“Our Pride is Showing”: NBC Settles With Nicholas Sandmann

Former Covington Catholic High School student Nicholas Sandmann has reached another settlement with a major news organization over the widespread false reporting of his encounter with a Native American activist in front of the Lincoln Memorial on January 18, 2019. Sandmann previously settled with the Washington Post and CNN. He has now settled his $275 million defamation lawsuit against NBC. Unfortunately, such damages have become the cost of doing business for many in the media in the age of advocacy journalism where the narrative is more important than the news. Having a MAGA-hatted, racist, pro-life high school student abusing an elderly Native American was a fact too good to check — even when it required as little as watching the unedited videotapes. 

The slogan “Our Pride is Showing” took on a more menacing meaning over years of protracted litigation (and the denial of motions to dismiss). In the end, there was more pride than professionalism displayed by NBC in its airing of the false reports and then the refusal to accept responsibility for the damage caused by its erroneous reporting.

Sandmann tweeted that “the terms are confidential” but confirmed the settlement.

Despite the existence of videotape showing him merely standing in front of the activist, the media reported that Sandmann was the aggressor. It was also reported that the students “performed a ‘Build the wall’ chant,” a claim contradicted by an independent investigation.

His counsel detailed roughly “fifteen defamatory television broadcasts, six defamatory online articles, and many tweets falsely accusing Nicholas and his Covington Catholic High School (‘CovCath’) classmates of racist acts.” According to the complaint, MSNBC continued to repeat the false representations as late as January 27th — after most media organizations corrected its coverage.

 Although NBCUniversal acknowledged on January 19 that there was video indicating that it was Phillips who approached Nicholas – not the other way around as other members of the mainstream media were reporting – as late as January 27, MSNBC was still falsely broadcasting that Phillips was not the aggressor and that video evidence supported Phillips’ claims.

 Although it was undisputedly clear by January 20 (at the very latest) that Nicholas had done nothing more than stand still while Phillips approached him and beat a drum in his face, as late as January 23 and 24, NBCUniversal was broadcasting and publishing stories indicating that Nicholas had taken actions for which he should apologize and for which Phillips had purportedly forgiven him.

More specifically, NBCUniversal painted the false picture that Nicholas and his CovCath classmates were “a big mob” that had “surrounded these black kids,” the Black Hebrew Israelites, with the two groups “throwing back and forth racial taunts,” and that “it needed one little spark and that mob would have descended on those 4 guys and ripped them apart,” and that Nicholas and his classmates then “targeted” and “surrounded” Phillips, causing Phillips to be “scared” when he was “harassed” and “taunted” by Nicholas and his classmates, who committed a “hate crime.”

Many in the media went into a virtual state of ecstasy in describing the group of high schoolers as a virtual meeting of the American Bund where brown shirted (or, in this case, MAGA hatted) teens trapped an elderly Native American under the looming gaze of Abraham Lincoln. It was enough to put MSNBC hosts into hyperventilation as they breathlessly recounted the attack.

Indeed, despite the clear record supporting Sandmann, many have continued to hound him including an ACLU lawyer who opposed his being accepted into college and a professor promising to follow his moves on campus.

Likewise, some continued to attack Sandmann and even compared him to George Zimmerman. We previously discussed one segment involving “Above the Law” writer Joe Patrice in his interview with The Nation’s Elie Mystal, In the interview, Mystal, the Executive Editor of “Above the Law”, attacked this 16 year old boy as a racist.  Patrice agreed with Mystal’s objections to Sandmann wearing his “racist [MAGA] hat.” They also objected to Sandmann doing interviews trying to defend himself with Mystal deriding how this “17-year-old kid makes the George Zimmerman defense for why he was allowed to deny access to a person of color.”

Putting aside the fact that Sandmann was not denying “access to a person of color,”  Mystal and Patrice were comparing this high school student to a man who was accused of murdering an unarmed African American kid and even assailing his effort to clear his name as the media continued to label him a racist. It was typical of much of today’s rage-filled commentary. These two writers had no qualms in attacking some kid as a racist in the national media while abusing him for trying to defend his reputation.  It was the popular thing to do in piling on Sandmann. He was merely a vehicle for the release of rage without the burden of reason or research.

Many writers who joined the mob attacking Sandmann have never apologized.  They just moved on to the next target to be declared a racist in a summary media judgment.

Indeed, Mystal continued to slam Sandmann in postings on “Above the Law.”  In one such posting, Mystal wrote in part:

Fresh on the heels of Clarence Thomas wishing he could rewrite the First Amendment to make it easier to sue people, we’re getting a glimpse of what that dystopian future would look like. A team of lawyers have filed a $250 million defamation suit against the Washington Post, on behalf of Nick Sandmann and his family.

The suit alleges many bad things happened to Sandmann after his encounter with Nathan Phillips in front to the Lincoln Memorial. It does not allege that there was no encounter in front of Lincoln Memorial, or that the encounter was captured on video. Seeing as a truth is a defense to any defamation claim, it would be surprising for the lawsuit to survive a motion to dismiss.

Obviously, for a third time, a major news organization was not able to use a motion to dismiss to dispense with the lawsuit … and any journalistic responsibility for its own reporting.

Of course, the settlement will change nothing. We have discussed the false reporting in controversies ranging from the Lafayette Park protests to the Russian collusion scandal to cases like the Rittenhouse trial. However, where stories on Lafayette Park or the Russian collusion scandal falsely accused public officials who understand that they are targets for reckless reporting, these stories falsely accused a teenage boy and his fellow high schoolers on a school trip of being racists in national media stories. That should be appalling to anyone with a modicum of decency, let alone integrity and humanity.

Damages, however, have never been shown to instill integrity or humanity in those who lack such qualities. However, it does show that, despite years of punishing litigation and hostile coverage, Nickolas Sandmann was able to recover something for the media flash mob coverage of his high school trip.


251 thoughts on ““Our Pride is Showing”: NBC Settles With Nicholas Sandmann”

  1. Like Sandmann, more people are fed up, and are going to hold these purveyors of propaganda to account. A judge has seen the evidence and is taking the law suit against CNN to go ahead.

    According to U.S. District Judge Gregory Woods’ ruling, the network aired a report this year entitled “CNN Goes Inside A Gathering of QAnon Followers.”

    “The report included a brief clip of Lieutenant General Michael Flynn proclaiming, ‘where we go one, we go all.’ Plaintiffs John P. (‘Jack’) and Leslie A. Flynn … are shown in the clip standing next to General Flynn,” wrote Woods, an appointee of former President Barack Obama.

    Jack and Leslie stated in their suit against CNN that they are not followers of QAnon. They’re seeking $75 million in damages, saying the network’s reporting defamed them and put them in a false light.

    1. Since it wasn’t clear from your quote, if you read the opinion you linked to, the judge dismissed the Flynn’s defamation suit and is allowing a “false light claim” to proceed.

      1. if you read the opinion you linked to, the judge dismissed the Flynn’s defamation suit and is allowing a “false light claim” to proceed.

        Like I said, the Judge is allowing the case to proceed.

  2. Turley says:

    “Obviously, for a third time, a major news organization was not able to use a motion to dismiss to dispense with the lawsuit … and any journalistic responsibility for its own reporting.”

    First, just for the record, I completely agree with Turley that Mystal is everything that Turley says he is. He is an obnoxious analyst who I wish MSNBC would get rid of. He reminds me of Fox’s Jessie Watters.

    Second, Turley’s statement is *dripping* with hypocrisy. Turley’s own Fox News had its own motion to dismiss a defamation lawsuit recently denied:

    “The Court Can Infer That Fox Intended to Avoid the Truth’: Judge Refuses to Dismiss Dominion Lawsuit Against Fox News Over 2020 Election Coverage”


    This article outlines the sort of legal analysis one would think would interest a self-described “Free Speech Originalist.” Unfortunately, it’s quite embarrassing for Turley’s network. The Judge stated:

    “The Court, reviewing the Complaint’s allegations, notes that it is reasonably conceivable that Fox’s reporting was inaccurate. As alleged, Dominion attempted to factually address Fox’s election fraud allegations. After Fox began connecting Dominion to election fraud claims, Dominion sent Fox executives and television anchors its “SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT” emails. Dominion’s emails, which contained analysis from election and related experts, tended to disprove the election fraud claims. Nevertheless, Fox and its news personnel continued to report Dominion purported connection to the election fraud claims without also reporting on Dominion’s emails. When Fox guests spread or reiterated disinformation about Dominion, Fox did not use the information Dominion provided to correct its guests or to reorient its viewers. Instead, Fox and its personnel pressed their view that considerable evidence connected Dominion to an illegal election fraud conspiracy.

    In addition, the Court notes that it is reasonably conceivable that Fox was not dispassionate. Given that Fox apparently refused to report contrary evidence, including evidence from the Department of Justice, the Complaint’s allegations support the reasonable inference that Fox intended to keep Dominion’s side of the story out of the narrative. Moreover, the Complaint alleges numerous instances in which Fox personnel did not merely ask questions and parrot responses but, rather, endorsed or suggested answers. Fox therefore may have failed to report the issue truthfully or dispassionately by skewing questioning and approving responses in a way that fit or promoted a narrative in which Dominion committed election fraud.”

    And worse, the judge added:

    “The Complaint supports the reasonable inference that Fox either (i) knew its statements about Dominion’s role in election fraud were false or (ii) had a high degree of awareness that the statements were false. For example, Fox possessed countervailing evidence of election fraud from the Department of Justice, election experts, and Dominion at the time it had been making its statements. The fact that, despite this evidence, Fox continued to publish its allegations against Dominion, suggests Fox knew the allegations were probably false.

    In addition, the Complaint alleges that several of Fox’s personnel openly disclaimed the fraud claims as false. Yet, certain Fox personnel (e.g., Mr. Dobbs) continued to push the fraud claims. The nearby presence of dissenting colleagues thus further suggests Fox, through personnel like Mr. Dobbs, was knowing or reckless in reporting the claims.”

    Turley castigates Fox’s media competitors regarding the Sandmann settlement:

    “Unfortunately, such damages have become the cost of doing business for many in the media in the age of advocacy journalism where the narrative is more important than the news.”

    While Sandmann was suing for millions, the election companies suing Fox are demanding billions! What is the likelihood that Turley will publicly acknowledge his employer’s cost of doing business if and when Fox settles out of court for its reckless false representations that the election was stolen?

    I’ll tell you-


    because he is a hypocrite.

  3. Of course, the settlement will change nothing. We have discussed the false reporting in controversies ranging from the Lafayette Park protests to the Russian collusion scandal to cases like the Rittenhouse trial.

    And all things COVID.

    The 6th Circuit has reinstated Biden’s OSHA Mandate on a 2-1 vote, dissolving the stay ordered by the 5th Circuit. Shocking.



    Confusion reigns re: COVID, vaccines, masks and social distancing. The MSM has made things far worse given their political activism and alignment with Biden’s handlers. Just when I started to hope things might settle down re: COVID, the Omicron variant is being manipulated by the CDC, Biden’s handlers and the MSM yet again.

    We can not continue to pretend our nation can endure ongoing whiplash events where people live in fear of everything. Perhaps that was the plan all along by Democrats/MSM. If so, neither party is going to win in the end. Everyone loses just like in the Sandman lawsuits.


    The CDC’s Flawed Case for Wearing Masks in School
    The agency’s director has said, repeatedly, that schools without mask mandates have triple the risk of COVID outbreaks. That claim is based on very shaky science.

  4. They have made it a crime to express how you feel about people, just like how a dictator might make it a crime to express how you feel about him. Man, Orwell wasn’t kidding about thought crime. So what if a judge made such a video in the privacy of her own home? Your fellow free people want to see you punished for offending them just like a dictator like Saddam Hussein would want to see you punished for offending him. We need a benevolent dictator of freedom to destroy political correctness and those who promote it.

    1. Darren,

      Merry Christmas to you, our family, Professor Turley & everyone.

      I especially enjoyed Photo Portfolio this year. The one with the flowers was great.

    2. “Pride and Prejudice” is an excellent movie, the one starring Laurence Olivier and Greer Garson. That’s the best one.

      1. True, but you’ll just have to live with the facts that the great actor Laurence Olivier was a conservative and he wore makeup to appear black in the title role of Shakespeare’s Othello.

          1. Are you a moron? Do you actually believe that non heterosexuals have to be progressives? The progressive movement includes Muslims who have been known to throw gays off the roofs of tall buildings.

  5. This case proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Americans and America listen to media nonsense constantly. The current debate on vaccination mandates is one such nonsensical event. Repeatedly, the justification for current vaccination mandates is claimed to be derived, not from codified law, but from previous mandates. New York may now order a vaccine mandate because New York ordered vaccine mandates in the past.

    Let’s be clear, New York had no authority or legal basis to deny constitutional rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities and order vaccine mandates at any time in the past, and New York has no authority to deny constitutional rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities and order vaccine mandates now. New York had no authority to deny constitutional rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities and order vaccine mandates derived from a nebulous concept or principle of “public health” or “healthcare” at any time in the past, and New York has no authority to deny constitutional rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities derived from a nebulous and uncited concept or principle of “public health” or “healthcare” now.

    Further, “implied powers” are fictitious, phantom powers which, in fact, do not exist. Nowhere does the Constitution provide any power to order or impose mandates or proclamations of any sort. The Constitution provides the executive branch the power to “…take Care that the [constitutional] Laws be faithfully executed.” Nowhere is a power of “public health” or “healthcare” provided. Nowhere is the power to deny constitutional rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities provided to any branch. The rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities of Americans are superior to and immutable by any powers provided to the executive and legislative branches. The sole exception to the superiority of rights and freedoms is the occasion of the suspension of habeas corpus, which is narrowly defined by and provided only during rebellion or invasion. No form or component of government has any power to order vaccinations or any other aspect or facet of “public health” or “healthcare.” That certain citizens and/or elected officials favor and approve of mandates of any sort, does not make them legal or constitutional.

    Americans were compelled to listen to the preposterous nonsense of NBC and the Communist Stream Media (CSM) in the Nicholas Sandman case. Americans are similarly compelled to listen constantly to the preposterous nonsense that vaccination and mask mandates are legal and constitutional, and that the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) have any authority to issue them.

    The judicial branch and Supreme Court must have immediately struck down any and all mandates and proclamations as unconstitutional. Legal and constitutional legislation may not deny the rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities of citizens and is accomplished only by the legislative branch.

    1. Americans were compelled to listen to the preposterous nonsense of NBC and the Communist Stream Media (CSM) in the Nicholas Sandman case. Americans are similarly compelled to listen constantly to the preposterous nonsense that vaccination and mask mandates are legal and constitutional, and that the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) have any authority to issue them. — George (emphasis added)

      Americans are not being compelled to watch (TV), read (newspapers), listen (radio), or anything else (internet). They choose to do so. There is no watch mainstream news mandate emanating from Washington. Americans willingly pay, in many cases, for access to the “news.” They may “trust” the media to greater or lesser degrees, but they all expose themselves to it willingly.

      1. Spanky: you are correct, and I hope that what you say will always be true–at least in this great country, we have a choice to read/listen/watch various (and competing) news sources and form our own opinions. BTW, I thought “S. Meyer” made a nice comment earlier today when he commented, “Critical thinking skills help one obtain the best answer.”

        1. The news media, corporate and many of the highbrow alternatives, have been under deep state “control” for many decades as is documented by historian Carroll Quigley, sociologist Thomas Dye, and others. All the internet has done, for a short while, is expose that editorial control — but that is now being rectified, as is plain to any casual observer.

          Critical thinking is great, but the drumbeat of propaganda can, and often does, drown it in irrelevancies and falsehoods. The current drumbeat against Russia and China is a prime example.

          1. -Not familiar with either one, but thanks for pointing them out. I also agree with your substantive comment. I don’t worry about critical thinkers like you (even if we may engage in debating a point in the future). It is the small-town moms and pops of America, who have no Internet and only get 3 or 4 channels of mainstream ABC, NBC, CBS on their televisions-that I worry about.

            1. Not familiar with either one, but thanks for pointing them out. — lin

              You’re welcome lin.

              It took a long time, and much research, to fully embrace Quigley’s scholarship. Tom Dye wound up being a critical piece of that puzzle. (My cognitive dissonance was very strong.) One of my regrets is I was unable to pursue graduate study under Tom Dye before he retired.

              FWIW, Quigley was WJ Clinton’s history professor (two semesters) at Georgetown. Clinton mentioned Quigley’s influence on his aspirations and political philosophy, when launching his presidential campaign at Georgetown. Considering Clinton’s subsequent Rhodes Scholarship, that influence should not be underestimated, especially in light of our recent history.

      2. You should write a letter.

        Tell NBC that they should get their money back.

        Perhaps the judge will grant a new trial based on the “new evidence” that nobody is compelled to watch NBC and nobody does watch NBC, ergo, there was never any possibility of Nicholas Sandman being damaged.

        That should mitigate to the point of dismissal.

        1. And your point is, George?

          The corporate “news” media, including NBC, defamed and lied about the kid in service to their social / political narrative and in search of profits. Controversy sells — so they manufactured some using Sandmann as their whipping boy. Media gaslighting is an all too common occurrence, unfortunately. However, this time they were at least held (somewhat) accountable in court for their perfidy. I would have preferred a trial, personally, but would the media have covered it?

          This case proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Americans and America listen to media nonsense constantly. The current debate on vaccination mandates is one such nonsensical event. — George

          We agree. Most Americans worship at the altar of the one-eyed-god every night. They pay for the privilege. But they are not compelled to do so.

          Aye, there’s the rub — are you not entertained?

          We can force through any lie. It just has to be big enough so that a normal person says, ‘Well that cannot be a lie!’. Then the lie cannot be recognized as such. And the lie has to be repeated continuously. Then it is believed and is powerful because it is the belief in a ‘truth.’

          The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. — Edward Bernays

      3. I do not watch TV, period. I do listen to radio, but generally to classical music. And I read a lot.

        Anybody can do this.

        1. I do not watch TV, period. — Lysias

          You are a smart man(?*), in my opinion.

          *According to the “50/50 — 90 rule” there is a fifty percent chance you are a man, and my guess is accurate. So, of course, ninety percent of the time I’ll be wrong. My apologies if so.

    2. Geroge: Let’s be clear: the U.S. Supreme Court already held, decades ago when there was a smallpox outbreak in Boston, that vaccination can be mandated. No one has any “right” to go around spreading a deadly virus. That is the law.

      1. Natacha, in 1905 the US supreme court upheld Massachusetts state law requiring a smallpox vaccine. This would be a good precedent If one or more of the various state legislatures enacted a vaccine mandate. However, there is no judicial precedent for the federal government to issue a vaccine mandate by executive action.

        1. Fed or state is a distinction without substance. The question is whether the government can compel vaccination. It can and it has.

          1. So your position you argue is that the Individual US Citizen as no Autonomy over their own body, that they are mere Chattel Slaves subservient to the State as a Guinea Pig instead of “Part of the Superior Controlling Group of Stakeholders”?

            That people like you, for the Gov’t can do as they please & shot us all up with whatever Experimental “Bio-Weapon” they/you wish?

            Isn’t that you’re position?

  6. “Unfortunately, such damages have become the cost of doing business for many in the media in the age of advocacy journalism where the narrative is more important than the news.”

    It’s not the cost of doing business. It’s the cost of libel and slander. Maybe I am wrong, and the business of these media outlooks is to libel and slander those whose ideological ideas don’t match the ideological views of those these libelers laud and praise.

    We hear a lot from Jeff and ATS when they parrot the news media and make their comments about how Turley should act. These nuts want the vicarious experience of slandering Turley and others but are afraid to stand behind their actions.

  7. Off topic again, but I want to join others in thanking Professor Turley and Darren for maintaining a superb blog that stands for the rule of law and particularly for freedom of speech.

    They are voices of sanity and courtesy in an increasingly chaotic world that seems on a course leading to authoritarianism. I suspect that is why some of the commenters seem devoted to attacking them. They are like the thugs who break into university talks to try to shut down any speech they do not agree with. I imagine it will continue but all of us who value law and the freedoms protected by law have learned who they are and we tend to ignore them. It seems plausible that some of these voices are coming from other countries that do not like this country, its laws or its freedoms. They may be articulate, but there are small signs. One of them argued that George Washington lived until the early 1900’s. No American would make that mistake [not unless he was a Common Core graduate] and another seemed confused by the colloquial expression “knock yourself out” thinking it literally meant knocking oneself out, again an expression that any American would understand.

    I do worry that an increasingly intolerant establishment frustrated with the online survivors of the reigning narratives will reach for more oppressive tools to silence voices they do not like.

    In the meantime, God Bless Professor Turley and Darren this Christmas and in the coming year.

    1. Totally legal speech gets deleted here. Turley doesn’t support free speech on his blog.

      1. If you rephrase you comments to comply with the blog standards the core idea will be posted and that is the essence of free speech. Basically, don’t try so hard to be a snot-nosed jerk.

        I think that some of my comments have been deleted in the past, not sure, but there are some that were made in a rush of ideas that subsequently I wished I had not made and would have deleted myself had I the means to do it.

        Turley most certainly does support free speech on this blog and in his professional life and in his professional acts and that is why you and others attack him.

        1. Why were Art Deco and Elvis Bug banned? I think Sqeeky might have been too. I know a bunch of her legal racist comments were removed. I have to laugh that you just assume I was talking about my own comments when most comments that were removed aren’t mine. Open your eyes.

          “The blog standards” are not anywhere close to free speech standards.

          1. Elvis Bug: Continuous bad language.

            You have continuously complained about your own comments being deleted. Can anyone trust you? NO.

            1. You’re only underscoring the difference between protected speech under the 1st Amdmt and what’s allowed here.

              1. I am underscoring the difference between someone who genuinely wants to discuss issues and someone who genuinely wants to be a disruptive jerk.

        2. If only Darren / Professor Turley banned and censored.

          🎶 All I want for Christmas is for Darren to use the ban hammer script 🎶

          Function: When equipped in-game, users can click to knock other players down. Double-clicking flings them far distances and may even kill the player if they fly off the map. It also makes an explosion sound upon impact, though an explosion itself never occurs.

          1. Estovir,

            I haven’t kept up with this lil sweetheart in more then a few years. I’ve only read a few of her comments here. She had up a nice quote I thought;

            What does “Judica me, Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta” mean? It is the Latin of the first verse of Psalm 42, which is prayed at the foot of the altar at almost every Tridentine Mass. It means, “Judge me, O God, and distinguish my cause from the nation that is not holy.”


            1. Judica me, Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta

              I love Latin. It is simple, basic, to the heart/ grain of the matter and expressive

              “Judge me, God and discern my cause compared to an unholy people”

              The Latin Mass formula said by the priest is:

              P: Judica me, Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta: ab homine iniquo et doloso erue me.

              P: Do me justice, O God, and fight my fight against an unholy people, rescue me from the wicked and deceitful man.

              I recently saw a marquis sign on a Disciples of Christ Church:

              Fruit??? Got any??

              I busted out laughing and thought, “Touché!”

              I used to attend the Tridentine Mass decades ago when John Paul II was Pope. The people after Latin Mass would gather for coffee and donuts in the church social hall, and say every unkind, uncharitable, vilifying commentary towards Pope JPII. I stopped attending precisely because these “c”atholics arrogantly signaled they were holy because they attended the Tridentine Mass, but their actions after Mass were revolting.

              The church sign got it right.

                1. Estovir,

                  Thank You.

                  I saved that link to a file. I tend to get back to saved stuff & study a bit on interesting subjects to me as you’ve just posted.

                  But I suggest to you as was suggested to me, Always make time for Family & Friends 1st, especially this time of year.

                  lol, he said further, we can’t always get a perfect job yet we still try the best we can. I know what it has meant to me.

                  1. Always make time for Family & Friends 1st


                    We shall know them by their fruits. If people lack family and friends, pay attention to that, like a waving red flag.

    2. Young says:

      You are not going to wish me, the Whoopie Cushion, a Happy New Year? After all, my presence serves as a punching bag for you and others here. You gotta give some love, no?

    1. Young,

      It isn’t almost as if, the Commie/Nazi Anti-American Creeps are already in charge of many institutions/orgs.

      I see it all the time with search results I attempt to pull up.

      Wiki for example, I’ve had reason to hate the outfit for many years now yet it is always close to the top of the searches.

      I wish I could ban & exclude Wiki & many others from all of my searches unless I specifically request them in a search.

      And notice what Trump Failed to do about these IT & AI issues when he had a chance. Now he’s banned everywhere & can’t even seem to hire competent people to start up his own websites.

      1. Okyi: “And notice what Trump Failed to do about these IT & AI issues when he had a chance.”


        True to a point. He did a lot, but neither he nor the rest of us anticipated how deep the rot was in government and in our institutions. Where he could reasonably expect cooperation he found resistance and stealth sabotage. For me it was a shock to see the masks come off and discover the visages underneath, more often Che than Lincoln.

        1. We can do nothing but wonder what deals he made with those in position of power to aid him in getting elected.

          I remember us Dr Ron Paul supporters immediately “Had” to flow to Trump after Dr Rand Paul lost Iowa ( There’s still today more to that)

          When it came to Trump’s failure regarding Sec 230 at one of the public faces to that betrail was a Petty Power Hungry Scum Bag Fm East European Sebastian Gorka. And Brad Parscale seemed just out of his league.

          Infowars type people have been on Trump’s azz for sometime for him to Fire many/all of his advisers.

          Recent rumor a few weeks back finally Soro’s Supporters, Jared & Ivanka Kushner have been removed from Trump’s inner circles.

          I thought right off the bat Trump had baggage problems with all the normal NYC/DC/West Coast Trash.

          In most ways Trump was/is still far better then the Hillary/Biden/Romney type Trash.

          But still it’s pretty bad with the IT/AI & also as real Doctors, & I agree, Stay the hell away from hospitals in the US if people can!!!

          I’ll be posting some good Doc info real soon. I’ve got to go dig it back up 1st.


      2. No need to use such lengthy expressions as “Commie/Nazi Anti-American Creeps.” I coined a term that encapsulates it all: Communazi.

        1. JFeldman, thanks for bringing that term to the forefront, but its first use was at the beginning of WW2. The implications behind that word were that communism and nazism were the same totalitarian types of dictatorship. The left didn’t like being linked to the Nazi movement, so they successfully fought to place nazism on the right, polar opposite from communism. Of course, The Nazi and communist movements were made from the same cloth, and the deniers of that on this blog have never shown why that is not true.

    2. If you bothered looking at the actual WP page, you’d find that there’s simply a discussion on the Talk page — see the Talk tab in the upper left hand corner. You could choose to become an editor and work on improving the page, but you seem to prefer to gripe.

      1. A few years ago an author of a scholarly book on Sacco and Vanzetti spotted errors on the Wikipedia page. As an editor and a published authority he corrected those errors. Within moments his correction was undone. He corrected again and was undone again. Ultimately he asked what the issue was and he was told that he didn’t have sufficient authorities for his corrections. He told them he and his published book were actual authorities and, of course, his book cited many others. It didn’t make any difference. The errors stayed in place and they leaned left.

        Recently I read a Wikipedia article about a labor issue that took place in my hometown in the late 1800’s. The article was not exactly wrong in its details but the omissions that I spotted tended to shift the theme of the article into falsehood and, of course, it leaned left.

        These are the types of things that led one creator of Wikipedia to say, “Don’t trust Wikipedia.”

        For reasons too involved to give here I have come to suspect that some of the articles and many of the editors are in China and working under the aegis of that government. The shading is subtle but consistent. No doubt some in our government do as well. That they would want to scrub the bloody history of Communism does not surprise me at all. Don’t trust Wikipedia.

        1. I don’t believe you. Every single edit is saved, and if an edit is undone, it can be redone, and if there’s a conflict between editors’ views, it can be taken to conflict resolution. All your expert would have to do is cite a reliable published source, including his own book. Go ahead, tell us the author’s name, and let’s see if you’re right or wrong.

          If WP leans left, it’s because people on the right choose not to put as much time and effort into editing it. You and they prefer to complain instead of pitching in and improving it. Yes WP is imperfect, just like everything else.

          1. ATS: “All your expert would have to do is cite a reliable published source, including his own booK.”


            He did. Then he wrote an article about his experience. You boast of your search ability. Look it up

            1. I already know that your claims are often wrong, and I’m not going to waste my time investigating your claim when you’re too lazy to even identify his name.

              1. ATS, you are a putz and less credible than Wikipedia which is well known to be driven hard to the left. Only you don’t know it. Do you know why? Because you are ATS.

            2. BTW, your laziness even identifying his name also explains why you’d rather complain about WP instead improving any of the pages yourself.

                  1. I am not trying to con you into doing anything. I remember the essence of his article and have no need to look for it. If you are interested, look for it. If not, don’t.

                    1. You think you’re remembering the essence right. I bet you’re not even remembering the topic right — that it wasn’t even about Sacco and Vanzetti — and also that you were so lazy that you repeat all of this without ever bothering to look at the actual WP page to check the details and see how the page continued to evolve.

                      Fact remains that you choose to complain about WP but can’t be bothered to try to improve it.

          2. Anon,

            If Wiki wants to hang slanderous Garbage on it’s site it’s their rep & problem not ours!!!!!!! Same goes for Apple/Google-Youtube/ Facebook/Twitter/PayPal/Pfizer/Maderna/ etc.etc. American Hating Commie Fascist Trash the lot!


            Alex Jones – Wikipedia
            [Search domain en.wikipedia.org] https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Alex_Jones
            Alexander Emerick Jones (born February 11, 1974) is an American far-right radio show host and highly prominent conspiracy theorist. He hosts The Alex Jones Show from Austin, Texas, which the Genesis Communications Network syndicates across the United States and online. Jones’s website, InfoWars, promotes conspiracy theories and fake news, as do his other websites NewsWars and PrisonPlanet.


            Far-Right….. The correction is “Just Right”……… Conspiracy “Theorist” , GTH wikip, more the case of Conspiracy Analyst & Conspiracy Confirming Outlet.

            Fake News! LOL;) They are not competing with the NYT/WAPO/NBC/CBC/ABC/NPR & the rest of the Globalist Rulers Propaganda Arm’s Crap!

            Hell, among many other wikip slanders Mark Levin! I believe Mark when he said he made many attempts at correcting wikip’s page on him only to have his corrections deleted. Then Mark said to hell with them & left. wikip, Ph’em

          3. ATS: “Every single edit is saved, and if an edit is undone, it can be redone, and if there’s a conflict between editors’ views, it can be taken to conflict resolution.”


            That, apparently, is what was done and how he came to be told he had insufficient authority for his edit to remain. I suspect that he had more authority than those who posted the wrong information. Political leanings rather than mere truth seemed the guiding principle leading to the result.

    3. Don’t trust Wikipedia or many other large institutions. — Young

      Just some food for thought about Wikipedia…

      Wikipedia is swimming in money—why is it begging people to donate? — daily dot


      When the WMF announced the creation of an endowment with the Tides Foundation in January 2016, on Wikipedia’s 15th birthday, its goal was to accumulate $100 million over 10 years, as “a permanent source of funding to ensure Wikipedia thrives for generations to come.” — emphasis added

      Moreover, the WMF is launching a for-profit company named Wikimedia, LLC. This will sell API services to big tech companies, making it easier for them to process Wikimedia content, which powers voice assistants like Apple’s Siri and Amazon’s Alexa as well as Google’s infoboxes. These smart internet of things devices all draw on content from Wikipedia to create their aura of omniscience.

      In April, during her last week at the WMF, outgoing WMF CEO Katherine Maher was interviewed on the Daily Show with Trevor Noah. (The wife of the WMF’s PR consultant, the Clinton Foundation’s Craig Minassian, works on the show as a producer.)



      Tides Foundation — InfluenceWatch


      The Tides Foundation is a major center-left grantmaking organization and a major pass-through funder to numerous left-leaning nonprofits. The San Francisco, California-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit was founded in 1976 by Drummond Pike, a professional political activist who has since retired from the organization, to funnel grants from liberal donors to center-left nonprofits using donor-advised funds, encouraging individuals to donate to Tides since they would hold an advisory role in its grantmaking.

      The Tides Foundation’s extensive use of donor-advised funds to funnel grants to center-left political nonprofits has led some right-leaning groups to criticize it as a “dark money” group. [4] The Tides Foundation calls itself a “values based infrastructure service for progressive nonprofit work.” [5]

      The Tides Foundation has been described as an organization that “washes” away the paper trail between its grants and the original donor.[19] Tides Founder Drummond Pike stated, “Anonymity is very important to most of the people we work with.” [20]


      1. Thanks Spanky. The following sites provides 199 organizations funded by Soros. One has to be a fool to believe any organization funded by Soros won’t spin hard left. I’ll bet a number of those that write for Wikipedia are likewise directly or indirectly funded by a Soros organization. We might even have one of those on this blog.


      2. If you want more info, WP’s Wikimedia Foundation page has a section on Wikimedia’s endowment. They’re a lot more forthcoming about their finances than Trump has been, despite his pleas for people to donate to him too.

  8. This is a masterful piece by Professor Turley.

    The courageous Professor entertains and knows no fear as he plows through the rubbish of communist propaganda and indoctrination material propagated daily by the Communist Stream Media (CSM).

    The intrepid Professor is more formidable and no less inexorable than a Caterpillar D11 CD.

    Typical milquetoast American sheople immediately collapse and succumb under the sheer weight of the offal and effluvium excreted by the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs).

  9. Let Sandmann set precedent. There is no other way to check an activist media hell-bent to destroy innocent people, even minors, in order to promote a false narrative for the gain of the Democrat Party.

    There is no better inducement to reacquaint the media with truthful, investigative reporting than significant financial damages.

    The rotten fruit at the core of their narrative is that voting Republican in general, and for Donald Trump specifically, is racist. This is a lie that has been so oft repeated it has taken root as truth in the naive. It’s. Not. True. A MAGA hat does not stand for racism. That was simply Democrat propaganda to defame the Republican Party for political advantage. It’s truly despicable political dirty tricks. But it’s also effective.

    Sandmann was a child, yet slavering political activists publicly fantasized about him getting physically assaulted or murdered. Disney producer Jack Morrissey posted a Tweet with a gruesome scene from Fargo saying he’d like to feed the Covington Catholic High School kids, screaming, MAGA hat first, into a wood chipper. Chelsea Handler said she hoped these kids should be scammed a-la Fyre Festival style. Jim Carrey called them “baby snakes.” The school had to close due to the volume of death threats.

    Kids. These were kids. The media knew this entire narrative was a lie against kids, because they had the entire video of the incident. They knew it was the Black Israelites spouting racist antisemitic slurs and threats. But they lied because it made news and pushed the Democrat agenda against Republicans.

    These people are despicable.

    1. It’s not precedent. News media have settled out of court before, and they’ll do it again. Fox News settled with Seth Rich’s family, and now they’re being sued by Dominion.

    2. Karen says:

      “There is no better inducement to reacquaint the media with truthful, investigative reporting than significant financial damages.”

      Could not agree more! Brava! I’m sure you will join me in applauding a judgement against Fox News, Newsmax and OAN for billions of dollars for defaming Smartmatic and Dominion. Let’s hope that those “significant financial damages” will reacquaint them with “truthful, investigative reporting.”

  10. You have now officially become nothing more than a joke, Turley. Talk about tossing red meat to the disciples. Turley claims: “He has now settled his $275 million defamation lawsuit against NBC. Unfortunately, such damages have become the cost of doing business for many in the media in the age of advocacy journalism where the narrative is more important than the news.” How ironic that you criticize “advocacy journalism”, which is what you do every time you carry out one of your assignments for the Hate Network. Turley: you have no idea what the actual settlement amount was, because you and I both know that settlement amounts are almost always confidential, unless it is a governmental entity that is paying or when a court must approve a settlement on behalf of a minor or impaired person under a guardianship or wardship, and even then, the records are often sealed. The amount demanded in the Complaint has nothing whatsoever to do with the amount actually paid out, so to imply that the smirking little turd in the MAGA hat actually received $275 million is deceitful, if not an outright lie. Many claims such as this one are settled for nuisance value or to save litigation costs, which has nothing to do with the merits, as you well know. And, neither does the fact that a court denied an early motion to dismiss–that doesn’t begin to imply that the MAGA hat-wearing jerk would actually win. But, your assignment in writing this little caca piece is to make the disciples feel vindicated and to attack “mainstream media”. I’m truly beginning to feel sorry for you, Turley. Hey, wasn’t it your law school that just lost a bunch of tests?

    Hey Turley: when are you going to write about Ingraham, Hannity and Kilmeade begging Trump to stop the insurrection, and then denying that he was responsible, but that it was really the FBI, Nancy Pelosi and ANTIFA? When are you going to address The Big Lie? Turley wants to criticize media for lacking “journalistic integrity”, so why not start with your own employer?

    1. (1) the good professor is not claiming that Sandmann received $275 mm in the settlement. (2) Your comments are always filled with such hate and venom, I suggest you take two aspirin and lie down and call us back in the morning after you have curbed your enthusiasm and thought about your words. (3) why indeed do you breathlessly return to this site every day and bother to read and wax prolix on the professor’s posts? I do not wish to be insulting, but I do want to call out your rudeness. I have often mentioned that the good professor provided this forum for open debate/discussion among us. I also told a similar commenter like you, don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

      1. Where does a Trumpster like you get off giving advice to anyone? Turley himself has said that criticism of him is fair game. He submits himself to criticism every time he carries out one of many assignments for Fox. No, Turley never actually SAID Sandmann actually received $275 million, but he implied it because it’s part of his assignment to: 1. make the disciples feel vindicated; and 2. feed into the Fox News criticism of non Trump media. Why mention the amount demanded at all? To imply that Sandmann got a big payday, and based on blog comments here, some of you Trumpsters believe it.

        If I seem harsh, it’s because intellectual dishonesty pisses me off, especially when someone is intellectually dishonest while holding himself out to be a professor of law.

        1. No one should ever accuse you of being intellectually dishonest….maybe just dishonest.

      1. Don’t blame NUTCHACHA, she has been misled.

        Now you grasp why the American Founders denied women the vote; women will vote relief from their purpose and function, and women must be totally involved with childbirth, nurturing and education.

        Women have failed in their natural and God-given purpose to perpetuate the species and bear, nurture and educate children.

        [If women don’t produce babies, they produce hysteria and incoherence by default].

        So says Elon Musk.

        Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who has six children of his own, called the world’s rapidly declining birth rate “one of the biggest risks to civilization” at a Wall Street Journal event on Monday.

        “So many people, including smart people, think that there are too many people in the world and think that the population is growing out of control. It’s completely the opposite.“

        “Please look at the numbers—if people don’t have more children, civilization is going to crumble, mark my words.”

        “‘Civilization will crumble’ if people don’t have more babies.”

        “There are not enough people.”

        “I can’t emphasize this enough, there are not enough people.”

        – Elon Musk, Fortune Magazine

    2. Natacha, there have been many times when Professor Turley has stated that while he allows the questioning of the election to occur he does not believe that such questioning has merit. You just don’t want to really see or hear because you have the same narrative playing over and over again in your mind. Your red meat comes from the ranches at CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico Magazine. You know, the ranches that all had to admit that they got RussiaGate all wrong for four years. Natacha you should be careful. Rotten meat is not good for the digestive system and it also makes your mind dizzy. Just Sayin.

      1. Thinkitthrough says:

        “there have been many times when Professor Turley has stated that while he allows the questioning of the election to occur he does not believe that such questioning has merit.”

        That’s 100% correct!

        At no time did Turley state what the lying Trumpists would have one believe, that is, the election was stolen, because Turley is NOT a liar. He is a hypocrite to be sure, but a liar he is not- unlike the majority of his followers here.

        1. Look at this nutcase saying the same thing over and over again insulting professor Turley who has provided this jerk a podium for free. What does this jerk say? He insults Turley because Turley won’t agree with him.

          1. I would bet $1000 that Turley would be more insulted by being regarded as a Trumpist than a Never Trumper as I suppose he is!

      2. The issue isn’t whether it is proper to “allow the questioning of the election”–it’s the fact that there is no validity to the questioning, which started even before Election Day, when Trump began complaining that his “landslide victory” would be stolen from him because polls predicted he would lose. Then, there’s all of the other things he did, like filing dozens of frivolous lawsuits, stirring up his fans into believing that their “victorious candidate” was cheated, trying to bully Pence and secretaries of state into awarding him votes he didn’t get, and inciting an insurrection to prevent the election from being certified. These things are unprecedented in our history, and they are the stuff of banana republics, not democracies, but most of all, they far exceed “questioning the election”. Trump never “questioned” the election results at all–he denied their validity, falsely accused election workers and companies that make voting equipment of fraud, and claimed that mail in ballots were fraudulent– all without any evidence, and despite massive amounts of contrary evidence. That is wrong.

    3. Natacha asks:

      “When are you going to address The Big Lie? Turley wants to criticize media for lacking “journalistic integrity”, so why not start with your own employer?”

      Good questions. At least we know Turley is a blatant hypocrite. And when he EVER submits to an interview by a non-Fox News questioner, he’ll be asked these damning questions.

      And what will he have to say? What can he say? I suspect he will not submit to a public interview until he breaks from Fox. That way he can claim he left Fox because he was uncomfortable working for a network which engaged in the advocacy journalism which he condemns at its media competitors.

      Turley is not fooling anybody.

  11. In this era of subscription journalism, there’s a way to beat the propagandists. I fill in the big picture with opposing sources because I expect certain “errors of omission,” but I strongly believe fact checking is any journalist’s minimum obligation. He might not want to report some facts, but he should never report lies as facts. If I ever catch a journalist blatantly lying, he’s done. I never click on him, again, even to complain (advertisers count angry clicks, too).

    At this point, Fox News and The Hill are my go-to sources. Substack, UnHerd, Jimmy Dore, Dark Horse, Bill Maher, and–of course–Jonathan Turley are also good. I don’t always like what I hear, but I believe they are at least making a good-faith effort to be truthful.

    ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, WaPo, NYT, Huff Po, and Yahoo News are all dead to me. All caught lying bigly.

    1. P.S. I didn’t include late-night comedians because they’re not journalists. They’re idiots.

      1. It’s so funny how the libtard’s collective heads are exploding over the fact that a completely innocent high school student is reaping the legal rewards from journalistic hacks that have shunned ethics and truth for pseudo-communistic activism and ideology. Doubly funny now the Cuomos are both unemployed! Poor Fredo!

  12. There is no moral equivalence between a good country and an evil country, so the analogy is fallacious from the start. You poor dear: you thought the point you made was cute and clever. Well, it wasn’t.

  13. It has become clear that mainstream news outlets are no longer for-profit purveyors of news. Their agenda-driven lies, and string of errors have resulted in viewership that is dwarfed by, among other things the number of followers on YouTube channels of teenage girls curling their lashes. It is clear that they now exist to mouth the desires of big business and big tech, forming public opinion and public policy in a fashion that increases their profits. They are no longer news organizations seeking to make a profit by providing a product, namely truth. They are now simply non-stop commercials, an expense for the oligarchs that pull their strings. It is quite amazing to me that the left, who historically and appropriately was on constant watch of conservatives for being too close to big business, has now completely flipped the script and abandoned that principle, if it ever was a principle.

  14. I have a new story for you Professor Turley: A USC student DIVERSITY SENATOR has called for the killing of all F…ing supporters of Zionism. Of course the USC administration “deplored” the words but since the student senate is independent they won’t do anything. Does anyone think that if a white student with a title of senator called for killing all supporters of BLM that the school would do nothing? She has also said F^$%$^ Israel and their b-tch America as she supports Hamas. Does this moron think that Hamas has diversity? Ask her how the Jews voted in their last election. Or the gays.

    Professor, I love your free speech stance, but calling for the killing of anyone is NOT FREE SPEECH.

    This little moron of Palestinian descent got into USC (probably on a free boat), became a student senator, got on the “diversity” committee, and then talks about how bad America is and how certain groups should be killed. Of course now she is getting death threats and she is complaining. I abhor all death threats, but when you call for killing whole groups maybe you reap what you sow.

    1. OT, but, Unfortunately, she most likely models her views and behavior on those of Ilhan Omar and Rashid Tlaib.

      1. Omar and Tlaib have not called for killing Zionists, so you have a harmful imagination.

        1. Nope, your inferential error. My generalization of the controversial (plural) views and behaviors of Omar/Tlaib in no way relates to any such specific implication as you intentionally suggest. More specifically, I am referring to their views and behaviors such as Omar telling Muslims to “raise hell;” her downplay of 9/11, etc., and Tlaib’s potty-mouth (“MotherFs” etc). What fine role models they have become!

          1. Lin says:

            “I am referring to their views and behaviors such as Omar telling Muslims to “raise hell;” her downplay of 9/11, etc., and Tlaib’s potty-mouth (“MotherFs” etc). What fine role models they have become!”

            You don’t have the moral standing to criticize anyone as being poor role models when you champion Trump who is a self-confessed sexual degenerate and a chronic and habitual liar and quite likely a fraudster if the civil and criminal investigations ultimately indict, prosecute and convict him.

            1. I call you out again, sir (which is why you hate me so much). Please provide a single example in which I “championed Trump.’

              1. Lin,

                I don’t hate Trumpists . I hate the sin, not the sinner. I try to forgive them for they know not what they say about the election is false. I pity Trumpists because they have been misled by a consummate conman.

                1. You didn’t answer my single question to you. You accused me of having no “moral standing” because I “championed Trump.” I asked that you provide a single example of when I “championed Trump.” You cannot, because I have not. I wish not to be rude, but can you please stop this silliness and try to stay on topic (the substantive issue of the professor’s blog)? As I said to Natacha, take two aspirin and lie down and call us in the morning when you are ready to talk substance, not nonsense.

                  1. I wrote a reply your comments, but you ignored it:

                    Lin asks:

                    “Aren’t you one who was bemoaning “whataboutism?”. hmmm…..”

                    Glad you asked. I do ask “what about?”However, I do so NOT to EXCUSE bad conduct by pointing to similar conduct ignored by my opponent. Pointing to bad conduct never justifies another’s similar conduct.

                    Rather, I ask “what about?” to expose my opponent’s *hypocrisy* for complaining about bad conduct or speech while at the same time his ignoring similar bad conduct or speech. I have never made the argument that 2 wrongs make a right.


                    Refresh my recollection, counselor, have you not stated that you agree with Trump that the election was stolen or words to the effect that you have serious doubts about the validity of the election results on account of the potential of massive fraud due to the changes in voting rules in order to safeguard the health of voters during a pandemic?

                    I’ll have you know that I do take 81 milligrams of aspirin daily- doctor’s orders- if it’s any business of yours.

                    1. Nope. Neither stated nor implied that the election was stolen, or any similar implication. Anyone who regularly reads my comments over MONTHS would agree that the main gist of my criticism has nothing to do with Trump, but rather, is directed toward slanted media and academia and the danger that represents to America. Thanks for responding. good night.

    2. They only do it because you allow them to. You are so powerless and afraid of them, they do whatever they choose whenever they choose. The Founders restricted immigration, citizenship and the vote because they established a restricted-vote republic, not a suicidal, self-terminating one man, one vote democrazy. Never did the Founders intend citizens to be anything other than European and never did the Founders intend for the “poor” to vote.

      America has arrived at Tytler’s dictatorship of a loss of resolve, courage and gumption by actual Americans.

      To wit,

      “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy–to be followed by a dictatorship.”

      – Alexander Fraser Tytler

      1. George, you’re a misogynist who doesn’t even want women to have voting rights, much less serve in Congress.

        1. It is not I, Frau Feminazi; it is Elon.

          Elon Musk encourages women to have babies…lots and lots and lots of babies (see above @ 1:37 PM).

          Elon wants women to carry babies, bear babies, nurture babies, raise babies and educate babies.

          It’s a big job and I, for one, believe women are man enough.

          How ’bout you?

    3. I was in law enforcement for 33 years. There are many laws on the books, both State and Federal addressing threats such as those described above. We do not need to set up independent word-police on campuses and social media to police them. That is a false dilemma. Doing so inescapably puts the job of discerning truth from fiction in the hands of individuals who have bias and often an agenda. Remember, the eraser used to rub out someone’s rights today can be turned on yours tomorrow.

    4. We do not live in a world where Christians and Jews terrorize the world hoping for domination. On the other hand the Islamist terrorizes and practices genocide all over the world. There are many Muslims that are not like that but I wish more of them would stand up and use their voices against the slaughter.

      The killings by these Islamists are based on the Koran. Muslims should loudly disavow that type of action, the people engaged with them and those words

      “Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them.” Koran 2: 191
      “Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable.” Koran 3:28
      “Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Koran.” Koran 8:12
      “Jews and Cristians are like pigs and monkeys.” Koran 5:60
      “Whenever opportunity arises kill the infidels” Koran 9:5

  15. The biggest liars are also the ones calling on Big Tech to monitor “disinformation” and censor it. The mass hysteria among the left certainly deserves some attention from the medical community. The precedents in history — the Inquisition, witch trials and burnings, the cultural revolution, etc. — are too ominous to ignore.

  16. The mainstream media, to this day (even today 12/18), still refers to Jan 6th as an ‘insurgency’ even after the FBI said there was no such thing,

      1. The FBI found no evidence that Jan 6th was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election results. Now, look back in history and point out the revolutions and insurgencies that were never organized, or that people engaged in without any weapons. But don’t let facts and common sense stand in the way of a good “Trump is a dictator” story. Adam Sciff needs this kind of thing to pretend he’s still relevant. And the Democrats need something to run on in 2022 and 2024, because all they have is a pile of Biden disasters, angry parents, and crime-ridden cities.

        1. The FBI has not said that it “found no evidence that Jan 6th was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election results.” It’s still investigating and generally doesn’t comment on ongoing investigations.

          Lots of rioters used weapons on Jan. 6. One was sentenced to 5 years in prison just yesterday for his violent use of weapons against the police that day.

          1. Take note the people killed were supporters of Trump.

            Take note the people pushing for riotous behavior appear to be related to the FBI and the left.

            Take note, Jan 6 wasn’t an insurgency. Over the summer on a regular basis we saw violence in a much larger scale including attacks on federal buildings. We saw what happened at the Kavanaugh hearings. ATS likes leftist violence.

            Take not how most of the bloggers on the right criticize the violence from the right. Not ATS, no criticism unless gratuitous so he can look at himself in a mirror and say he is a good person. He isn’t.

          2. I think you are right, Anonymous—it was SCANT evidence, not “no evidence.” I equate that to something like “trace” minerals found in soil. The “weapons” you mention were a fire extinguisher, long pole, and a wooden plank.

            1. The FBI hasn’t said “scant” evidence either. They aren’t even done with their investigation, but for some reason, you and the original commenter want to pretend that the FBI has stated conclusions that they haven’t stated.

              As for the weapons that were used against the police, think about how you’d respond if they had been used against you. If someone tried to hurt you by hurling a fire extinguisher at you, would you say that they were using it as a weapon? If someone tried to hurt you by throwing a pole at you as if it were a spear, would you say that they were using it as a weapon? Would you worry that you might get hurt if you were hit by one of those things? He admitted that he tried to hurt police with those weapons. He said he was ashamed of what he did. Are you trying to make excuses that he didn’t make?

              1. Anonymous: Please Go back and look at my comment and read it more carefully. NEITHER I nor “giocon1” attributed ANY language to the FBI. Rather, giocon1 stated (as in opinion) that the FBI found “no evidence.” My comment is mine. It is you who engages in misleading textual matters, not us.

                1. Please go back and (re)read the original comment that started this subthread and set the context for all the replies: “The mainstream media, to this day (even today 12/18), still refers to Jan 6th as an ‘insurgency’ even after the FBI said there was no such thing.” This entire time, I have been discussing what the FBI itself has and has NOT said, which is a factual matter rather than a matter of opinion.

                  As for giocon’s belief that “the FBI found no evidence,” he cannot possibly know the totality of what the FBI has found or will ultimately find, since the FBI has not made all of their existing findings public, and their investigation is ongoing. Ditto for you. You are, of course, free to have any opinions you want, but I doubt you’re even trying to follow all of the public evidence in the hundreds of indictments (just a guess). I know I’ve only read a fraction of them.

                  1. The “original comment that started this subthread” is NOT from either me or giocon1. So why did you feel it important to respond to me? Because you despise me for correcting you.

                    1. Lin, I’m well aware that the “original comment that started this subthread” was not from either you or giocon1. I never suggested it was from either of you, I only said that it set the context for all of my replies.

                      You chose to reply to a comment I made to giocon, so I replied to what you wrote, and you responded to that, so I replied again.

                      I don’t despise you, and you didn’t correct me, as nothing I wrote was factually false. If you think I wrote something factually false, just quote it and we can straighten it out.

                    2. P.s. this is in response to your Dec. 19@ 1:54 comment: (1) I accept your invitation to respond; (2) we both acknowledge that we were exchanging commentary regarding a comment from giocon1-not the “original commenter”) (3) you deflected and made the following statement at 5:46: “but for some reason, you [Lin] and the original commenter want to pretend that the FBI has stated conclusions that they haven’t stated.” (4) your statement is categorically and unequivocally false, and I corrected you. (5) As we say in court, “the record speaks for itself.” While it may be possible to selectively remove your earlier comments or block response thereto, mine will remain. (5) Thanks for the invitation.

                    3. Lin, thanks for clarifying. When you wrote to me “I think you are right, Anonymous—it was SCANT evidence, not “no evidence,”” I interpreted “it” as a reference to what I’d written about what the FBI had said or not said. Sounds like I misunderstood, and perhaps “it” instead referred to the Reuters article? Or did you mean something else by “it”? It’s not always clear what pronouns refer to. Glad to resolve the misunderstanding.

                    4. (Did you notice in my above-comment that there are quotation marks around giocom1’s comment, but NO quotation marks around “scant?”)

                    5. Lin, if you’re not willing to answer my question and clarify what you were referring to by “it,” I guess this is the end of our exchange.

                  2. “the FBI has not made all of their existing findings public, and their investigation is ongoing”


                    Maybe they haven’t made all of their ‘findings’ public because they are still making them up.

                    Their ‘investigation’ [manufacturing] is still ongoing.

                    1. Or maybe you have an overactive imagination.

                      If you have actual evidence of any findings having been manufactured rather than real, I suggest you hand it over to the inspector General and the defense attorneys.

                    2. ATS- An inspector general has limited jurisdiction and no enforcement authority. He can investigate to a degree and refer a case but that’s pretty much it.

                2. Lin, don’t hold your breath waiting for ATS to recognize he was wrong. He is wrong very frequently, but on occasion, when the point is insignificant, and he makes a tiny error, he apologizes. That is to prove to himself that he has the humility and the ego to apologize. Then he takes a few bows, pats himself on the back, and at times has one of his anonymous pretend friends compliment him so that at a later time, he can brag that he admits when he makes a mistake. The truth is he is deceitful and a liar.

              2. Rueters reported the FBI doesn’t believe the thousands-strong mob that stormed the Capitol was part of a coordinated effort, or that the rioters had planned what they would do once they breached the building.

                So yes. According to those radical right wingers at Rueters The FBI has in fact said no coordinated effort. That FACT, rules out insergency and insurrection. So it is reasonable to say: The FBI has said there is no insurrection/insurgency.

                To debate that is just childish pedantic word play.

                1. “According to those radical right wingers at Rueters The FBI has in fact said no coordinated effort.”

                  No, if you actually bothered to read the Reuters article, you’d find that they didn’t have any statement from the FBI, only from someone who used to work in law enforcement and who claimed to know about the investigation. That article was already linked in an 11:41 AM comment yesterday. All you’re doing is showing Yahoo’s sloppy reporting and how a game of telephone quickly distorts the actual facts.

                  1. From the article: “the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.”

                    ATS, Note the “according to the sources…directly involved in or briefed regularly..on the investigations” and compare that with your claim that the article was sourced “only from someone who used to work in law enforcement….”

                    This type of thing is why you are known as ATS and known also to be dishonest.

                    1. I think I’ll believe Wikip acct there’s Klaus Schwab, part of the Kissinger Group & further Soros, Bill Gates out to Finish off the USA for good & they are most of the way through their long held plans for Globalist wet dream of a UN type run UnElected govt like the Commie/Fascist type the EU govt..


                      Salary level and lack of financial transparency

                      While Schwab had declared to see excessively high management salaries as “no longer socially acceptable”,[18] his own annual salary of about one million Swiss Francs has been repeatedly addressed by the media. The Swiss radio and television corporation SRF reflected this salary level in the context of ongoing public contributions to the WEF and the fact that the Forum does not pay any federal taxes.[19] Moreover, the former Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung journalist Jürgen Dunsch criticized that financial reports of the WEF as institution headed by Klaus Schwab were not very transparent since neither income nor expenditures were broken down.[20]
                      In the view of some critics, the WEF is exercising too much influence on global systems and institutions. The picture shows George Soros during a Davos session on redesigning the international monetary system.
                      Capture of democratic structures and institutions

                      Schwab as publisher of the World Economic Forum’s 2010 “Global Redesign” report postulates that a globalized world is best managed by a self-selected coalition of multinational corporations, governments (including through the UN system) and select civil society organizations (CSOs).[21] He argues that governments no longer are “the overwhelmingly dominant actors on the world stage” and that “the time has come for a new stakeholder paradigm of international governance”. The WEF’s vision includes a “public-private” UN, in which certain specialized agencies would operate under joint State and non-State governance systems.[22]

                      According to the Transnational Institute (TNI), the Forum is hence planning to replace a recognised democratic model with a model where a self-selected group of “stakeholders” make decisions on behalf of the people.[23] The think tank summarises that we are increasingly entering a world where gatherings such as Davos are “a silent global coup d’etat” to capture governance.[24]
                      Controversy with Davos municipality

                      In June 2021, Schwab sharply criticised the “profiteering”, “complacency” and “lack of commitment” by the municipality of Davos in relation to the WEF annual meeting. He mentioned that the preparation of the COVID-related meeting in Singapore in 2021/2022[25] had created an alternative to its Swiss host and sees the chance that the annual meeting will stay in Davos between 40 and 70 per cent.[26][27]


                    2. Thanks for the insults! They definitely bolster your weak case!

                      Notice that absolutely nothing in what you quoted was a statement from the FBI itself.

                      Also, I didn’t “claim that the article was sourced “only from someone who used to work in law enforcement….””

                      I said “they didn’t have any statement from the FBI, only from someone who used to work in law enforcement and who claimed to know about the investigation.”

                      I’ve been talking about public statements — quotes — this entire time.

                      This is why you are known as inattentive and some of us wonder how you make a living as an attorney.

                    3. ATS, Young is quite intelligent and well-read. He is someone you would look up to if you were more imaginative, but you are not. You weasel your way through comments to such a degree that trying to read your explanations can get one dizzy. It is hard for you to defend your position because you are a hypocrite. That is what you are known for, that, and being a jerk.

                  2. We have spent the last years having the media quote persons “close to the person. investigation, conversation, _____…

                    But we do have the fact. that the DOJ has not charged a single person with conspiracy.

                    1. Wrong again. For example, in the case against Hostetter, Taylor, Warner, Martinez, Kinnison and Mele, one of the crimes they’re all charged with is Conspiracy, 18 USC 1512k.

                  3. The FBI has testified to congress that they have found no evidence of coordinated effort or conspiracy.

                    That is likely untrue – as the reporting from Revolver demonstrates obvious evidence of a coordinated effort and conspiracy – among atleast a dozen people – none of whom have been arrested or questioned.

                    Which beggs the question “Why ?”
                    Why hasn;t the FBI arrested or questioned the people who tore down the capital fencing BEFORE the protestors arrived at the capital ?

                    Why hasn’t the FBI arrested or questioned people who for several days before were actively inciting a riot, inciting violence ?

                    Why hasn’t the FBI arrested or questioned people who at the capital were actively inciting a riot, inciting violence and in some instances committing violence ?

                    Revolver concludes that these people have not been arrested – for the same reason that 12 of 18 of the Michigan Wolverines were not arrested int he plot to kidnap Whitmer, for the same reason that numerous purported right wing thugs have not been arrested.

                    Because they are all FBI agents or informants.

                    Is that True ? Maybe, maybe not.

                    REGARDLESS, those who actually incited violence, who clearly conspired, should be questioned and arrested.

                    By the FBI, by the DOJ, and by the Faux Jan 6 committee.

                    Regardless the left wing nut media and democrat pushed narrative regarding Jan. 6th is falling apart.

                    it is not Trump supporters that are actively thwarting making public the 14,000 hours of video of the Jan. 6 events at the capital.

                    The more we learn the more we know that the nonsense the left has sold is FALSE.

                    One last question.

                    When EVER has the capital been closed to the public while Congress was in session ?

                    Like it or not – congress is a public body. Only when dealing with very limited matters of national security can congress meet in private.
                    Nor can it EVER ACT in private. Every single excercise of power the constitution allows to congress must be performed in PUBLIC.

                    This is a requirement specifically so that people can actively PROTEST the actions of govenrment, and so they can petition government.
                    Which is best done at the seat of government – the capital.

                    The capital was not closed for the Kavanaugh hearings and protests.

                    It should not have been closed on Jan. 6th.

                    1. John, I agree. I looked at some of their videos—one in particular shows orchestration. One can see Epps (I think) near the front, and many expected red hats, but one that was pushing on the fence had his hat turned backward (there was possibly a second hat turned backward). One can see a few at the fence wearing black, which seemed out of place. (This is from memory so that I might be incorrect)

                      Could Epps have directed tearing down the fence with leaders who turned their red hats backward while people dressed in black? Who knows, but wouldn’t that be something the FBI would explain while arresting those that actually broke into the gates?

      1. Work on your reading skills. That statement didn’t come from the FBI, and no, that’s not splitting hairs.

  17. These suits and settlements are important, but have these propaganda news outlets factored that into the cost of doing business? The damage was done. And with false reporting on conservative public figures an obvious part of the Left’s propaganda business model, the grooming of consumers (getting Bezmenov’d) to anti-American values by these outlets runs unabated.

    1. Olly, that’s what I struggle with, too. This propaganda and character defamation works. It works well. To date, we have not mounted an effective defense.

      My hope is that Sandmann will blaze a trail, and there will be so many defamation lawsuits that the media will have to correct its course or fall. It’s not the days of 4 networks in the 1970s anymore. The internet is a universe of sources for news and entertainment, of varying quality.

      Step one is to punish the media’s lies financially. That might reacquaint them with journalistic integrity. Maybe.

      Step two is to drain its viewership. CNN is hemorrhaging viewers and stars. There needs to be a connection between dishonesty and failure.

      Step three is to reach an audience that currently gets all its news and information from far Left sites and Hollywood. The Daily Wire is staring a grass roots alternative to far Left Hollywood, beginning with Run, Hide, Fight. But you have to be a member to view their films. We need to get films with broad appeal, without far Left messaging, into theaters. We need more comedians and talk show hosts like Dave Chappelle and Bill Maher to question the propaganda and cancel culture. I’m waiting for the day when Maher realizes he’s a Libertarian.

      We need to run a long game.

      The question is how to combat their very effective propaganda that unless you vote not only Democrat, but far Left, you’re racist, et al?

      1. Karen,
        Unfortunately, disinformation is immediate, while the the justice system takes a very long time. The damage can be significant and last for generations.

        1. Olly, et aL;

          I did watch that Peter McCullough interview you posted & it was good.

          I’ll likely will post these pieces below a few times for both those that have & haven’t had the mRNA vaccines & what we can ask/do about parts of it.

          Some of these Doc/Pros are hanging with 13/14000 others that signed letter/s to the public/others.

          {BTW I like Greg’s site & support it)

          Calamitous Suppression of Early CV-19 Treatment – Dr. Pierre Kory



          Still a bit of trouble finding the DR Malone Emergence Message.

          I’ll find it.

      2. Karen says:

        “The question is how to combat their very effective propaganda that unless you vote not only Democrat, but far Left, you’re racist, et al?”

        The question is how to combat their very effective propaganda that unless you vote not only Republican, but Trumpist, you’re an American Marxist.

Comments are closed.