statements were false or in reckless disregard for the false light in which the statements placed the plaintiff.

However, like many such cases, a defamation or false light case is not that easy.

First, the woman’s identity is not revealed in the stories. She is generally identified as a the 46-year-old woman.  Other news reports identify her as an African American. While her car is shown, it is not clear that she would suffer actual damage to her reputation. She can raise a per quod case where defamation occurs by reference to extrinsic facts. It is not clear if her identity has been widely disseminated.

For libel or per se slander, such injury does not have to be shown through special damages.  News broadcasts (and certainly twitter) are treated as libel, which traditionally covered written forms of defamation. However, even slander was considered inherently damaging if it fell into one of a number of “per se” categories.  Those traditional categories include allegations of criminal conduct, moral turpitude, and other highly damaging acts.

Second, she would have to sue a media organization.  She is also not public figure, so she is not subject to the higher standard set out in New York Times v. Sullivan. Public officials are placed under a higher standard for defamation in the case: requiring a showing of actual malice or knowing disregard of the truth. The public figure standard is the same and was established in Curtis Publishing v. Butts (1967).

However, the Supreme Court applied the higher standard in cases against the media in a variety of tort claims from intentional infliction of emotional distress, disclosure of private fact, and false light.  See Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988); Florida Star v. B.J.F. (1989); and Time Inc. v. Hill (1967).

Third, NPR issued a correction.  Kentucky is one of many states with the retraction statute.  Kentucky’s Code (411.051) states:

(1) In any action for damages for the publication of a defamatory statement in a newspaper, magazine, or periodical, the defendant shall be liable for actual damages sustained by plaintiff. The defendant may plead the publication of a correction in mitigation of damages. Punitive damages may be recovered only if the plaintiff shall allege and prove publication with legal malice and that the newspaper, magazine, or periodical failed to make conspicuous and timely publication of a correction after receiving a sufficient demand for correction.
(2) A “sufficient demand for correction” is a demand for correction which is in writing; which is signed by the plaintiff or his duly-authorized attorney or agent; which specifies the statement or statements claimed to be false and defamatory, states wherein they are false, and sets forth the facts; and which is delivered to the defendant prior to the commencement of the action.

Thus, she would not be able to receive punitive damages against NPR.  If her identity was not disseminated, damages could end up as de minimis.

Thus, in my view, it would seem that the correction in Kentucky should protect NPR from serious damages for the story.

261 thoughts on “NPR Retracts Report That Labelled Louisville Woman As “Right-Wing” Extremist In Fleeing Armed Protester”

    1. I am sure the political decision at the state and local level to let barbarians loot and torch cities had nothing to do with the spread of an infectious disease.

    2. The EU has the same GDP as the us and a 1/3 larger population.
      But just 4 countries in the EU have more total deaths than the US.

    3. The number of cases has a lot more to do with the number of tests, but we already know that mathematics and statistics is not your strong suit. What you need to look at is death rates. Why don’t you learn a little about the subject matter before commenting.

      1. Anon– If he (John) learned a little more about the subject he would have nothing to say.

      2. Even the number of cases is not all that important.

        What we are learning is that there is nothing government does that has any effect.

        That C19 will pass through a population – quickly if government stays out of the way.

        It will kill 3-5 times as many old people who get it as the flu. While young people not only do not die, but many do not even get sick.

        If your population is old and not healthy – you will have more deaths.

        If you latitue is more northerly – you will have more deaths.

        If your diet is high on fish oils – you will have less deaths.

        These factors will predict the death and infection rates most everywhere in the world.

        No government action has proven to have a statistically significant effect on death rates or total number of infections.

        1. Appreciate your Sweden approach and being open to nutritionally preventative measures (an important piece of the puzzle). But your sweeping statement that no government measures can help is just short sighted. Boris Johnson changed his tune in this respect really late in the game…, my guess is if you were faced with what he was faced with consequently, much would make sense to you that doesn’t presently. The disease itself is really effective at changing ideology in a hurry. And unfortunately there are enough that can’t see beyond ideology and rhetoric right now.

          Just know your opinion runs against medical data and opinion in a stark way and just proclaiming that data and experience not to be true won’t make it go away. And Trump’s shifting to the Sweden strategy when he finally was able to focus on CV 19 is already having a markedly negative effect on the economy, which is ostensibly what he doesn’t want to happen. Watch what happens in Florida, Texas and Arizona as a result of his head in the sand approach. It’s really just an extension of initial denial…The next couple of weeks will tell if the U.S. will largely have to experience another shut down as happened in several Asian countries…

          Bolton on Trump’s early response:

          1. “Appreciate your Sweden approach”
            Sweden made a policy decision based on their own predictions.

            I am specifically refering to the results of after the fact data analysis.
            I would advocate for a sweden approach.
            But TODAY, what I am doing is not predictive, it is analytical.
            Oh, and it is not even my work or my conclusions.
            It is the results of using using computer models to hindcast and then aplying statistical processes to determine what measures has statistically significant effects.

            Conclusion – nothing govenrment did.

            “being open to nutritionally preventative measures (an important piece of the puzzle)”
            Again I happen to beleive that BUT this is not about my guesses or projections.
            It is about an actual after the fact statistical analysis.

            Real world data was used. The IMIE model – with parameters adjusted to correct for now known variables was used to hindcast
            Then regessions were performed
            and used to statistically separate our the significant factors.
            Those turned out to be
            Demographics (health and age).
            and diet.

            government policy choices did not have any statistically significant effect.

            If you asked my BELEIF – I would claim that SOME government measures did work – such as those of Japan, Tiawan and South Korea
            But that is NOT the results.

            “But your sweeping statement that no government measures can help is just short sighted.”
            I am not making a sweeping statement
            I am reporting the results of a statistical study.

            “Boris Johnson changed his tune in this respect really late in the game”
            This study was done well AFTER that.

            “my guess is if you were faced with what he was faced with consequently”
            What would I have done in his shoes ? I doubt I would have done as he did. But that DOES NOT MATTER.

            We are not talking about – what would I have done with incomplete knowledge facing a threat of armegdon.

            The current debate is based on what we KNOW NOW – what worked and what didn’t.

            And the statistics show that nothing government did worked.

            “much would make sense to you that doesn’t presently. The disease itself is really effective at changing ideology in a hurry. And unfortunately there are enough that can’t see beyond ideology and rhetoric right now.”

            You are quite correct. Mortal threats often make people abandon principles and do stupid things out of fear.
            I fully understand that.

            “I have squandered my resistance
            For a pocketful of mumbles,
            Such are promises
            All lies and jest
            Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
            And disregards the rest.”

            “Just know your opinion runs against medical data”
            “and opinion”

            You have not yet grasped the obvious – that expert opinion has been wrong constantly.

            I will further note that many of the errors that have been made by experts were knowably wrong at the time.

            There is an excelent video by 3Blue1Brown on Youtube about mathematically modeling epidemics.

            There is no measures except quarantine of vaccine that reduce the total number of infections. NONE.

            Further for quarantine and/or vaccine to be effective they have to be something like 95% effective – that is actually variable based on the R0 value, the higher the R0 the more effective the quarantine must be to work.

            This is part of the debate over the effectiveness of masks. Even the crappiest mask reduces transmission.
            But given enough time and exposure – all masks and PPE ultimately fail. They can not reach the effectiveness necescary to actually stop a virus with an R0 or 2.5.

            All the measures government has taken (except quarantine) stretch out the duration. They “flatten the curve” – but they do NOT alter the area under the curve. Absent a measure that reaches that high effectiveness rate, the entire non-immune population eventually gets infected.

            The above is not “opinion” it is the state of the science.

            A 95%(approx) effective quarantine will stop the virus before it infects the entire non-immune population. Anything less, or any other measure just results in delay.

            Towards the begining the experts were being honest – they were “flattening the curve” because saving the healthcare system MIGHT reduce the number of deaths.
            Well the state of the healthcare system is irrelevant if we do not have an effective treatment. Which until recently we did not, and even what we have only reduces deaths by 30%. Regardless the US healthcare system was never overwhelmed – it did not come close.

            Simplified – any expert who was honest, knew from the start that the math and the science did not support what was being done.

            But even scientists and doctors who know better act like Johnson in desparation when told everything will go to hell if they don’t. and pick an option that they know will not work, just to be able to say they tried.

            ” in a stark way and just proclaiming that data and experience not to be true won’t make it go away.”
            That is right. While we had science and math – and it contradicted the experts from the start – and many of them knew it.
            We now also have data and experience.

            And the FACT is nothing government did had a statisically significant effect – beyond delaying the inevitable.

            “And Trump’s shifting to the Sweden strategy”
            This is not about Trump or Sweden.
            This is about what had we not been terrified we would have known from the math and science.
            And what after the fact given the data we know have we now know empiracly.

            No government policy worked.

            If no policy worked – then Trump, did no better or worse than any other world leader.

            “when he finally was able to focus on CV 19 is already having a markedly negative effect on the economy,”
            The actual damage of C19 to the economy was minor.
            The economic damage was done by the shutdown.

            If you wish to blame Trump for that I do not care – but that does not avoid the fact that no one else did better.
            That was not possible.
            Because there is no govenrment policy that worked.

            ” Watch what happens in Florida, Texas and Arizona as a result of his head in the sand approach.”

            I can tell you what will happen already.

            There will be a spike until sufficient of the non-immune population gets this to create “herd immunity”

            In the places where we have seen declines – that is what has happened.

            It is estimated that 20+% of NYC has already had C19. I strongly suspect that is correct.

            The data is telling us that about 50% of people are naturally immune. They can not get C19 no matter what.
            Another roughly 30% are highly resistant – it is very very hard for them to get it.

            That means 20% of people are vulnerable.
            I have some guesses as to how to determine who is immune and who is resistant. But those are guesses and it does not matter.
            What matters is that they exist – and the data strongly suggests that is the case.

            Before you jump and claim that is stupid – remember 100% of people do not ever get the flu, or a cold.
            In fact it is very rare for any epidemic to effect more than 30% of the population.

            I do not need to explain why that is. I do not need to know why that is. Because it is reality.
            It is possible that C19 is the virus that infects 100% of people. But that is unlikely.

            Anyway states that go green early will see a spike in C19 infections until the reach approximately the same overall infection rate as states/countries where C19 has burned out.

            There are some variables – NYC is highly population dense. Herd immunity requires a larger portion of immune people than say montana.

            “It’s really just an extension of initial denial…The next couple of weeks will tell if the U.S. will largely have to experience another shut down”

            We already have more than enough global data to know that you are wrong.
            I am not saying there will be no increase in states that go green early.

            I am saying exactly what the data we have already tells us.

            For EVERY nation, state, ….

            The total number of infections will be determined by
            demographics (age, health)

            If a state opens “early” – it will spike until it approaches that limit and then slow.

            That will happen everywhere in the world, and the only effect of government polices will be how long it takes to burn out.

            1. “The data is telling us that about 50% of people are naturally immune. They can not get C19 no matter what.
              Another roughly 30% are highly resistant – it is very very hard for them to get it.”

              John, I have no objections to what you have said nor disagreeing with it but I would like to know where you got the 50% and 30% number. A lot of numbers have been thrown out most of which are guesses.

              Overall, what you are saying is true. I did not disagree with the initial 2 weeks closure because we did not know what we were dealing with or if the virus was weaponized. The rationale to protect the hospital system was good but we only ran into trouble in a limited number of hospitals. The news focused on those hospitals without placing any focus on hospitals that were essentially “empty”. That is why those watching the news can recognize certain hospitals and might even know their names like Elmhurst.. The same hospitals were filmed and shown virtually every day.

              A slow return to a more normal economy IMO was appropriate, but my definition of slow is quite different than what we have seen. We have the testing ability to handle outbreaks in different areas so that we can prevent an overload on the hospitals or one segment of the local economy from getting sick all at once. I believe that the elderly and the sick should self-isolate while the healthy get back to their lives. If this continues much longer we will have a generation of children that will severely ‘suffer’ real life as they grow up. We have already bankrupted enough people and reduced the incentive to work.

              We have seen what this virus does. It can make the young quite sick but it doesn’t generally kill them or incapacitate them for long periods. The flu seen every year can do the same.

              1. “John, I have no objections to what you have said nor disagreeing with it but I would like to know where you got the 50% and 30% number. A lot of numbers have been thrown out most of which are guesses.”

                This is the conclusion that the statisticians/modelers from Europe arrived at after changing the IMIE model inputs to reflect what we have learned. and then trying to determine the correct values for natural immunity to get the models to hindcast to reality

                I am not claiming those numbers are set in stone.

                But I would offer several reasons they are not just good assumptions but that we must assume high natural immunity resistance by default.

                All mathemtaical models will result in 100% infections eventually for any disease with an R0 over 1 for any approach EXCEPT quarantine.

                But in the real world this never happens. Diseases with much higher R0 than Covid do not effect large portions of the people.

                Very very few diseases ever infect more than about 30% of the population.

                It is not just reasonable, but the probability is that given any random new disease that natural immunity/resistance is near 70%.

                Just to be clear – that is a probability, not a fact. But it is a very good probability.

                There is another reason to assume this.

                The probability of a disease infection 100% of people MUST be low – or humanity would not exist.

                This is the fatal flaw of all malthusian claims. If the world was so fragile it could easily be destroyed – it would have been.

                If there was a disease every 10,000 years that killed everyone it infected and infected everyone.
                There would be no humans – 15 times over.

                The 50/30 numbers are determined so as to make the models correctly hindcast given otherwise correct patterns.

                But they match natural assumptions and observations.

                As to your other remarks

                The goal of flattening the curve is protecting hospitals period.

                IF the results of your efforts have hospitals at 1/3 of capacity – you FAILED.
                You have prolonged the pandemic for no useful benefit.

                “It can make the young quite sick”
                That appears to be false. For nearly all people under 30 both the symptoms and the mortality are much much lower than the flu.
                By several orders of magnitude.

                I recently found a comparative severity mortality curve to the flu by age that I found quite interesting.
                C19 is radically less consequential by all measures for the young – it is much milder than the flu.

                Despite our fixation on deaths among the elderly – C19 is NOT that much worse for the elderly.
                That is not because it does not kill lots of old people – it does. It kille predominantly older peopel.
                But so does the flu.

                The big difference is actually with those in the 55-65 range.

                Even though the C19 mortality is not high in that group – it is still 5 times higher than the flu.

                1. John, I am not sure of what IMIE stands for. If you have a specific site where those numbers lie (50 / 30) I would appreciate it.

                  I also am a bit wary of numbers and how they actually relate outside of specific areas. The registration techniques vary considerably. In the US I suspect actual Covid-19 deaths to be significantly lower than they are thought to be in this country while in some other countries much higher.

                  >“It can make the young quite sick”

                  >>That appears to be false. For nearly all people under 30 both the symptoms and the mortality are much much lower than the flu. By several orders of magnitude.”

                  I don’t know that your mortality rates are true except if you are dealing with children.

                  I said: “We have seen what this virus does. It can make the young quite sick but it doesn’t generally kill them or incapacitate them for long periods. The flu seen every year can do the same.”

                  I was not talking about children but dividing the country up into two groups the young and the old not into age groups.

                  If you wish you can produce the http for what you found, “I recently found a comparative severity mortality curve to the flu…”

                  If you are using single source to draw conclusions then what you are doing is what many on left of this blog do daily. Cherry picking the data they like and forgetting the rest. It’s too early to draw conclusions and before we do we have to research the individual cases to see if our comparisons are between apples and apples or apples and oranges.

                  You are too fixated on specific numbers that may or may not be correct and no one is actually positive as to how to count Covid-19 deaths.

                  1. I may have the initials wrong though I could swear that it is IMIE – this is the imperial college model that would predicting 4M deaths in the US. It is the model that cause Boris Johnson to shift away from the swedish model.

                    I can not find my source anymore, and I check so many things it is a needle in a haystack.
                    I tried googling – but it is hard to trust google anymore you can not tell if you are just not searching right or if google is supressing links it does not like.

                    I would very much like to provide my source – my recollection is that it was a youtube video by one of the authors about a research study done in the netherlands using the Imperal college model.

                    I distinctly remember the video as well as the results.

                    I particularly recall it because I was reaching the same conclusions on my own.

                    Which is one thing I can provide you.

                    Look at the data from the world yourself.

                    Is there anyplace anywhere that has had more than 20% infections ?

                    I beleive even the cruise ships only hit 30%.

                    You do not have to agree with my educated guesses. It is still reasonable to say – this does not infect 100% of people.
                    There is some natural limit and we should be able to look at what we are seeing accross the world and empiracly get close tot hat limit.

                    The 50/30 thing is probably in error too The reality is likely that people range from easily infected to completely immune probably on a bell curve. And that about 80% of people are partly to completely immune in varrying degrees.

                    The other logical principle I would strongly suggest is the anti-malthusian principle.

                    Which is basically that the probability of some existential threat being correct is inverse to the scale of the threat.

                    Put more simply – if the probability of life ending disasters was high, there would be no life.
                    and given the duration of life – if the probability was even very low – we would have no life.

                    The worse the Malthusian prediction the less likely it can be true.

                    I am sorry I can not give you more.

                    1. “What makes you think their modeling is better than anyone else’s?”

                      Nothing and infact their model is pretty bad.
                      But the fundimentals of modeling epidemics are not that difficult.
                      The problem with the imperial college results was the C19 parameters were wildly incorrect.
                      This study corrected to known attributes and then used the model to hindcast adjusting unknown parameters like natural immunity until it could do so accurately.

                      “Probably, but one wouldn’t know.”
                      We would not ?
                      Name a virus that has effected 100% of a population ?
                      We also have lots of random population samples for C19 as well as a few closed experiments – like cruise ships.

                      “HOW MANY COVID DEATHS ARE THERE, REALLY?”

                      I can not get the data to the present, but at the begining of june the difference between total deaths todate 2020 and average deaths todate for the past 5 years was only about 20K

                    2. “The problem with the imperial college results was the C19 parameters were wildly incorrect.”

                      That means that posting the results with two numbers isn’t of great value. Knowing how and why those numbers were created can be of great value and that is why I wanted to look over the study. Many studies because of PC, politics and funding are garbage. Variables are omitted and the data used is selective. I won’t even bother with registration and all the other things that can screw up a study.

                      What is vital is understanding the lost years due to the virus. IMO that is far lower than what the numbers promoted seem to show. In otherwords if grandma didn’t die of Covid today her tumor might have gotten her tomorrow. A rolling death rate average where certain variables are taken into account might very well show a lower death rate in the most affected areas over the next several years. That lower rate would reflect the Covid deaths that were doomed to die the following year or so.

                  2. I agree with you that many of our numbers are unreliable.

                    But they are not so unreliable as to look for patterns globally.

                    I think the conclusion that C19 total infections are somehow limited to approximately 20% of the population.

                    Accepting that this might be lower at lower latititudes or higher with elderly populations.

                    Regardless we are obligated to work with the numbers we have.
                    And make decisions trying to sus out meaning from less than perfect information.

                    1. “I think the conclusion that C19 total infections are somehow limited to approximately 20% of the population.”

                      Too much conjecture and too little reliable fact for my taste.

                      We have to look at this virus in simpler terms. When one wants to explore it for figuring out what to do for themselves simplicity is best.

                    2. >“I think the conclusion that C19 total infections are somehow limited to approximately 20% of the population.”

                      “Too much conjecture and too little reliable fact for my taste.”

                      We have to work with the data we have.

                      CDC is now estimating that 54M americans may have been infected,
                      That is 16.8% of the country.

                    3. “We have to work with the data we have.”

                      Of course, but that doesn’t mean we have to place a lot of faith on any of that data.

                      What we know is, absent a vaccine or good treatment, the only thing we are doing is delaying the inevitable infection of more people. As long as the infected get better and don’t die we don’t have a workable problem and can get back to building the economy. In the long run we probably caused more years lost from closing the economy than from the disease. Keeping the economy closed means death and destruction. Voluntarily isolate the elderly and sick while watching for spikes that will overload the hospital system or close down a specific industry. That is the only reason to flatten the curve at this time.

                      Covid and rioting is being used by the left in the left’s search for supreme dominence over the nation. If that occurs we will not be a free nation.

                    1. “Aparently it is now 20X”

                      John, for our purposes the exact number doesn’t matter. The death rate does. If it is 10X the virus will be less troublesome over a longer time period. If it is 20X the virus will be more troublesome over a shorter time period.

                    2. The larger the number of existing infections:

                      The less serious the Virus is.
                      The higher the portion of asymptomatic cases or mild cases.
                      the closer we are to the virus burning out.
                      And finally the less effective govenrment measures have been.

                    3. “The larger the number of existing infections: The less serious the Virus is.”

                      That is an indirect measure of the death rate and rate of hospitalization.

        2. And just as an aside, your view on the old re CV 19 is basically staggeringly gruesome. That logic is just this side of being open to a new Holocaust.

          Here’s an excellently darkly humorous movie that might be right up your alley (without the humor, anyway). One of my favorite flicks in recent years…

  1. Good run down on the law of defamation but I see this NPR hack as likely guilty of journalistic malpractice. She’s a propagandist pure and simple and just made stuff up to fit her woke narrative.

  2. here the ANTIFA do an “after action report” on their evil attack on police precinct in Minneapolis

    full of a certain grandiosity and some obvious self serving lies, but, observe how they explain that they used the “peaceful protesters” as human shields to allow them to pin down and physically attack police

    which they were also doing exactly this in DC TODAY i saw the videos


    and find out who’s the money behind all this and then nail that octopus to the wall


    PKK is a terror group. So is ANTIFA and guess what they are “friends”

    let the FBI do something useful besides looking at garage door handles, and harassing the American President,
    and investigate the terrorists active in destabilizing and wrecking America

  4. Bubba Wallace’s story turns out to be totally false, but the defunct corporate media and the leftist shill blogs all still call it a “noose” for effect even though it’s just a piece of rope used for pulling down the garage door…it’s more of a hand loop. Every time you think it can’t get any weirder it does. Check out how full of themselves these idiots are: Bubba Wallace on The View

    1. “Phelps said NASCAR it is still investigating how the garage pull rope was made to look like a noose. NASCAR checked every other garage stall and none had been shaped like a noose.” -from the following article


      Phelps said NASCAR it is still investigating how the garage pull rope was made to look like a noose. NASCAR checked every other garage stall and none had been shaped like a noose.

      “The last race we had had there in October, that noose was present, and the fact that it was not found until a member of the 43 team came there is something that is a fact,” Phelps said. “We had not been back to the garage. It was a quick one‑day show.

      “The crew member went back in there. He looked and saw the noose, brought it to the attention of his crew chief, who then went to the NASCAR series director Jay Fabian, and we launched this investigation.”

      Phelps said he felt calling the FBI was justified.

      “To be clear, we would do this again,” he said. “Of the evidence that we had, it was clear that we needed to look into this.”

      The noose was originally found late Sunday afternoon. That evening, NASCAR issued a statement announcing an investigation.

      Danny Kanell


      Man I absolutely hate what happened with @nascar. Doesn’t change the fact that @BubbaWallace :

      -didn’t ask for this attention
      -handled all of it with class and dignity
      -will now receive totally unjustified hate thrown his way
      -needs love and support more than ever

      5:48 PM – Jun 23, 2020

    2. It took 15 FBI agents standing around with their thumbs up their rears to finally figure out this was a garage pull.

      Must not be anything important going on in the country for these guys to have so much time on their hands.

      1. I wonder if these were the same FBI agents who went down on their knees to the mob?

        What a disgrace.

        1. why arent they investigating ANTIFA and its terrorist activities all across the USA?

          Pathetic lack of leadership

          1. Kurtz– That’s a very good question. I suppose Wray is still chasing white supremacists with the help of NPR and Bubba and Jussie.

  5. If cops don’t vote for Trump in November, they are fools. Did you see where a cop in Cali found a used tampon in his frappacino? Just say No to Joe — unless you want to get broken glass, used tampons, bleach, etc, put in your cup of Joe by sick liberal brainwashed domestic terrorists.

    1. Love this Steve Schmidt quote about Trump:

      “Donald Trump has been the worst president this country has ever had. And I don’t say that hyperbolically. He is. But he is a consequential president. And he has brought this country in three short years to a place of weakness that is simply unimaginable if you were pondering where we are today from the day where Barack Obama left office. And there were a lot of us on that day who were deeply skeptical and very worried about what a Trump presidency would be. But this is a moment of unparalleled national humiliation, of weakness.
      “When you listen to the President, these are the musings of an imbecile. An idiot. And I don’t use those words to name call. I use them because they are the precise words of the English language to describe his behavior. His comportment. His actions. We’ve never seen a level of incompetence, a level of ineptitude so staggering on a daily basis by anybody in the history of the country whose ever been charged with substantial responsibilities.
      “It’s just astonishing that this man is president of the United States. The man, the con man, from New York City. Many bankruptcies, failed businesses, a reality show, that branded him as something that he never was. A successful businessman. Well, he’s the President of the United States now, and the man who said he would make the country great again. And he’s brought death, suffering, and economic collapse on truly an epic scale. And let’s be clear. This isn’t happening in every country around the world. This place. Our place. Our home. Our country. The United States. We are the epicenter. We are the place where you’re the most likely to die from this disease. We’re the ones with the most shattered economy. And we are because of the fool that sits in the Oval Office behind the Resolute Desk.”

      1. The losers at Lincoln Project are despicable backstabbers, turncoats, and anyone in the Republican party who trucks with them has no face

          1. remember guys run with the horse that brung ya

            nobody likes a snitch or a turncoat
            that’s all these losers are

            if there was a real Republican Party they would punish these worms fiercely

            Republicans need to get some real strategists with psychological intensity and a long enemies list such as Rahm Emmanuel famously had.

            it’s not too late. this may be the crucible which burns out the lesser metals

            1. Trump has a hate list. Apparently we’ll hear much about it tomorrow with the Zelinsky testimony. Sorry. Trump’s actions have caused all his problems. Whether it be squashing testing, or squashing information and punnishing whistle blowers Trump is responsible for anything coming his way.

      2. He’s a horrendous president. And I only hope that enough people understand this by November that he’s soundly rejected and brings the current Congressional GOP — his enablers — down with him.

        The EU may issue a travel ban for Americans in July due to coronavirus, which is unsurprising, given the crappy job the U.S. is doing controlling infection here:
        We also currently have the 4th highest deaths per capita internationally.

        Meanwhile, “The president’s family is asking a New York City surrogate court to halt the publication of Mary Trump’s upcoming book, Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man, which promises to reveal damaging secrets about President Donald Trump, the New York Times reported Tuesday. A person familiar with the matter told the Times that a request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) was filed on Tuesday by Robert Trump, the president’s younger brother. The request was filed against Mary Trump and publisher Simon & Schuster in Queens County Surrogate’s Court, where the estate of the president’s father was settled.”
        I hope the older Trumps lose in their TRO / prior restraint effort. Mary Trump has a good lawyer, Ted Boutrous.

        1. Countries with higher deaths/1m than the US
          Belguim, UK, Spain, Italy, France, Sweden.

          Nearly the entirety of Europe has a higer Case fatality rate and the US case fatality rate is dropping.

          The average age of new US cases is 20-30 – most are asymptomatic or have mild symptoms

          The fatality rate for 20-30 year olds – the current average age is an order of magnitude LOWER than the flu.

          Of the 10 US states with the highest death rates all but one has a democratic governor.
          Nearly all are completely run by democrats.

          1. John your correction of CTHD tells us how inaccurate and untrustworthy his data is. That makes him non-credible. What I don’t understand is why one would prefer to be non-credible rather than credible. I don’t think it is a simple answer.

            1. All of us want to find some way of using C19 as proof of some political value.

              I have personally noted how much worse blue states have done than red.

              But I am trying not to dwell on that.

              Because Data is not really showing a blue/red bias.

              There is one C19 related choice that blue states have made that is really bad – returning recovering C19 patients to senior care facilities.
              That was criminally negligent homicide.

              The shutdowns were very bad ideas and harmed blue state economies more than red.
              But they had no impact on C19 – aside from making it take longer.

              The difference between blue and red states are fully explained by
              age of population
              health of population

              Not red/blue.

            1. Anon, Be specific. The death rate is falling, the number of hospitalizations is falling. That is what counts.

              Testing has increased so we will detect a lot more cases. Those cases would exist with or without the testing but if the testing was stopped you would wrongly say the prevalence of the disease has decreased. That is your problem. A little knowledge in your hands is dangerous.

            2. I do not know where the graph you found came from – but it is wrong.

              It takes very little effort to find real information.

              Europe has about 540 M people, the US 320M people. graphs of C19 in the US and Europe are nearly identical – except that Europe as a whole has about 40% more cases and deaths, because it has about 40% more people.
              I linked to a graph from govenrment data confirming that.

              I do not know if there is a “surge” in red states. That is impossible to tell. Could be from protests, could be from reopening, could be from better testing – and I beleive they are now testing antibodies as well as antigens – so they are picking up people who WERE infected in the past.

              But there is no increase in the death rate – in fact it is declining.

              And the average age of new cases is WAY down – 20-30 and pretty much all are asymptomatic.

              All of this means it is highly unlikely that opening up has resulted in more deaths and that is all that we should care about.

                1. Well the European Center for Disease control disagrees.

                  Further – JH is generally reputable – how about an actual link to the source on JH.

                  Sorry but as I have said before – people who have bought and sold numerous falsehoods and made false moral accusations.
                  Do not have the credibility to be beleived just because they say something

                  Especially when European Center for Disease control disagrees.

              1. “I do not know where the graph you found came from – but it is wrong.”

                John, the graph is meaningless and likely detached from a series of graphs that provided meaning. That is what Anon thrives on, disconnected data. He can’t deal with a complete idea that is complex because a complex idea requires more than a sound bite for it to have meaning and by the time the first few words are spoken Anon is off looking for something else.

                Connect the graph to hospitalizations and death along with factors that make one population more susceptible than another. That is what is important.

            3. “The problem is national – red states now have the highest surging rates – and requires a national response, of course an impossibility with our dysfunctional toddler as president. He even sabotages WH guidelines.”


              Surge, no surge – irrelevant.

              Todate there is no evidence ANYWHERE that the actions of ANY government had ANY positive impact on the number of total C19 deaths.

              There is nothing Trump can do, there is nothing a govenor can do, there is nothing Biden could do.

              We would all like it if there was a miracle cure or if following CDC guidelines would keep us safe.

              But the FACT is that it will not.

              We have NEVER stopped a respiratory virus after 2000 cases without a vaccine.

              Many of us – including myself hoped this time would finally be different.

              I wish that govenrment had been able to kill this.
              But that has not been the case.

              There not only is not, but nevr was anything government could do to make this better.
              Though a few things that some states did made it worse.

            4. You say there is a surge we should care about

              Well CA has the 2nd largest number of cases in the US – behind NY.

              And it is seeing 7K new cases a day – compared to 4K.
              Last i checked CA was the bluest state in the country.

              Further the rise in cases in CA is pretty much the enitre rise in new cases in the US.

              TX went from 4K to 5K.

              FL is declining
              GA when from 1K/day to 1.5K/day.

            1. You have a problem with data from European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control ?

      3. I’m supposed to listen to one of the grifters who sabotaged John McCain’s campaign (and then later appealed to the federal Supreme Court to manufacture a right to homosexual pseudogamy) out of whole cloth?

      4. Those of you on the left are living in a different world.

        I think Trump is at best a B- president.
        But Obama and Bush were D presidents and the more I learn the more likely it is Obama was a D-.

        Your quite is full of adjectives and emotions – but there are no facts.

        You say he is incompetent – and yet the job gets down WELL.

        Trump was elected based on a specific promises. He is keeping those promises.
        That is honesty, and that is competence.

        It is not dishonesty and incompetence just because you do not like his promises.

        That is a reason to vote for someone else.

        Honest, Competent people deliver on their promises.
        Trump has – even ones I disagree with.

        Your attacks on Trump are based on style, or policy disagreement.
        Fine – but he is doing what he was elected to do.
        That is not incompetence.

      1. There is plenty of video on Youtube of activists encouraging people to poison cops food, spit in their drinks, ….

        The ShakeShack story was not a hoax. It just was not deliberate. They claimed to have just cleaned the machine and the first shakes produced were off.

        The officers have no way of knowing the difference between that and a clerk poisoning them, and I am sure the cops are familer with the threats that have been made.

        Regardless, it is likely we are going to see alot of police leave the job. Who wants to work at a job where you could be poisoned for wearing a uniform to a food shop ?

        And even a small loss of police is going to spike violence.

        You are working hard to get Trump re-elected.

    2. I know, right? Everyone knows you should inject bleach rather than drink it.

    3. I know that the polls are claiming Trump is falling behind – though oddly Rassmussen still has his approval rate above Obama at this time.

      But I look at what is happening and wonder like Hillary – why he is not ahead by 50 pts ?
      And I am deeply suspicious of the polls. The swing state polls right now are as good or better for Trump than they were on election day 2016.

      But yes, Trump has just gotten the Cop vote – probably something like 90:10 or more. And their families. So that could be a swing of 750K votes from 2016 just among the police.

      Purportedly gun sales are up 80% right now FOR THE YEAR, and 40% of new owners are women. Who is a women that just decided to buy a gun for the first time in her life voting for ?

      Crime in NYC is up 358%, other major cities are seeing the same thing.
      I beleive 3 blacks have been shot in CHAZ so far – 2 died.

      And none of this is likely to get better anytime soon.

      1. John Say – CHAZ has both the highest number of murders per capita and the highest number of black deaths per capita. The problem seems to be that Antifa seems to be better armed than BLM.

        1. I honestly do not care about the details.
          The big point is that these people have no clue how to change the world.

          I noted in another post that NYC has disbanded the anti-crime unit.

          If there is “systemic racism” in NYPD – this is where. These are the guy who run the “stop and frisk” program.
          They go where the crime is – minority neighborhood. The number of stops is something like 90% minority.

          They are targeting minorities.

          BUT where they go violent crime drops. Because of the possibility that you will get stopped and frisked, the number of guns in the hands of criminals is radically reduced. Stop and Frisk results in few consequential arrests – that is not its purpose.
          But it results in the risk of being stopped with a gun going way up. So the crooks do not carry guns. so deaths – particularly of innocent bystanders drops radically.

          So we have disbanded “anti-crime” – no more stop and frisk. And nearly immediately violent crime in NYC is up 358%.

          I am absolutely a big fan of lots of reform to our policing.

          But I am not intested in a 358% increase in violent crime.

          Soes anyone think that most of the black people in poor neighborhoods want a huge increase in violent crime ?


    Bubba Wallace, the black NASCAR driver and vocal supporter of BLM howled ‘hate crime’ when a rope with a loop was found on the door to his garage at the track.

    The FBI, which has nothing better to do, investigated and discovered the garage doors, all of them, have ropes with loops so it is easier to close the doors. Been that way for awhile.

    Bubba, you are a jackass.

    1. “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

      – William Casey, CIA Director

    2. Bubba is in the club, guaranteed. This was his Humiliation ritual or Embarrassment ritual to climb the ladder of fame and money.

      Just another sell out, it is so obvious. Doing his job, playing his part.

      His half white / half black sell-out arse.

      Way to go Bubba! You and your crocodile tears.

  7. Defund NPR!!!

    Defund Welfare Radio!!!

    NPR is “individual or specific welfare.” NPR is not “…general Welfare.” Congress has no power to tax for NPR. NPR must not exist.

    Article I , Section 8, Clause 1

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

  8. here is a banned book., nobody should read it! Nobody I say

    I confess I read it however. it was an exciting dystopian action novel. it was filled with awful sinister racism

    Dont read it but if you must, if you can’t resist the forbideen fruit, well, they sell it at gun shows if you’re afraid to buy it from amazon

  9. Law and order is breaking down. There are riotous violent protesters who should expect to be run over if they block people in cars and threaten them.

    If i am in fear of my life, I will run someone over who threatens me., And it will be a lawful act.,

    The failure here is law enforcement, the lack of it, which is a consequence of failed political leadership. Don’t blame people who fear for their lives.

    1. Always wait a bit. Nearly every bad act is initially blames on white supremecists and racists.

      But if that story dies rapidly – you know the Press F’d up. That the found the blog or FB pages or manifesto of the “white supremecist” and it turns out he is a Bernie Bro or most commonly just a garden variety paranoid schiz.

      I have not heard more about the sniper who killed the Cops. I am guessing the “white Supremecist” claims on that flopped too.

      There are 10 times as many antifa in Portland as “white supremecists” in the whole united states – and most of them are in prison.

      1. What an idiot.

        “FBI special agent in Charge John Bennett said Carrillo along with accomplice Robert Justus took advantage at a time when the nation was mourning the killing of George Floyd.

        “They came to Oakland to kill cops,” said Bennett.

        “How does one reconcile what seems like an insane act that seems like an act that is wholly inconsistent with a person’s record and history,” said Stotter.

        U.S. Attorney David Anderson says Carrillo used his own blood to write phrases associated with the Boogaloo movement on the hood of a car he carjacked….”

        The El Paso shooter came to kill immigrants. He didn’t get that from Bernie. The Pittsburgh shooter came to kill Jews. Didn’t get that from Bernie.

        1. Our right wing snowflakes are wetting their pants over BLM and Antifa, but the only dead people in weeks of protests and rioting are black guys killed by white guys.F….g drama queens.

            1. BTB’s comment is false.

              Most of the killers are not identified yet,
              If those that are many are black looters.

          1. You do understand that Antifa is mostly white ?
            The suspects in the Dorn killing are black – looters.

            Most of the killers of people killing in the riots have not been identified yet.

        2. “The El Paso shooter came to kill immigrants.”
          Read his manifesto he is also an ecco terrorist he did not get that from republicans.

          The Pittsburgh shooter came to kill Jews.
          He was openly critical of Trump.

          You do realize that Trump’s daughter is jewish, that Jared Kushner is Jewish ?
          If you are looking for a anti-semitism and politics – it is pretty trivial to find that in the democratic party.


          The “boogaloo movement” is not white supremecist. It includes blacks, gays and gay blacks.

          The evidence on Carrillo and Justius is that they came to kill cops – not blacks.
          There is supposed to be a long social media trail, but none of it has been provided yet.

          So far there is no real indication of ideology beyond wanting to kill cops.

          That sounds more like Antifa than anything on the right.

          regardless we will ultimately learn more over time.

          Pretty sure the murders in CHAZ were not white supremecists – though the victims were black.

          Jeremey Christian uttered racist slurs before killing 3 people on a subway – 2 minorities,
          But his Social Media was Bernie Bro.

          James hodgkinson set out to murder the GOP congressional baseball team – it is hard to get more political than that.

          There is a long list out there of the political assassins and mass shooters that are purportedly democrats.
          The fact checkers CORRECTLY debunk this by noting – most of these people are nuts and politics has nothing to do with their actions.
          That is true for the few killers you can pretend to identify as on the right, or white supremecists.

          There are murders committed by white supremecists every year.
          They tend to kill each other, and their spouses.
          Fundimentally they are disorganized criminals. They are not truly political.

  10. No Correction Made. Why?

    N.P.R.’s so-called correction:
    “… The photo, chosen by editors, [does not appear] to be an example of the assaults described in the story, and has been replaced. …”

    The words “… does not appear …” are weasel words, at best.

    N.P.R. does not say it made an error or mistake. N.P.R. does not simply, clearly and directly say, “… is not an example …”. N.P.R. does not apologize, does not regret, its false, wrong and harmful action and conduct. “… does not appear …” is not a correction or admission of wrong doing in a highly inflammatory story.

    The “… editors …” did it! Oh!, those dastardly editors.

    The professor, let’s be honest, sincere and genuine, over uses, and I assert often hyperbolically, employs the word rage.

    Again, does not the professor use the weasel word “appear” when he attempts to strike, from the high ground, the pose of the neutral, disinterested and objective arbiter.

    The professor ends with “Thus, in my view, it would seem that the correction in Kentucky should protect NPR from serious damages for the story.” This may be a reasonable interpretation of the facts and law. Time will tell.

    I end by asserting that money damages is, and was, not the issue in N.P.R’s news, fake news? N.P.R. intended to fan the flames of discontent, the professor would say rage. N.P.R. was working from and does work from a preconceived “story line.” The story was too good, the story fit perfectly with N.P.R.’s bias in favor of the “good” as it sees it and its prejudice against the “bad”, as it sees it. It, like the professor, stands on and speaks from the high ground.

    I would invoke the field of ethics; N.P.R. and the professor don’t hesitate to invoke the field of “morals.” Why ethics, and not morals?

    Simply, “… should …” calls forth the field of ethics. Ethics, as a field, deals with what “encourages” or “inspires” the best interaction of people, and professionals (journalists by no definition are professionals).

    N.P.R’s story line, I admit, does not preclude a monetary incentive.

    “An apology would have been nice for the woman …” the professor rises as an issue merely to dismiss it for issues law and money damages.

    I submit N.P.R. made or offered no correction. The woman, the African-American, misrepresented suffered a loss of truth, accuracy and ethical standing in the facts, society and her name and reputation.

    N.P.R. could have, should have and can still issue to issue an apology to the African-American woman, the unidentified African-American woman. That would be ethical of N.P.R. Will N.P.R. issue an apology?

    Time will tell.

    dennis hanna

  11. I consider npr nothing but socialist propagandists, and oral terrorists. Anyone working there is a legitimate target if there is a shooting civil war. LBJ said we could, and should kill socialists/communists to protect our country.

  12. NPR is “individual or specific welfare.” NPR is not “…general Welfare.” Congress has no power to tax for NPR. NPR must not exist.

    Article I , Section 8, Clause 1

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Comments are closed.

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks
%d bloggers like this: