The deceit of the NPR taxpayer-funded welfare queens marched on when the far-left outlet’s public editor published on Thursday a few hundred blatantly false words to justify their refusal to correct the outlet’s debunked story about a mask controversy at the Supreme Court.
Earlier this week, the welfare queens published a fake story that said Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor had been forced to work remotely because Justice Neil Gorsuch refused to wear a mask. Gorsuch refused even after Chief Justice John Roberts asked all the justices to mask up, the story claimed.
This obvious slice of fake news fell apart completely when Gorsuch and Sotomayor released a rare public statement declaring the NPR story “false.” This was followed by an even rarer public statement by the Chief Justice that would have forced any news organization concerned with public credibility to issue a correction or retraction.
Here’s the Sotomayor-Gorsuch statement: “Reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us. It is false. While we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends.”
Here’s the Roberts statement: “I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench.”
But being a left-wing welfare queen means never having to say you’re sorry or issue a correction.
On Thursday afternoon, hours after the story had been debunked, NPR media reporter David Folkenflik tried to gaslight the public into believing this was a right v. left controversy.
“NPR’s Nina Totenberg’s reporting on Justices Gorsuch & Sotomayor and masking has been challenged by the right,” he tweeted. “Chief Justice Roberts now appears to deny thrust of her story. Totenberg & NPR stand by it – I’m told NPR’s public editor will post on this later today.” [emphasis added]
“[C]hallenged by the right.”
I guess when you’re as far to the left as NPR, Sonia Sotomayor is considered “the right.”
Well, soon after, NPR’s public editor finally weighed in, and what a laughingstock she made of herself [emphasis is mine throughout, and I don’t link fake news]:
“Totenberg’s story merits a clarification, but not a correction. After talking to Totenberg and reading all justices’ statements, I believe her reporting was solid, but her word choice was misleading.”
So at NPR, “misleading” doesn’t require a correction. Good to know.
Oh, it gets better. It gets so much better…
Exactly how did Roberts, in some form, ask or suggest that his colleagues cover up? Totenberg told me she hedged on this: “If I knew exactly how he communicated this I would say it. Instead I said ‘in some form.’ “
What part of “request,” as in “I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench” is confusing? Regardless of how he “communicated this,” a request is a request is a request, and Roberts states clearly that he made no request. And why doesn’t Totenberg know how he communicated it? Why didn’t her “sources” tell her that? How was that not her first question to her — LOL — sources?
More from this joke of a public editor:
That phrasing is at the core of the dispute. Totenberg said she has multiple, solid sources familiar with the inner workings of the court who told her that Roberts conveyed something to his fellow justices about Sotomayor’s concerns in the face of the omicron wave. Totenberg said her NPR editors were aware of who those sources are and stood by the reporting.
Now we’re down to “conveyed,” which still falls under the definition of “request,” which Roberts denies.
Totenberg and her editors should have chosen a word other than “asked.” And she could have been clear about how she knew there was subtle pressure to wear masks (the nature or even exact number of her anonymous sources) and what she didn’t know (exactly how Roberts was communicating).
Oh, so now we’re down to “subtle pressure” to wear masks. What was that, exactly? You claim to have all these sources (who refuse to go on the record), and they can’t tell you? Was it a wink-wink-nudge-nudge-know-what-I-mean-know-what-I-mean?
What a joke.
And now we get to my favorite part. The NPR public editor’s straight-up lie: “No one has challenged the broader focus of Totenberg’s original story, which asserts that the justices in general are not getting along well.”
Uhm … Just two days ago, Sotomayor and Gorsuch released this statement: “Reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us. It is false. While we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends.”
We all know what the propagandists at NPR are up to here: because Gorsuch respects the Constitution and is seen as a conservative justice, he’s being smeared as a villain. But that’s how stupid NPR is. The person who really came off looking terrible, like a big entitled baby, is Sotomayor. And that wasn’t fair to her.
Anyway, can you imagine how sweet it must be to live in the corporate media bubble, a bubble with zero accountability? Imagine never having to worry about getting a story right. Imagine being able to publish whatever lies you wish as long as those lies further the Fascist Statist Cause. Imagine being able to blatantly lie and plagiarize and encourage violence, and no one ever holds you accountable. In fact, you’re rewarded with promotions and raises and even more fame; a bigger house, a fatter wallet…
What a world.