Media Blatantly Misreported the Atlanta Mass Murder Story; FBI Director Admits Race Wasn’t a Factor

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay

On Tuesday, a clearly disturbed 21-year-old white male killed eight women at three Atlanta-area massage parlors. Because six of those women were of Asian ethnicity, the media collectively and immediately began reporting this mass murder as the latest “hate crime” to be committed by a white supremacist against Asian Americans.

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, who were to make a stop in Atlanta on Friday on their “Help is here” tour to promote their boondoggle of COVID relief package, abandoned their original purpose and instead devoted the visit to lecture the American people about racism.

Biden allowed “President Harris” to do the talking. “These facts are clear,” she said. “Six out of the eight people killed on Tuesday night were of Asian descent. Seven were women. The shootings took place in businesses owned by Asian Americans. The shootings took place as violent hate crimes and discriminations against Asian Americans has [sic] risen dramatically over the last year…”

She couldn’t resist taking a shot at former President Donald Trump for what she wants us to believe is his role in this crime.

“Racism is a real in America. And it has always been. Xenophobia is real in America and always has been…The last year we’ve had people in positions of incredible power scapegoating Asian Americans. People with the biggest pulpits spreading this kind of hate,” Harris said.

For the repellent Nicolle Wallace over at MSNBC, there was no doubt this was a hate crime against Asian Americans. “I just keep thinking of that domestic terror alert warning we got shortly after the insurrection. It warned us that until the end of April, we’d be living under the threat of domestic violence extremism from a combination of White supremacists, militias and extremists who are angry about both the election results because of Donald Trump’s big lie and the COVID restrictions. I wonder if you can speak to the intersection of that group we were warned about publicly [Trump supporters] and the targeting of Asian Americans.”

On Thursday night, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson devoted his opening monolog to the left’s campaign to make this a hate crime. (Please scroll down to the bottom of the page to view.)

David Leebron, the president of Rice University in Texas, Carlson told viewers, “immediately issued a statement that got key facts about the killings completely wrong, not that facts were the point of the statement. The point was making that sure everyone understood the political lesson.”

Leebron declared that, “The deliberate use of such terms as ‘the China virus’ to foster bigotry has played a significant role. … Sadly and predictably, this escalation of racially-based hatred has led to violence.”

“Leebron is telling us it was all entirely predictable,” Carlson explained, “because once you describe a Chinese virus as Chinese, people are naturally going to start murdering Korean women. You could have seen that coming.”

Next, it was Harvard’s turn to get involved. Harvard administrators issued a statement which said, “For the past year, Asians, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders have been blamed for the pandemic.”

“Once again,” Carlson notes, “if you dare note that the novel coronavirus came from Wuhan, a mentally ill sex addict is certain to shoot up a brothel in Atlanta.”

He reminded us that Harvard has “publicly admitted” denying “admission to Asian students precisely because they are Asian.” They were forced to do so after they’d been caught.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki hopped on board the freight train. She told reporters, “You know, I think there’s no question that some of the damaging rhetoric that we saw during the prior administration, blaming — you know, calling COVID, you know, the ‘Wuhan virus’ or other things led to, you know, perceptions of the Asian-American community that are inaccurate, unfair…”

After the shooter, Robert Long, was caught, Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office held a press conference. Captain Jay Baker told reporters, “The suspect did take responsibility for the shootings. He said that early on, once we began the interviews with him. He claims that these, and as the chief said, this is still early, but he does claim that it was not racially motivated. He apparently has an issue, what he considers sex addiction, and sees these locations as something that allows him to go to these places, and it’s a temptation for him that he wanted to eliminate.”

Carlson reviews the facts:

So the police took a long and detailed statement from Robert Long, and to restate, here’s what they found: Long immediately confessed to the crimes. But while he admitted to committing multiple murders — a death penalty offense in the state of Georgia — Long denied having any racial motivation. Instead, he told police he had a sex addiction and an “issue with porn,” and that he shot up massage parlors in an effort to eliminate his own temptation to visit them.

Police arrested Long as he was heading to Florida, where he said he’d planned to kill more people in the sex industry. So, Robert Long was fixated on prostitution and pornography, and that’s why he said he committed the murders.

The next day, information came to light that seemed to confirm his story. A man called Tyler Bayless said he shared a room with Long in a Georgia rehab facility last year. Bayless was there for drugs, but Long was there for sex addiction.

“It was something that absolutely would torture him,” Bayless said. While at the facility, Long frequently relapsed and went “to massage parlors explicitly to engage in sex acts.”

Moreover, in the following audio clip, FBI Director Christopher Wray tells NPR in a Thursday interview: “And while the motive remains still under investigation at the moment, it does not appear that the motive was racially motivated.”

So how did this story immediately become about race? Because the left decided it should and would be about race.

Substack’s Andrew Sullivan wrote an especially good column on Friday about the media’s manipulation of this story headlined, “When The Narrative Replaces The News: How the media grotesquely distorted the Atlanta massacres.”

We have yet to find any credible evidence of anti-Asian hatred or bigotry in [the killer’s] history. Maybe we will. We can’t rule it out. But we do know that his roommates say they once asked him if he picked the spas for sex because the women were Asian. And they say he denied it, saying he thought those spas were just the safest way to have quick sex. That needs to be checked out more. But the only piece of evidence about possible anti-Asian bias points away, not toward it.

And yet. Well, you know what’s coming. Accompanying one original piece on the known facts, the NYT ran nine — nine! — separate stories about the incident as part of the narrative that this was an anti-Asian hate crime, fueled by white supremacy and/or misogyny. Not to be outdone, the WaPo ran sixteen separate stories on the incident as an anti-Asian white supremacist hate crime. Sixteen! One story for the facts; sixteen stories on how critical race theory would interpret the event regardless of the facts. For good measure, one of their columnists denounced reporting of law enforcement’s version of events in the newspaper, because it distracted attention from the “real” motives. Today, the NYT ran yet another full-on critical theory piece disguised as news on how these murders are proof of structural racism and sexism — because some activists say they are.

This is how it happens. It becomes a group effort. Every major mainstream media outlet reports the same story based on an agreed upon set of talking points and it gets repeated over and over again until most Americans believe it. ‘But I read it in the New York Times!’

Once a story reaches that point, it becomes nearly impossible to establish the truth, although we do try. And we won’t stop trying.

Trump: WaPo Was Courageous to Admit Their ‘Mistake’ in Story about Call to Georgia Election Investigator

Advertisements

Former President Donald Trump was incredibly generous, uncharacteristically so, to The Washington Post in a Tuesday night interview with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo. When asked about their correction of a very pivotal story about his December 23 telephone call with Frances Watson, the chief investigator for the Georgia Secretary of State’s office, he replied:

It probably affected the Senate race. But it was a terrible thing.

I will say this. I was very happy that the Washington Post had the courage or whatever you want to call it to at least admit their mistake. I hope it was a mistake. But I think probably it came from the people in Georgia that run an election process that frankly is just absolutely terrible. … They were told something that didn’t exist and it made me sound bad and when I heard it, I said, ‘That’s ridiculous. I never said that.’

The Washington Post did a correction. A lot of pressure was put on them but they did a correction because they realized what they did was wrong.

Actually, they printed a correction because The Wall Street Journal had published an audio recording of the call which revealed the actual words that had been said. A recording, I might add, that had been deleted by someone who knew what would happen if it were found and later discovered in a “junk folder” .

The Post published the following correction to the story:

Correction: Two months after publication of this story, the Georgia secretary of state released an audio recording of President Donald Trump’s December phone call with the state’s top elections investigator. The recording revealed that The Post misquoted Trump’s comments on the call, based on information provided by a source. Trump did not tell the investigator to ‘find the fraud’ or say she would be ‘a national hero’ if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find ‘dishonesty’ there. He also told her that she had ‘the most important job in the country right now.’ A story about the recording can be found here. The headline and text of this story have been corrected to remove quotes misattributed to Trump.

On Tuesday, the Post published an article to explain how this ‘error’ may have occurred. It was written by their media critic, Erik Wemple, He wrote that the “individual familiar with the call … spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the conversation.”

The original story had been “based on an account from Jordan Fuchs, the deputy secretary of state, whom Watson had briefed on [Trump’s] comments.”

Wemple spoke to Fuchs before writing his piece. She told him, “I believe the story accurately reflected the investigator’s interpretation of the call. The only mistake here was in the direct quotes, and they should have been more of a summary.”

“I think it’s pretty absurd for anybody to suggest that the president wasn’t urging the investigator to ‘find the fraud. These are quotes that [Watson] told me at the time.”

Is it the job of Jordan Fuchs, the deputy secretary of state, to interpret the President’s intent? Especially when she had not directly spoken to him. Certainly not. As a public official, people expect the facts from her office, rather than her interpretation of the facts.

“Misreporting the words of the highest elected official in the land is a serious lapse — and one that, in this case, seems so unnecessary,” Wemple wrote.

“The existence of the call itself is a towering exclusive. When it comes to phone calls, the only good sources are the ones who are dialed in,” Wemple explained. “The former president’s partisans will attempt to memorialize The Post’s story as a fabrication or ‘fake news.’ But a central fact remains: As the Journal’s recording attests, Trump behaved with all the crooked intent and suggestion that he brought to every other crisis of his presidency.”

And with that comment, journalist extraordinaire Erik Wemple interprets the President’s intent as well. Suddenly, we understand why Fox News’ Tucker Carlson used to distribute “Erik Wemple” coffee mugs as a joke during a now-discontinued feature of his program called “Final Exam.”

After Wemple’s article had run, the Post stated, “We corrected the story and published a separate news story last week — at the top of our site and on the front page — after we learned that our source had not been precise in relaying then President Trump’s words. We are not retracting our January story because it conveyed the substance of Trump’s attempt to influence the work of Georgia’s elections investigators.”

And with that, we’ve hit the trifecta. The media outlet whose slogan is “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” became the third party to interpret the President’s intent.

First, Watson injects her bias against Trump into her recap of the call to Fuchs. Fuchs embellishes the call further in her conversation with Washington Post writer Amy Gardner, who adds her own highly partisan views to what she’s been told.

Next, the other major networks jump on the bandwagon. They all run the story claiming that they had independently confirmed it. Oh really? With whom? Did they speak to Fuchs as well? And she felt it was okay to do so because, after all, that’s what the President had intended?

And what about Watson herself? She knew the quotes attributed to the President were false. Yet she didn’t feel the need to correct the record?

This little story perfectly illustrates the anatomy of a smear. Really it’s no more complicated than a game of “Telephone” among like-minded adults.

And it happens every day.

Media and the Gameshow of Doom, Is it Real?

Advertisements

Over the past several years, I’ve noticed that “existential” crises seem to be identified with ever increasing velocity. They are proffered by the media, which tells me that my lifestyle, my financial security, my family, my own very personal (important-to-me) existence, and even America itself, are all under threat.

Is it just my imagination? Are these things really happening? In the deal-making of life did we really, somehow bargain ourselves into these kinds of choices? If we did, who in blazes did we bargain with?

Or maybe this is just some kind of evil, chardonnay-laced, game-show dream induced by a media constantly obsessed with chasing clicks/eyeballs; a dream that I’ll wake up from just as soon as I hear the next sonorous stutter of “C’mon man”?

Some examples for you to consider as I gently drift off. Hazily, I see door number one approaching:

“Left-wing HBO host Bill Maher slammed the ‘never ending woke competition’ that is engulfing America, warning that it has turned Americans into a ‘silly people’ and that China is ‘eating our lunch’ as a result,” read a recent article in The Daily Wire. “Maher said that while China is dominating in seemingly every arena that they enter, America is struggling because ‘half the country’s having a never ending woke competition deciding whether Mr. Potato Head has a d*ck” while others believe in conspiracy theories.'”

“We’re not losing to China. We lost,” Maher added. “The returns just haven’t all come in yet.”

Even more quickly, I am confronted with that ever-present, ever-evolving danger to national security, climate change (the threat behind door number two):

In a March 9 memo to senior Pentagon leadership announcing the formation of a “Climate Change Working Group,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin III wrote, “Climate change presents a growing threat to U.S. national security interests and defense objectives. The changing climate is altering the global security and operating environments, impacting our missions, plans and installations.”

Before I could react to the weather, rampant inflation got pushed right in my face (good ol’ door number three).

I come upon an op-ed by Market Watch’ Brett Arends entitled “Opinion: A worry for retirees: Inflation forecasts hit 8-year high.” He informs us, “There’s quite a lot to be concerned about.”

Nobody suffers more from high inflation than retirees. Back in the 1970s, it was those in retirement living on fixed income that got hit the hardest as prices rose year after year. The investment returns from their bonds and cash fell way behind. Bonds were ruefully described as “certificates of confiscation.” Every year retirees got poorer.

Could this happen again? Many strategists on Wall Street say no.

And not everyone is convinced. The bond market, for one. Five months ago, just before the elections, the bond market was predicting inflation over the next 10 years of 1.6%.

Today: 2.3%.

It may not sound like much in real terms. It’s still lower than the historic average. But it’s a 40% rise in a short time and it’s the highest since 2013.

Finally I stumble across a Kitco News interview of Adrian Day, president of Adrian Day Asset Management.

Day noted that the rise in nominal 10-year yields would soon take its toll on the U.S. economy.

Day added that the U.S. central bank could not afford to raise interest rates or let bond yields rise much higher because of the growing government debt.

“If you look at the federal government today, only about 10% of federal receipts are going to interest payments. That’s the lowest rates in history,” he said. “If the 10-year yield goes to say 2.5%, which is still low on a historical basis, those interest payments would more or less double. That’s not a good place to be.”

Wait, wait … doom to the left of me, doom to the right of me. Is impending doom my only choice? Dear Media, let me review your gameshow nightmare to see if I understand.

The Chinese are going to (already do) own us

or 

Climate change will somehow attack and defeat the U.S. Military, leaving us standing on the only patch of land on the planet that hasn’t been engulfed by rising oceans (Epstein’s New Mexico ranch)

or

Our collective lunch will be eaten by inflation, resulting from the out-of-control spending by the most out-of-control politicians ever assembled in the history of the not-so-free world.

Cue Media’s voice: Richard Edward, go ahead and ask the folks which of the three doors they would choose to usher in America’s demise.

Richard Edward: Sure. Yes, fellow citizens, these wonderful choices are all YOURS. Where else but in the modern American society can you have these kinds of choices, and more? So, what will it be?

Door number one? A once in a lifetime opportunity to learn to speak Mandarin. Be sure and pack a small bag for your stay in the re-education wing at Chairman Mao’s Kung Pao camp. Oh, and you people of faith, leave your Bibles at home. … The camp will supply you with little red ones for your reading pleasure.

Door number two? Just think how good you’ll feel getting in shape by walking everywhere after fossil fuels are totally banned. And, speaking of getting healthy, you’ll marvel at how quickly you’ll get used to huddling for warmth and when you get your two square meters of dry land at the ranch; well, just think of all the possibilities.

And last, but certainly not least, door number three: America, pick this door and we’ll give you a bushel basket to hold all of those freshly printed federal reserve notes that you thought had value. But wait, there’s more. Not only do you get the basket. Pick this door and we’ll erase all the stored wealth in your bank accounts and 401Ks. Just think of the free time you’ll have not worrying about balancing your check book and those investment percentages in your portfolios.

Then I hear a small, wavering voice in the distance, “C’mon man.”

Waking up, soaked with fear. Whew, that was a gameshow dream I’d rather not have, ever again. Just think what would happen to us if any of it were true…

If you think that Richard Edward’s evil gameshow dream could be more than just a nightmare about the next American Crisis, please leave a comment below.

— Richard Edward Tracy