Debunking The Photo Op Myth: Inspector General Investigation Refutes Media Account On The Clearing Of Lafayette Park

For over a year, there has been one fact that has been repeated in literally thousands of news stories: former Attorney General Bill Barr ordered the clearing of Lafayette Park on June 1, 2020 to allow former President Donald Trump to hold his controversial photo op in front of St. John’s Church.  From the outset, there was ample reason to question the claim echoed across media outlets. As I noted in my testimony to Congress on the protest that month, the operation was clearly a response to days of violent and destructive protests.  Now the Inspector General has completed its investigation and the report debunks the conspiracy theory that the Lafayette Square area was cleared to make way for the Trump photo op.

While many today still claim that the protests were “entirely peaceful” and there was no “attack on the White House,” that claim is demonstrably false. It is only plausible if one looks at the level of violence at the start of the clearing operation as opposed to the prior 48 hours.  There was in fact an exceptionally high number of officers were injured during the protests. In addition to a reported 150 officers were injured (including at least 49 Park Police officers around the White House), protesters caused extensive property damage including the torching of a historic structure and the attempted arson of St. John’s.  The threat was so great that Trump had to be moved into the bunker because the Secret Service feared a breach of security around the White House.

The expansion of the perimeter with the fencing was a logical and necessary move. It is the same decision reached (and indeed the same fencing) by Congress when it responded to January 6 riot this year. Absent such fencing, an extremely dangerous situation could have arisen where a major breach of the White House perimeter would have triggered the use of lethal force with the potential of a major loss of life.

Ample evidence emerged in the days after the protests to reinforce the account of Barr and others that the plan to clear the park area was proposed days before any plan for a photo op. There was never any evidence that Barr knew of the photo op plan before approving the operation.  Nevertheless, media and legal experts continued to claim as a fact that this was all done for the photo op.  University of Texas professor and CNN contributor Steve Vladeck continued to claim that Barr ordered federal officers “to forcibly clear protestors in Lafayette Park to achieve a photo op for Trump.” In a still uncorrected segment still up on the Internet, NPR declares “Peaceful Protesters Tear-Gassed To Clear Way For Trump Church Photo-Op.”

Democratic leaders like Speaker Nancy Pelosi repeated the conspiracy theory about the photo op and the Washington Post ran an article by Philip Bump titled “Attorney General Bill Barr’s Dishonest Defense of Clearing of Lafayette Square.” Not only did the Post refer to the “debunked claim” that no tear gas was used by the federal government, but goes on to state incredibly:

“It is the job of the media to tell the truth. The truth is that Barr’s arguments about the events of last Monday collapse under scrutiny and that his flat assertion that there was no link between clearing the square and Trump’s photo op should be treated with the same skepticism that his claims about the use of tear gas earns.”

It turns out that both assertions were true.

The Inspector General of the Department of Interior has conducted an investigation over the last year and the Biden Administration just released the findings. The IG states unequivocally that there is no evidence to support the allegation that Barr or others ordered the clearing for the photo op. The report further concludes that “the USPP had the authority and discretion to clear Lafayette Park and the surrounding areas on June 1.” It further “the USPP cleared the park to allow the contractor to safely install the antiscale fencing in response to destruction of property and injury to officers occurring on May 30 and 31.” It was not done “to allow the President to survey the damage and walk to St. John’s Church.”

That is not the only contraction of the almost universal media accounts. The federal government has long denied using “tear gas” in its operation as opposed to pepper balls in the clearing operation on June 6th. The difference has little real significance either legally or practically. However, critics latched on the denial to show that Barr and others were lying. The IG found that “the USPP incident commander did not authorize CS gas for this operation. Expecting that CS gas would not be used, most USPP officers did not wear gas masks.”

The IG found no evidence of approval or use of tear gas by the federal operation. However, it confirmed “and the MPD confirmed, that the MPD used CS gas on 17th Street on June 1. As discussed above, the MPD was not a part of nor under the control or direction of the USPP’s and the Secret Service’s unified command structure.”

In fact, last week, the District admitted that it used tear gas about a block away in its enforcement of Mayor Muriel Bowser’s curfew. The admission was itself breathtaking since the media lionized Bowser for her stance against the operation and specifically the use of tear gas. For a year, the District knew that it used the tear gas and said nothing to the public as Bowser basked in the media glow – and Barr was attacked as a liar.

Now, on the anniversary of the operation, the Bowser Administration is in court asking for the lawsuit by Black Lives Matter be dismissed. Her attorneys are arguing that the use of tear gas was entirely appropriate and that the clearing of the area was reasonable. This is the same mayor who received national acclaim for painting “Black Lives Matter” on the street next to the park and renaming it “Black Lives Matter Plaza.”

The Biden Administration is also joining in the effort to dismiss the BLM case. It told the court “Presidential security is a paramount government interest that weighs heavily in the Fourth Amendment balance.” The DOJ’s counsel, John Martin, added that “federal officers do not violate First Amendment rights by moving protesters a few blocks, even if the protesters are predominantly peaceful.”

The media has largely ignored the admission of the District and the change of the position on the legitimacy of the law enforcement actions. Moreover, none of the media outlets have corrected their prior stories reporting that Barr ordered the clearing to allow for the photo op, let alone apologize to Barr.

In today’s echo journalism, it is doubtful that any of this will matter. The myth of the photo op fueled the anger and fed the ratings. It is doubtful that these same media and legal experts will now acknowledge that they fostered a conspiracy theory without any concrete support.

The IG Report may have more to say about our media culture than the clearing operation itself. As with the effective media blackout on the Hunter Biden story and the Chinese lab leak theory before the election, the media actively shaped the news to fit a narrative. It worked. Biden was elected and the public still believes these false accounts. For many Democrats, Bill Barr will remain the man who violently crushed protesters for a photo op. As the old media saying goes, it was (and remains) “a fact too good to check.”

113 thoughts on “Debunking The Photo Op Myth: Inspector General Investigation Refutes Media Account On The Clearing Of Lafayette Park”

  1. A much better analysis of the IG’s report –

    I wouldn’t be surprised if JT didn’t actually read the entire report before writing his column.

  2. Turley says:

    “It is doubtful that these same media and legal experts will now acknowledge that they fostered a conspiracy theory without any concrete support.”

    Just as unlikely for you, Turley, to acknowledge the Big Lie which your network, Fox News, promoted, fed and championed for which it is currently being sued for billions. This Fox News’ lie accounts for the fact that 61% of Republicans believe the election was stolen from Trump and 53% who think that Trump is the true president right now!

    Turley will NEVER acknowledge the lies of his employer.

    1. Have you never noticed how everyone—and I mean everyone—who claims that Trump’s claim of election fraud was “debunked” or “a lie” never ever provides evidence to refute this alleged lie? Trump at least does have evidence: there is ample statistical evidence, eyewitness evidence, and technical evidence that there was fraud. It was never debunked, only ignored with the false claim that it was debunked.

      1. James, you are entirely correct. Jeff picked up a buzzword that he is unable to define. The common thought concerning that buzzword is wrong because Trump didn’t say the words some say he said.

        The question is whether or not there was fraud in the election. Without question, there was. Rules were not followed and that should make a lot of ballots invalid. There was ballot stuffing and a lot of other things.

        Right now, audits are showing that the results are not correct. We will probably never know the true extent of the fraud in the 2020 election. Suffice it to say, what Trump said was reasonably true. The made-up things compressed into the buzzword remain untrue. Jeff uses the buzzword, so without question, he is wrong.

      2. Strange, I wonder why the trump administration lost 60 times in court and, under the threat of perjury never presented their ‘evidence’? All their challenges were of the process variety. And the ‘debunking’ came with the recounts that were done in the states that were close.

        Sooner or later, it would be a good thing for trumpies to go with the evidence that has already been presented and to discount their suspicions because the truth is, your guy lost. And he lost the popular vote twice as badly as he did in ’16. And he never won a popular vote. And he lost despite doing whatever he could do in office to undermine the election process, up to and including forcing the Justice Dept. to ‘investigate’ his enemies and extorting foreign governments to provide dirt on his most popular opponent. There’s your evidence.


        1. “Strange, I wonder why the trump administration lost 60 times in court and, under the threat of perjury never presented their ‘evidence’?”

          Based on new evidence, Keyon Sprinkle was recently released, after spending 20 years in prison for a murder he did not commit. (A true story, among countless others like it.)

          Strange, I wonder why that evidence, under the threat of perjury, was never presented at the original trial?

          “Law & Order” is fiction. In the real world, complex fraud cases are not resolved in 60 minutes, or in 2 months.

        2. Strange that you don’t know why, Bug. John Say has posted dozens of times the exact answers to your questions. They make sense. Your confusion does not.

        3. John Say wrote an answer to your question last night though it is not totally complete. I will copy it here.

          “So John, what you are saying is if a plurality of voters in Texas don’t like the results in Pennsylvania, there should be an inquiry by the courts.”

          Nope. I am saying that ALL elections have to be conducted such that nearly all of us can beleive and accept the results regardless of who wins.

          We spent 4 years with left wing nut nonsense that the Russians had elected Trump.

          That was a ludicrously stupid claim from the start.
          At its strongest – the claim was that someone Russians had persuaded legitimate voters to vote for Trump by the hundreds of thousands.

          While false – even if true that would not have been a lawless of fraudulent election.

          The RNC is free to influence voters, the DNC is free to influence voters, Jeff Bezos is, John Oliver is, Russia is.

          There is only one organization in existance that is NOT free to have a voice in US elections – and that is our government itself.

          What no one is free to do is coerce or induce votes.
          That is the reason that 28 states REQUIRE secret ballots – that is a ballot cast privately and secretly at a polling place where election officials assure that it is not possible to prove how any individual voter voted.

          Prior to the 20th century (and those state constitutional amendments) it was common place for employers to pay or coerce voters, for political parties to do so. In fact election spending dropped dramatically after those laws were enacted – because while you could pay someone to vote for your candidate – you could no longer verify that they did.

          Regardless a secret ballot requires that no one can ever be able to see a record of how a specific person voted – before or after their vote is cast.

          Prior to 2020 a handful of states did not have secret ballots.

          In 2020 nearly all states – including the 28 that had constitutional requirements for secret ballots – violated those requirements.

          That is Lawlessness.

          Worse that is a corrupt act on the part of govenrment.

          As I noted the one group that CAN NOT attempt to influence our elections is our own government.

          And yet that is exactly what they did.

          “Can you cite the law on that.”

          PA constitution A5S4 – as well as other provisions.

          The TX – and other states lawsuit in the supreme court – which has original jurisdiction for lawsuits between states,
          Correctly asserted that 6 states had failed to follow their own election laws.

          The constitution is fundimentally a contract between the states.
          A prerequisite for the existance of a federal government is the assumption that states will follow their own laws – particularly regarding federal elections.

          “Clearly there is no logical resaon for it,”
          Yet, clearly there is.

          In fact there are a great deal of logical reasons.
          There are numerous allegations of fraud made regarding this election.

          Many, might fail under actual scrutiny. But absent scrutiny – we are ALL deprived of our constitutional rights.

          There are allegations that photocopied ballots were counted. Can you prove that was not true ?

          We are talking about an election – the burden of proof that election results are trustworthy rests with the government.

          This is not about the dissatisfaction of candidates or parties with the outcome.

          Our courts have an absolute duty to assure that the law and constitution is followed – particularly in elections.
          Without lawful elections – the govenrment does not have the consent of the governed – the government is illegitimate.

          The left and democrats rant about Jan 6..

          Yet, absent trustworthy election – armed trump supporters could have marched on Washington, occupied the capital and demanded a trustworthy election. Read the declaration of independence. Violent resistance to government CAN be justified,

          It is the duty of the courts to assure that conditions justifying violent resistance to government never occur.
          In 2020 they failed.

          I noted the possibility of photocopied ballots. That is a trivial means of committing election fraud.
          It is also a detectable form of fraud.
          In fact every single alleged form of fraud is either detectable or preventable.
          Yet in 2020 specifically – and many prior elections more generally – little is done to prevent or address most forms of fraud.

          Ballot stuffing is only possible by election officials – when elections are conducted in person – as secret ballots require.

          But with mailin elections and hundreds of unattended ballot boxes ballot stuffing is trivial and anyone can conduct it.

          Trillions of dollars are at stake in US elections – are you going to say that would not induce anyone to commit fraud ?

          You made the russians the boogey monster fo the past 4 years – is it outside of Russias ability to stuff ballots in mailin elections ?

          Given that it is within my personal abilities to inject hundreds of thousands of ballots into elections conducted as the 2020 election was, why should I beleiver that no other nation, organization or individual would be able to do so ?

          With in person elections the two primary fraud threats are individuals voting multiple times under different names.
          Voter ID makes that impossible. Even without ID requirements it is sufficiently difficult that in person fraud can only effect very close elections – yet really close elections have become commonplace.

          The other means of fraud in in person elections is ballot stuffing by election officials.
          That occurs – several people from Philadelphia were convicted of doing so prior to the 2020 election.

          Fraud by election officials is more difficult to catch and/or prevent – but it is not impossible.

          Regardless it is much harder to commit when election laws are followed.

          One of the primary means of thwarting ballot injection is the use of election observers – again something that was common place in prior elections. But in 2020 in numerous places – all those where there is controversy election observers were prevented from doing their jobs.

          But beyond the legal requirements of state constitions and state election laws,

          There is a more fundimental requirement that was breached.

          The declaration of independences requirement that legitimate government MUST secure the consent of the governed.

          That is an extra constitutional, extra legal requirement.

          Those who brought down east germany and the USSR – did so in violation of their laws and constitutions.

          But we celebrate them as heros. Because the requirement that government secure the consent of the governed supercedes law and constitution.

          The purpose of all election laws is NOT “fairness” – it is to ensure that the results reflect the consent of the governed.

          We deride the banana republic elections of other nations – specifically because no matter what the count is, if it does not reflect the consent of the voters – the govenrment is not legitimate.

          Our laws – including election laws do not serve themselves. They are not their for the benefit of government.
          They exist to protect the rights of the people.

          I am not entitled to have my candidate win the election – if I was Jo Jo Johnson and Gary Johnson would have been president.

          I am entitled to an election where only the legitimate votes of legitimate voters are counted.

          Preventing election fraud is not that difficult. The most important tool is assuring that any fraud will be detected.
          That is the purpose of voter ID, of election observers of post election audits.

          A version of what is occuring in AZ should occur in every state shortly after every election.

          GA did conduct a random audit of 5000 mailin ballots in Cobb county.

          The results of that audit – undermine the GA elections.

          Of 5000 ballots 300 failed the state laws minimal signature match requirement and 30 were clearly fraudulent.

          That means of ballots audited 6% were invalid and 0.6% were fraudulent.
          This result should have triggered a broader random audit throughout GA.

          But it did not – those like you yawned. Raffensburger refused to order the required larger audit.

          The only evidence we have of the rates of illegimate and fraudulent votes in GA are both more than sufficient to change the election results.

          While that evidence is limited – it is real, and there is no counter evidence.

          Random audits should be part of every election.

          In NH we found a non-fraudulent error of consequence that has effected elections in NH for decades – as a result of an audit required by a democratic challenger.

          Trustworthy Elections REQUIRE all the things that the left and democrats are fighting – not this time, but EVERY time.”

        4. Eb,

          The fact that Fox News has dropped promoting the Big Lie and no longer broadcasts Trumpists who claim that the election was stolen is proof enough for me that it does not believe it. Even though Fox is being sued for defamation, truth is a complete defense. If Fox believed that there was massive fraud, it would continue to provide coverage of it. But it has gone 100% silent- only the fringe right Newsmax and OAN will touch it.

          Turley is silent as well. I repeat- TURLEY IS SILENT AS WELL.

          For a long time Christians refused to accept Evolutionism because they claimed there was a “missing link!” Many people believe that UFO’s could be alien in origin notwithstanding that- as a matter of physics- it is impossible for that to be true. Scientists do look for evidence of life by scanning the cosmos for stray radio signals; they don’t look for evidence on earth!

  3. Did you hear Toobin was welcomed back on CNN?

    Some of the things that won’t get you fired at CNN
    1 – helping your brother cover up thousands of nursing home deaths
    2- coaching your brother on how to deal with sexual harassment allegations.
    3 – masterbating at a staff meeting.

  4. “Correction: I misremembered. I just checked and it was a fire in a single room in the basement, not exterior burns. It still was not “gutted.”

    Anonymous the Stupid, you should do your research before commenting. If you did you wouldn’t have to apologize, and look like a fool. There would also be a lot less comments on the blog.

  5. “It doesn’t, and if you think it does, you should create an account and correct anything you believe you be false or unsubstantiated. Why do you complain instead of improving it?”

    Because, like you Anonymous the Stupid, Wikipedia is dishonest. Sheryl Atkinson can provide you an explanation. Where politics is concerned one has to consider Wikipedia a left-wing hit site. I need not contribute to such an organization nor educate you. You lie too frequently to expend too much energy on.

  6. I have little patience for politicians playing games and little patience of academics playing games. However when the media does the games, it is a truly scary prospect. Even assuming the media was doing its best with bad information, it must report and acknowledge that the narrative was false as reported. I understand Trump was hated by a large percentage of the press, but it inexcusable the lack or reporting or acknowledgement of the situation. There are honest mistakes, but refusal to acknowledge makes one think it is on purpose.

    On the larger front, the Trump administration looks like it is getting shown that is has not done what it is accused. It looks like a pattern is starting to emerge. That remains to be seen for the future.

    1. The media today does not make *honest mistakes. They are propagandists with an agenda.

  7. JT fails to note that the IG chose not to do a thorough investigation. The report says as much: “As noted above, we focused on the USPP’s conduct, so we sought interviews and information from individuals outside of the USPP when doing so would provide us with information about the USPP’s activities. Accordingly, we did not seek to interview Attorney General William Barr, White House personnel, Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) officers, MPD personnel, or Secret Service personnel regarding their independent decisions that did not involve the USPP.”

    1. You are the exact corollary to Trump and Trumpists claiming he won the election; absolutely no difference. You should be proud of yourself.

      If you have one shred of evidence other than words you heard from the receiver in your tooth fillings, state the evidence and links supporting your pathetic excuse for an “argument.” Thill then your opinions are the ravings of an inmate assylum resident in a rubber room.

  8. I was there several times before and after the photo op.The crowd didn’t sit in a Kumbaya prayer circle, but was not violent. Violent, was Jan 6th. Easy, important distinction.

    You need to take better care with those pesky facts, Counselor..

    1. ND:
      “The crowd didn’t sit in a Kumbaya prayer circle, but was not violent.”
      I suppose the church burned itself and the officers’ wounds were self-inflcited. Right, Pinnocchio? I admire a good lair but these Lefties are the worst.

    2. Yes, just like I was at Stonewall even though I hadn’t been born. The ‘narrative’ is never going to make people disbelieve their eyes seeing a gutted church or boarded up businesses right in front of their faces.

      I actually WAS down in Wall Street the day the Occupy protests started (I have photos, would be happy to share if it’s permissible). I found it curious that at this spontaneous, unorganized, ‘grassroots’ movement Wikileaks and Google were parked around the square. The people protesting were anything but peaceful, more like drunk on rage, and it was the height of irony given many of them were students at elite and expensive Columbia. Oh, and they were 90% caucasian.

      1. The Church had exterior burns but was not “gutted,” and clergy from that Church were illegally removed from their own property outside the Church building by law enforcement prior to Trump’s photo op.

        1. There you go again with those pesky facts, it ruins their reality.

      2. James, I was there several days into OWS. I talked to a number of young people that **weren’t** busy defecting on police cars, drinking or otherwise acting like escapees from the local mental hospital.

        Those I spoke to at length were relatively proper young people who predominantly had libertarian ideas but seemed confused about the politics involved. They were not participating in any of the crazy activities. Those that were involved in crazy activities seemed to be from the left or anarchists.

        The leaders were staying in the nice hotels near by.

    3. NDGryphon:

      Contrary to your anecdote, per Turley, “There was in fact an exceptionally high number of officers were injured during the protests. In addition to a reported 150 officers were injured (including at least 49 Park Police officers around the White House), protesters caused extensive property damage including the torching of a historic structure and the attempted arson of St. John’s. The threat was so great that Trump had to be moved into the bunker because the Secret Service feared a breach of security around the White House.”

  9. THAT was more of an insurrection than ANYTHING that happened on 1/6/21…but they were the left’s little Brown Shirts, so they get a pass…..

    1. Nonsense. The Jan. 6 insurrection attempted to prevent Congress from peacefully transferring power by confirming the Electoral College votes.

      1. Imagining what you are saying is true, they couldn’t have delayed it for very long (no more than a day) without weapons. These were non-state approved protesters (unlike the Antifa-BLM rioters who destroyed about $2 billion in property and caused about 40 deaths during the summer) who were therefore subject to summary execution on-site as proved by the case of Ashli Babbitt.

      2. Anonymous the Stupid, you need to gather facts before speaking. Opinion is not fact.

  10. JT, it’s probably a good thing to realize a) that Barr and Trump are never going to live down clearing the Square so Trump could hold a bible upside down next to a church incident that happened in response to reports of Trump going to the bunker when things had gotten more intense some days prior. And there is no way to compare what happened during those times to what happened on 1/6 no matter how much false comparison tactic you employ…

    I mean, i guess you can roll with this forever, having it pop up in your rolling commentary the way Eric Loomis does. You’re clearly one that likes to take your grudges out for a spin. But engaging in the type of history rewriting you’re showing a willingness to venture into is a futile effort. Trump behaved like a wuss with his bunker escape, and January 6th is the biggest cluster f&*k in Washington short of 9/11, when Lincoln got assassinated and when the British burned it.


  11. Another Katrina controversy.

    That said, if we were to subscribe to the Pro-Choice religion and modern jurisprudence, the security personnel would have been socially justified to electively abort (e.g. murder, planned protestor) trespassers who were (e.g. unarmed female veteran Ashli Babbitt) and were not (e.g. Some, Select Black Lives Matter, Antifa fascists) invited. The actual (i.e. not merely plausible or handmade tales) violence targeting officers, transnational insurrections, widespread destruction of property, non-profit racketeering, and neighborhood invasions (i.e. intimidation) amplified over a period exceeding 16 trimesters was evidence of depraved mental states and eligible for legal enhancements.

    1. You seem obsessed with abortion. You regularly introduce it in situations that have nothing to do with abortion. Ashli Babbitt was not aborted.

      1. Your not the best representative to lecture about staying on topic

        And ‘aborted. means ‘killed’. Again leftist demanding accuracy in word usage is perhaps the funniest thing today.

  12. Due to the Press’s lack of credibility and its assumed mantle as mouthpeice for the Dems and the Leftists, we have an utterly uninformed and uneducated electorate. The lies over the last 4 years were so blatant and ridiculous. My favorite proof that liberals, leftists, and Democrats are ignorantly uninformed is the Gapminder test. Gapminder is an independent educational non-profit fighting global misconceptions.Take it and see how you do …

  13. I’ll bet Egypt is ecstatic that the Israelite slaves were out of Egypt before the ink was dry on their release papers.

    Egypt hasn’t suffered for millennia, and doesn’t suffer now, a caterwauling, ineffectual and dependent minority which is relentlessly begging for “free stuff,” in all its multitudinous forms, including compulsory free social acceptance, free money, free food, free housing, free matriculation, free grade inflation, free hiring, free mortgage assistance, free healthcare insurance, free immunity from culpability, etc.

    The communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) in America have made Karl Marx proud – no freedom and self-reliance for them; simply class “untouchability,” dependence and entitlement.

  14. Democrat politicians allowed Leftist rioters to burn, loot, and destroy private property. The effects may last for decades, with job losses, employers driven out of business or relocating, minority business owners folding, and the ensuing increase in poverty, drugs, and crime.

    Republicans are the party of law and order. Conservatives wish to keep the peace and support law enforcement. Trump taking photos after the violent rioters were cleared sent a message on restoring order. Any claim that there was no reason to clear them out, that it was a peaceful demonstration, or that this was some sort of vanity photo shoot is patently absurd. They were cleared because they were hurting people, including police officers, causing property damage, and trying to break into the White House.

    The January 6th incursion into the Capitol was wrong. It was trespassing, and property damage in the breaking of a window, etc. Any crimes should be prosecuted. But why are they treated differently than those who broke into the Capitol and Senate Office building during the Kavanaugh Hearing? Why are Democrat cities either refusing to press charges on rioters, or putting them through diversion programs, while the Jan 6th trespassers are kept in an oubliette with the book thrown at them?

    Why are their two systems of justice, depending on politics?

    If you want a brick through your storefront window, vote Democrat.

  15. No one owes Barr an apology. Someday, if the fates allow, he’ll apologize to the US for obstructing justice on behalf of his ‘client’.

      1. People who listen to the disinformation coming out of CNN and MSNBC, NBC, PBS, ABC, NPR, etc, do not know anything but lies and propaganda.

    1. “No one owes Barr an apology. Someday, if the fates allow, he’ll apologize to the US for obstructing justice on behalf of his ‘client’.”
      Says the salutatorian from clown college. Debunked numerous times there, Sam.

      1. Mespo,

        My wife doesn’t like some of the songs I Like, but you being of Italian descent & a lawyer I would think you’d know it isn’t over til the fat lady sings.

        1. Anytime the Great Gig is given voice is a great time. Full stop.


      2. BTW:

        God forbid you ever find yourself in a car wreck & your stuck & the music continues on, what album would you like to have playing?

        1. Oky1……Randy Newman ……….any album , but am partial to “Good Ol Boys”….His “Louisiana” is beloved by so many of us from that crazy a** state.

          1. The reason I asked was about 40 decades ago a teenager hit & totalled out the pickup I was driving. I was stunned for short while & trapped. The radio was turned up to loud & playing a complete crap talk show.

            I remembered thinking if the truck catches on fire I’d go out listening to crap. The truck didn’t catch fire but the thought caused me think I had to get the hell out there & did.

            Lucky that day, but I still think what I’ve got playing. lol.

            BTW: I think tomorrow we wimp out here as Okies, heat index about 104, humidity about the same, No Wind, Bugs everywhere & the wife & the German Shepherds seem like they’re looking at me kind’ve PO’d.

            Randy Newman seems to be a great guy. I haven’t heard it in a bit, something, Short People.

            1. ………. I think tomorrow we wimp out here as Okies…..

              IE: We turn on & test out the AC.

              We Biden Commies turning off all of the US’s Power Sources I’m thinking I’m going to buy a small window unit I can run off a generator in case those Biden Aholes play their scams like they did last winter.

              It harmed a bunch of people.

  16. Every time the president has a picture taken, it is a photo op. That is the nature of the presidency. You have nothing important to talk about, so you talk about photo ops. Take a nap instead.

    1. Anony………’re right, of course, about pictures being photo ops. Politicians love having their picture taken, “unless”, as former Louisiana Ed Edwards said : “you catch me in bed with a dead girl or a live boy”.

  17. If Attkisson thinks that there’s something false on that page, she should create an account and correct it.

    If you click on the “View history” tab, you can review the edits that have already occurred in light of the OIG report.

    1. Wikipedia is a lousy source if anything political is involved. It pushes leftist ideas.

Comments are closed.