By Lee Williams
It’s becoming increasingly difficult to tell the difference between FOX News and CNN or MSNBC. Especially when the topic is guns. And especially after a mass shooting.
For at least seven years, FOX News has been citing fake mass-shooting data from the Gun Violence Archive – an anti-gun nonprofit we debunked years ago – in its digital and broadcast news stories. The reason is simple. The GVA inflates body counts, sometimes by more than 1,000%, so its overblown data has become catnip for the legacy media, which is constantly seeking more sensational headlines and news stories.
How does the GVA get its inflated numbers? They created their own definition of a mass shooting, of course. When most Americans hear the term, they picture a madman stalking the halls of a school or a shopping mall, coldly murdering innocent victims. What doesn’t come to mind are rival drug crews shooting it out in Chicago, a deranged husband murdering his entire family, or a law-abiding gun owner acting in self-defense. Yet for the GVA, any time four or more people are killed or even slightly wounded with a firearm, it’s labeled a mass shooting.
For example, according to the FBI and its more conservative definition, there were 30 mass shootings in 2019. The GVA claims there were 417.
Despite the obvious bad math, the legacy media, politicians and the gun-ban industry treat GVA’s reports as gospel. The Biden-Harris Administration, The New York Times, National Public Radio, USA Today, The Trace and a host of other outlets all cite GVA’s fictitious data and use its overly broad definition when reporting about mass shootings.
The GVA uses dubious sources to gather its mass-shooting data, too. In a 2021 interview with the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project, Mark Bryant, a retired computer analyst and GVA’s executive director, admitted his researchers gather data from law enforcement Facebook and Twitter pages, as well as media accounts, even though the media is notorious for getting the facts wrong after a mass shooting.
Despite the bad sources and bad math, FOX News continues to cite the GVA’s numbers in their stories, most recently Monday, after a mass-shooting in Louisville, Kentucky.
Mark Bryant founded the GVA in 2013 and FOX News began citing them as a news source just a few years later. The network has never fully disclosed the nature of the anti-gun nonprofit to its viewers, or how it gathers its information.
Here is a list of how FOX News has attributed the GVA data in news stories from the past seven years:
- 2016 – “using information collected by the Gun Violence Archive, a nonpartisan research group.”
- 2017 – “based on data from the Gun Violence Archive, which catalogs reports of gun violence in the U.S.”
- 2018 – “according to the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive.”
- 2019 – “according to data from the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive (GVA).”
- 2020 – “according to the Gun Violence Archive.”
- 2021 – “according to data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive (GVA).”
- 2022 – “The Gun Violence Archive defines mass shootings as ones where ‘4 or more [people are] shot or killed, not including the shooter.’”
- February, 2023 – “according to the non-profit Gun Violence Archive.”
- March, 2023 – “according to the non-profit Gun Violence Archive.”
Both Trace Gallagher, FOX News Anchor/Chief Breaking News Correspondent, and Brett Baier, Chief Political Anchor and Executive Editor of Special Report, have cited GVA data recently in news stories.
I reached out to both on Twitter, warning them their credibility was at risk. Neither Gallagher nor Baier responded.
Hey @BretBaier, every time you cite “data” from the antigun Gun Violence Archive you lose credibility. We debunked them years ago: https://t.co/t3GSm95be6 pic.twitter.com/ORMpeiT9MI
— Lee Williams (@HT_GunWriter) March 27, 2023
Hey @tracegallagher. Why are you using biased mass-shooting data from the Gun Violence Archive, an anti-gun nonprofit we debunked years ago? For example, the GVA claims there were 417 mass shootings during 2019. The FBI says there were 30. pic.twitter.com/f62Rwzv6Up
— Lee Williams (@HT_GunWriter) April 10, 2023
Neither Irena Briganti, Senior Executive Vice President, Corporate Communications – FOX News Media, nor Porter Berry, Executive Vice President and Editor-in-Chief of FOX News Digital, responded to emails seeking their comments and an explanation as to why the network pushes flawed and biased data in its news stories.
I should disclose I am a regular FOX News viewer. I turn it on in the morning after my computer warms up and it stays on throughout my workday. I check the FOX News website at least hourly, and I can’t miss an episode of Tucker, who fearlessly holds the powerful accountable, or Gutfeld, who is always good for a laugh.
Still, what FOX News is doing is dead wrong. They are aiding and abetting the gun-banners by repeatedly citing false mass shooting data, which can lead the uninformed to believe that “gun violence” – another term FOX should stop using – is far worse that it really is.
FOX is the most-watched cable news network in the country. Millions of people tune in to its programming. That could be a real game-changer if the network would start telling the truth rather than promulgating debunked lies.
In my humble opinion, FOX should immediately stop citing Gun Violence Archive data and issue a clarification and an apology to its viewers. That’s what’s required journalistically, and it’s also the right thing to do. I hope FOX’s editors and producers take corrective action quickly because America is watching.
The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn’t be possible without you. Click here to make a tax deductible donation to support pro-gun stories like this.
This story is part of the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project and is published here with their permission.
You can bet any so called mass shouting will have over five victims…If not after the FBI arrives there will be…Even if it is a poor old lady walking down the street..
Are you looking for a job of your choice??? Can’t find the job you want even after visiting different websites? Considering your needs, we have organized our website with all categories of jobs, visit this link now….. ttps://salarycash710.blogspot.com
I learned long ago, when I watched Bill O’Reilly argue with an Oklahoma congressman that Fully automatic weapons were available from your average gun store for a thousand dollars.
The sad fact is that people who are “on our side”, are hopelessly ignorant on guns. Not just specific information like what a .45 caliber pistol means. I mean really really really basic information like, “what is a caliber”, “what is a bullet”.
I was shocked once when a person who had been in the military was just floored at the size of a .357 magnum cartridge. He’d never seen one in his life. Compared it to a rifle cartridge. It was a class, so I didn’t want to humiliate the guy, but afterword I had to explain the difference between the revolver calibers and modern pistol calibers. This was the first he’d heard it.
I have close friends who shoot regularly, who know virtually nothing about how guns work. Again, people that own firearms, and have watched me reload. They just dont pay much attention. If asked my shooting friends to extract the bolt carrier group from their own rifle, I doubt some could do it. They’d just hand the gun to me.
I’m not surprised that Fox News would cite an anti-gun site. “Our side” is only slightly less ignorant than “their” side. I dont think its a good excuse, its just reality than we have to realise.
I stopped watching Fox News years ago. Once upon a time, there was a show on that channel called Hannity & Colmes that was a true balance of conversation between left and right. Colmes was a true liberal, in the sense that he was open to new ideas, and I respected him for his occasional deference to Hannity when a conservative point was made. The show ran from the late 90s to 2009, when Sean Hannity was granted his own show.
Unfortunately, as is typically the case, more viewers equates more advertising revenue, and the bigger a presence one becomes, the more the focus shifts on grabbing eyeballs and pleasing the advertisers rather than the original pursuit of truth. Hannity quickly proved to be no different than anyone else, and I grew tired of his squawk-talk. Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and (sometimes) even Rush Limbaugh would go beyond the scrimmage line of relying on the bedrock foundation of conservative arguments, and leap into name-calling and claptrap.
Fox News has, over the past dozen years, placed several squawkers in front of the cameras with their own shows, and they’ve all been cut of the same annoying cloth.
The only exception to this is Tucker Carlson, who presently seems to be the glue that’s still holding the conservative plank of Fox’s viewership in place. If Tucker ever goes, you can kiss Fox goodbye for good.
Hmm. Looks like ‘ol Haz here goofed up the HTML tags for the italics, lol.
Just tilt your head to the right and keep reading…
Looks like you and I gave up on Fox for the same reasons and about the same time. As I read your post I was thinking “This guy has been reading my mind!”
Don’t forget Gutfeld. One of the few on Fox with an actual consistently conservative point of view.
To be honest, I’ve tried several times to watch one of Gutfield’s episodes, but the format (several people overtalking one another in front of a laughing audience) doesn’t resonate with me.
Oh, and it appears that an earlier comment of mine has been held up in moderation (because of course!), but I goofed the HTML tags for the italics. Just lean your head to the right and your screen will clear up.
A year or so ago, a guy I met at some event and I were chatting and somehow the subject turned to guns. I said something about being a gun owner and he asked what my first gun was. I said, well, my very first gun was a .22 rifle that my grandfather let me keep and use but the first gun I personally bought was a Smith & Wesson Model 19. He asked what that is and I told him it is a .357 magnum revolver. His response, “Oh, I have a revolver too.” “What is it?”, I asked. “A .38,” he responded. So, I asked, “What kind of .38, who made it?” To which he answered, “I don’t know, its just a regular .38.” I have no idea if he actually had a .38 revolver that he couldn’t identify or if he was just making shlt up.
“the difference between the revolver calibers and modern pistol calibers.” ???
Are you speaking about inches vs metric?
A 9mm short (.380 in inches) is the same dia as a .38 (basically) Many rounds have this dia – the various 9mm and .38/.380/.357. The 9×18 round is not the same.
Of course rifle rounds(for the most part) are longer than the same dia handgun rounds.
Is there another point I am missing?
wait, how is makarov not (basically) the same?
“the difference between the revolver calibers and modern pistol calibers.” ???“
So which is modern, .357 magnum or 9mm Parabellum?
Which is modern, .41 magnum or .45ACP?
.30 super carry creedmore.
Please stop trying to pretend you know f***-all about firearms, would you? You embarrass yourself (if you were capable of embarrassment).
Any idiot can look up when a cartridge was introduced. Revolvers ARE, relatively, an older technology. Generally speaking, they used extended-rim cartridges – which typically don’t work well in semi-auto pistols (ever use “moon clips”??? They’re a pain in the @$$).
Did you have a point buried in that irrelevant word-barf??? Nah, didn’t think so.
I was for 15 years an ARMOURER inthe ROYAL AIR FORCE and a Smallarms Instructor/Musketry coach and probably in the Top Ten Rifle Shots in the UK services at times and I also sxerved inthe UK ArmyInfantry Reserves for 7 years and I HAVE NEVER EVER used a TELESCOPE except that ”as ISSUED” with the 7.62 SLR the X4SUIT [or Sight Unit Infantry Trilux] or the ”as issued” with the SA80 the SUSAT [or the X6 Sight Unit Small Arms Trilux All my COMPETITION shooting with the Lee-Enfield .303 No4 was over Iron Sights and on a good day I had no probs taking ‘possibles’ on the BISLEY LONG RANGE [600 yards and an 18inch bull]. Whilst I am more thanfamiliar with all current small arms used at the time up to and including the BOFORS40/70 and all Aircraft cannon /machine guns,bombs/explosives/demolition practices minor explsives disposal and storage Ejection seats and asscoiated ground equipment I make no claim to detailed knowledge outside of what wqs in use with the UK Services at the time. BUT one thing I do know is that with 10/20 minutes instruction I could field strip and shoot anything of the era.
And you NEVER FORGET how to ‘use ’em’
Fox news has been trending Left since Arabs bought ~25% stake in FN stock, and since Trump was elected. Overall, still better than the other “top 30” cable news outlets.
Fox was anti-Trump during the primaries leading up to the 2016 election. The old guard on Fox continued to complain about him even after the primaries. I love how our betters questioned his morality for being a lifelong playboy while they practically worshiped the warmonger neocons who invaded a sovereign country based on a lie, resulting in how many deaths?
“the warmonger neocons who invaded a sovereign country based on a lie, resulting in how many deaths?“
If you were speaking of Iraq, then it last I have found something we agree on.
Unfortunately, I remember all the bullshit conservative abuse those of us who saw it clearly at the time received.
All the country music stars with their violent propaganda songs pushing America into an unjust war that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, there’s no excuse for the conservatives complicity in the war crimes.
And a shout out to Brad Paisley, a true hillbilly from the Mountain State, who risked his life to travel to Ukraine to encourage those folks to continue the fight for their freedom.
The rest of you Putin-lovers can continue to cower in your basement, worried about the brown people replacing you, comfortable in your willful ignorance of reality.
Blah blah blah anti-war. Blah blah blah pro-war. It’s hilarious that you’re blaming conservatives when Joe, Hillary, and other Democrat heroes were fully on board voting for it. Nice try rewriting history.
“Joe, Hillary, and other Democrat heroes”
Only because you conservatives questioned their patriotism and threatened them with prison for opposing the war of lies brought on by the conservatives led by President Dick Cheney and Vice President George W. Bush.
“Although the war would not begin until March 2003, the House passed the Authorization of the Use of Military Force (AUMF) for Iraq in October 2002. The vote was 296 to 133. 215 Republicans and 81 Democrats voted for it. 126 Democrats, 6 Republicans, and 1 Independent (Sanders) voted against it.
To pretend the war was anything but the construction of the Republican conservatives is laughable, y’all own that massive war crime.
“Bush and senior members of his administration then spent more than a year outlining the dangers that they claimed Iraq posed to the United States and its allies. Two of the administration’s arguments proved especially powerful, given the public’s mood: first, that Hussein’s regime possessed “weapons of mass destruction” (WMD), a shorthand for nuclear, biological or chemical weapons; and second, that it supported terrorism and had close ties to terrorist groups, including al-Qaida, which had attacked the U.S. on 9/11.
As numerous investigations by independent and governmental commissions subsequently found, there was no factual basis for either of these assertions.“
You live for partisanship, Miner. You found a comment you agree with, and went on an anti-war/pro-war, partisanship rant. You said it: 81 Democrats voted for it in the House alone. Major names in the Senate also voted for it. The 2004, 2016, and 2020 (and maybe 2024) Democrat presidential nominees voted for it, as well as party nomination candidate Edwards. This war was a bipartisan effort. It was supported by the biggest Democrat names. The reason more dems didn’t vote for it is because there was a Republican administration at the time. Dems do what they always do. They try to rewrite history, ignoring inconvenient facts. This works for them since they mostly control the media and culture. I bet most people don’t even know the history of who supported it, just like slavery and Jim Crow.
Hindsight is 20/20. Many Republicans now understand how the big neocon names weren’t so conservative after all. There’s a reason dems recently stopped putting down people like McCain and Bush. “Hey they hate Trump too!” Liz Cheney is practically a Dem hero. I’ve never been a fan of those guys. I haven’t made a secret of my anti-Republican stance prior to 2016.
“I don’t like war”
“I like this war”
Nice. You should show us how much you support Ukraine by volunteering. Send us pictures when you get there.
So, you objected to Iraq (on principle, I am SURE – NOT), but you’re totes OK with the US having “boots on the ground” for a territorial dispute 8000 miles away???
As usual, you’re a hypocrite liar on this subject, as well. If you were capable of the feat, I would commend to you the idea of developing a COHERENT idea of ‘use of force’ and ‘just war’ – but you’re not, so I won’t bother.
The part that frosts my nuggets is that I think you MIGHT possess the native intelligence to have a functioning cerebrum . . . but choose indoctrinated Leftism, instead. You are a pathetic example of someone who craps all over the gifts God gave us. Or, in the alternative, you actually are as stupid as you always sound. Either is pathetic; being intentionally stupid is more pathetic.
Just do us all a favor and go away. Don’t go away mad, just . . . go away.
There’s NOTHING LEFTIST about sensible GUN CONTROLS and I can absolutely assure you, and uNLIKEC 855 of AMERICAN whom do not have a PASSPORT I’ve bloody well been there ,that RIGHT WING administrations are far more likely to have an very very tough stance of firearms in the wrong hands as they see it than the Left is. I can also absolutely assure you that if those that are m now advocatiing unlimited gun ownership really did get into power the FIRST thing they would do is to rid themselves of the ‘USEFUL FOOLS who put them there – and THAT’S YOU my friend!
Fox News has a couple of personalities on the opinion side who are “conservatives” but on the news side of the house, they’re mostly RINOs or liberals like Baier and Cavuto.
The “news” media is comprised of a bunch of Baghdad Bobs all spouting the Establishment line. Look, literally everything you see, hear, or read is propaganda meant to direct and shape your opinions.
The US media would make Goebbels jealous.
I gave up on FauxNews a long time ago.
Gun Control happens when knee jerk Gun Control is promoted all over the TV and internet. The only thing that puts the brakes on Gun Control is Defining Gun Control according to its History of Rot.
And those with the megaphones who should be Defining Gun Control on radio, TV and the internet for the clueless masses are once again asleep at the wheel. I.E. Talking with the gun registration zealot bill o’really does not cut it, Hannity.
Anyone doubts the ignorance of the masses can ask the next 10 people they cross paths with to Define Gun Control, LMK what they say.
Our buddy Saul said “All societies discourage and penalize ideas and writings that threaten the ruling status quo.”
For all the “right-wing extremism!!!” shrieking the left does Fox is just one more pillar of that uniparty ruling status quo.
The crazy part is there are a lot of people that will think you are a far right extremest for watching Fox………and most of their programming ends up left of center neocons.
Fox literally shrieks “right-wing extremism!” with the best of them. Listen to the “hard” Fox News radio updates at the top and bottom of the hour. You’ll be hard pressed to tell the difference between the way they frame the news as opposed to the AP or NPR. I think it was today I heard them say something about the Proud Boys. They said something like, “The Proud Boys, a right wing extremist group…” Yet, you’ll never hear their hard news updates say, “BLM (or antifa), a left wing extremist group…”
“Yet, you’ll never hear their hard news updates say, “BLM (or antifa), a left wing extremist group…”
For your edification, here is CNN reporting where they point out the violence of antifa way back in 2020:
“Modern-day Antifa members have become more active in making themselves known at public rallies and within the progressive movement, says Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino.
“What they’re trying to do now is not only become prominent through violence at these high-profile rallies, but also to reach out through small meetings and through social networking to cultivate disenfranchised progressives who heretofore were peaceful,” Levin said.“
And here CNN points out the danger of “leftist extremists” attacks.
“But there is now evidence to support that anarchist and socialist militant groups have also used internet platforms to plan and coordinate real-world attacks, the authors of the NCRI report write. Notably, researchers say leftist extremist networks organized and coordinated a campaign on July 25 in cities including Seattle and Portland, where riots and property damage were later reported.“
Straw man or ignorance? The topic is Fox News.
You claim that Fox would never say “BLM (or antifa), a left wing extremist group…”
So I pointed out where CNN was not afraid to report on left-wing violence, so they’re more fair and balanced than fox, right?
So now you’ll quit watching Fox and start watching CNN…
Of course Fox reports on left wing violence. CNN does so sparingly. Go back to my original comment. I’m referring to the way the “hard” news breaks (on the radio, not cable) from Fox are framed. I’ve noticed that for years. That was just a quick example that I heard on the radio yesterday.
“start watching CNN”
I used to watch them on a practical daily basis. I also listened to NPR. I had to stop both because I couldn’t help but notice the terrible reporting and round table discussions.
Of course Fox reports on left wing violence. CNN does so sparingly. Go back to my original comment. I’m referring to the way the “hard” news breaks (on the radio, not cable) from Fox are framed. I’ve noticed that for years. That was just a quick example that I heard on the radio yesterday.
“start watching CNN”
I used to watch CNN on a practical daily basis. I also listened to NPR. I had to stop both because I couldn’t help but notice the terrible reporting and discussions.
I was trying to edit my comment similar to above. It was flagged for moderation, then it was gone before I could delete it. If anyone moderates it, just delete it. It’s just like the one above except the last sentence I believe. I couldn’t check the mod trigger.
Now I can see the comment, but I can’t edit it. It’s awaiting moderation.
Found the trigger. You can’t use the above two words together in a sentence. Why??
I said that before ‘discussion.’ I suspected that was the trigger.
WOW!!! TWICE, in . . . seven years. F*** right off with this weak s***, MajorLiar. CNN is ABSURDLY biased Leftist/state media (ah, but I repeat myself). Fox is SLIGHTLY better. You, on the other hand, are about as reliable a shill for statism as exists. Pat yourself on the back. Oh, and Senile Joe wants his johnson knobbed, and Kamala’s tired – I guess it’s your turn.
Same shit, different toilet. At this point if you watch any of these mainstream media outlets, you are part of the problem.
I get your point, but a bit harsh, Montana. I watch Tucker and Gutfeld reposts. Could never actually watch a Fox News broadcast. Got to support the Fox folk who are consistently conservative.
I’m with you LifeSavor. I watch The Five,Tucker & Guttfeld and that’s about it on Fox-Hannity is the Fudds fudd. “I got a NYC license to carry. It uses clips” Never their “hard news”. Every one whining should realize FOX is a business. I don’t expect a major news network to toe any “line”. If you want ultra pro gun stuff there’s a myriad # of Youtube channels & minor things streaming. Peace out!
“I watch Tucker”
“I watch The Five,Tucker… “
You people are so easily fooled, it’s breathtaking the depths of the gullibility.
“5 Times Tucker Carlson Privately Reviled Trump: ‘I Hate Him’
The Fox host’s private comments, revealed recently in court documents, contrast sharply with his support of conservatives on his show.
By Katie Robertson
March 8, 2023
Documents released in recent weeks as part of a $1.6 billion defamation suit against Fox News by Dominion Voting Systems have revealed extraordinary private communications and depositions from the network’s star hosts and executives. In those statements, many of them expressed disbelief about President Donald J. Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him, even though the network continued to promote many of those lies on the air.”
why didn’t i think of forming an opinion based on something the nyt published?
listen, shmutz, hating trump and loving his policies is an easy place to settle.
and the evidence of fraud, if only in six swing states, does not compel you to consider the possibilities, then you’re willingly dopey.
“the evidence of fraud, if only in six swing states“
Still waiting for that “evidence”.
If you have it, I’m sure Rupert Murdoch and Fox News would really appreciate the information because they are about to lose their multi billion dollar defamation cases.
Yeah yeah just like Ray Epps in the fedsurrection
Begin with: anyone who is against voter ID, not to mention signature verification, supports election fraud. There’s no other reason to be against it, unless you’re so racist, you think non-whites can’t figure out how to get a government ID.
“anyone who is against voter ID, not to mention signature verification, supports election fraud“
Is that all you got?
Some kind of vague bullshit, the fact is all fraud is local. Corrupt officials, both Democratic and Republican, let their lust for power and control over come their integrity and they concoct minor fraud schemes.
That’s always been the case, always will be, and they tend to cancel one another out in any case.
And I had to show ID to vote, when I registered to vote and received my voter registration card which serves as my ID for voting.
Then move onto those who don’t support clean voter rolls and legitimate voter registration.
“And I had to show ID to vote…”
Lots of people do. It’s easy. So why would people be against it? You know why.
MajorLiar,That’s always been the case, always will be, and they tend to cancel one another out in any case.
“That’s always been the case, always will be, and they tend to cancel one another out in any case.”
Since you’re so big on this, normally, care to cite some actual support for that proposition, you lying shitbag???
Gave up on FOX long ago. Just go to Lucianne.com and start there.
Is a bit easier to scroll than revolver so cool on that. Thanks.
Redacted on YouTube does a good show, Clayton Morris (former Fox) and Natali Morris have single topic episodes.
Fox News is as unforgivably ignorant about guns as well as being openly anti-“gun violence” as all of the other MSM propaganda puppets- listening to their botched firearms commentary is enough to make one spit puke.
Regardless of what ANYONE tells you……we’re on our own!!
Wow, the GVA even counts righteous self-defense shootings by law-abiding citizens where nobody was killed and only bad guys were injured as “mass shootings,” FFS!
Ok, you don’t like their use of the term.
However, that doesn’t change the fact that there have been four or more people killed or even slightly wounded with a firearm.
417 of those kinds of shootings
Oh cool we are acknowledging the overwhelming majority of such shootings are gang related now?
“Ok, you don’t like their use of the term.”
So you prefer the GVA definition that’s falsely applied?
I’d like to point out something though, from my own life. In an incident I related here before, to rescue my wife from two guys who had abducted and raped three other women before her and escalated each time closer to killing them and on the third one did actually try to kill her and by a stoke of luck she barely survived – I had to shoot the two attackers. It was listed in the GVA as a ‘mass shooting’ until they were advised of the correct information and even then it stayed for a while after and they took it out but then it came back and is still there today (no, I’m not going to link to it – the underlying ‘vague and confused’ media grab they used eventually leads to our identities with a little research).
The GVA’s definition says they exclude the shooter, yet in their lists are numerous cases where they included the shooter in their numbers to make it at least four to meet their definition. There are numerous instances in their lists where they used numbers of victims that did not exist – they got called out on this once before, when called on it, asked why the bodies (victims) they claimed did not exist and no trace of the bodies could be found to point out their flaw in relying on media coverage their excuse was a single 5.56 mm round from an ‘assault rifle’ had ‘vaporized’ the body such that there was no trace of anything left not even DNA.
Never mind its impossible for a 5.56 mm round to have impact energy enough to tear apart every single energy bond that holds the molecules of the human body together to vaporize it so that even DNA no longer exists. Its impossible by the very laws of physics, if a single a 5.56 mm round had that much impact energy the space-time fabric of space would have been torn apart the very first time a 5.56 mm round impacted anything and there would probably be no life on earth today – that’s the level of impact energy for such a small thing that would be needed to do as the GVA claimed, but of course the typical anti-gun person believes a 5.56 mm round does that and sometimes today you hear democrat politicians repeat that GVA lie.
Its not a matter of like or dislike of “their use of the term”. Its a matter of it being applied falsely, selectively, and in a biased manner to present information that’s overall deliberately false or deceptive.
It’s still a shooting with 4 or more killed or injured. It still happened.
Self defense, gang related, etc. they all count. Just like car crashes. That’s how data collection works.
Now 417 incidents can be broken out into distinct categories, but the purpose of the number is to give the public an much better idea of scope of the problem rather than a weak hunch most likely inflated/deflated by personal prejudices.
Its not a matter of like or dislike of “their use of the term” (the GVA). Its a matter of it being applied falsely, selectively, and in a biased manner to present information that’s overall deliberately false or deceptive.
LOL now how many news agencies actually break down the numbers and what they mean vs disingenuously presenting the numbers as largely similar in nature with the context being irrelevant in the face of needing to “do something”. Yeah there is a reason no serious researcher uses that data unless they are forced to.
That’s your argument? That four people were shot (NOT “killed”, but shot) in a THEORETICALLY related event?
The FBI has had an established definition of “mass shooting” for years – four or more people (OTHER than the shooter) killed in a single, related incident. Since it HAS BEEN the accepted definition of “mass shooting” for years, why did you Leftist/fascist liars have to invent your own? Oh, that’s right, if you use the ACTUAL definition, it doesn’t yield scary enough numbers. So, instead, you make up your own definition, apply it inconsistently, and shout the inflated numbers from the rooftops. Good on you . . . it helps us identify ignorant @$$clowns.
A gang shoot-out in Chiraq often has multiple shooters (not necessarily all gang members), and frequently bystanders are wounded or killed as part of it. And you lump that in with cases of one single deranged individual shooting up a school, church, or mall?
THAT’S intellectually honest, isn’t it? You are an @$$clown.
WARNING: Tennessee is attempting to pass “red flag” laws, though they too are attempting “distinction without a difference” in its nomenclature.
Leftists On Twitter Report Disturbing Rise In People They Hate Having Speech > https://babylonbee.com/news/leftists-on-twitter-report-disturbing-rise-in-people-they-hate-having-speech
Its the Babylon Bee, but its true in this case. The left wing hates people having speech they don’t like.
“Its the Babylon Bee, but its true… “
I’ll be sharing this post with my psychologist friends, it’s a beautiful display of how folks self-delude.
It’s really striking when an individual cites a satirical news source as justification for their beliefs, you just can’t make this stuff up.
Even when context and content is explained the joke goes over your head.
Miner49er, you being in denial is not a good thing for your mental health illness.
And of course it’s convenient for you to ignore the number of times a Babylon Bee meme has been an actual headline, a few weeks or months later??? Yeah, go with that story. It makes you look even stupider.
I’m sure you enjoy your pathetic life, completely untethered from reality. Good on you; stop annoying the rest of us. Go post on Slate, or TPM, or DailyKos, where they will totes appreciate your “brilliant” insights. If you only realized what a damn fool you make of yourself on here, you might even be embarrassed (assuming you even have the capacity). But that would require some degree of self-analysis and critical thinking, which you wholly lack.
Sod off, nitwit.
Babylon Bee has an annoying habbit of being true 2-6 weeks after it posts especially with pandemic related “reporting”. There were times I wondered if the various health departments read it for ideas.
Yeah, Fox News is part of the bullshit Trump propaganda machine.
And you suckers were taken in by it, every moment, every word.
Y’all was snookered bad, how embarrassing for you.
“MSNBC RELEASED NEW audio of Rudy Giuliani admitting to Fox News’ host Maria Bartiromo that he had difficulty backing claims of Dominion Voting Systems’ involvement in election fraud. The recordings, revealed on Wednesday, also include audio of a Trump campaign official saying that when the Secretary of State did his Georgia audit, “there weren’t any physical issues with [Dominion] machines on those inspections.”
The release of the audio comes in the throes of Dominion’s $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit over Fox’s attempts to link the company to nonexistent election fraud. Earlier on Wednesday, Delaware Judge Eric Davis sanctioned Fox News after the company was caught withholding evidence from Dominion’s lawyers, including recorded conversations with Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell.
Abby Grossberg, a former Tucker Carlson producer who has claimed the network coerced her testimony regarding the lawsuit, provided the recordings to the court.“
“Rolling Stone?” Pleeeeeeease.
Rolling Stones is just reporting the actual legal documents filed with the court.
You think your bullshit fantasy conspiracies and right wing propaganda has the weight of sworn depositions in a court of law, how precious.
“Rolling Stones is just reporting …”
“Rolling Stone” and “reporting” in the same sentence? Methinks I’m not the one between the two of us who believes in “bullshit fantasy conspiracies and propaganda.”
But please do, carry on, you’re sounding more and more unhinged with every babbling incoherency. You know that they’re doing amazing things with psychiatric meds, don’t you? Might wanna check that out.
Because EVERY SINGLE WORD of every court filing is the absolute truth, amirite???? Add “how the legal profession actually works” to your (LOOONNNGGGG) list of things you know nothing about.
Lawyers are SLIGHTLY more honest than politicians . . . but the difference is hard to discern from 10 feet away. Citing a legal filing to support a factual assertion is amazingly stupid. Do an experiment, @$$clown – go read the filings from both sides on just about any legal case, then ‘splain to me how they are BOTH true. And stop reading bullshit from Slate, Rolling Stone, Huffpo, the NYT, and (all PROVEN liars), and then trying to sell it as “truth” – it isn’t. The NYT has published true stories (if any) since Walter Duranty only by accident. Rolling Stone is INFAMOUS for their fake Duke lacrosse story. HuffPo is nothing more than liberal political porn. Slate is a complete joke. Fox is . . . sorta, kinda infotainment.
Get over yourself. You aren’t NEARLY as smart as you think you are.
yet another screeching off topic rant from Miner49er about Trump and falsely blaming everyone for his own confirmation bias.
Just admit it, like all left wing ‘raving religious fanatical level zeal’ fools you stayed true to form and got snookered by the GVA and The Trace.
“got snookered by the GVA and The Trace“
Sad attempt, but I don’t pay any attention to that sort of propaganda either.
That’s all you have to reply with, because your position is factually and morally bankrupt.
Fox ‘News’ has snookered you for decades, and Rupert Murdoch, Hannity, Tucker, et al have turned a pretty profit on your gullibility.
ya just upset and in denial ’cause what I replied to you is true
i will counter with this, (decidedly not as cutting edge as rolling stone magazine):
compiled by an actual auditor, not a “journalist.”
Thanks for providing this info, I do appreciate you taking the time to find some sort of reasoned response with an actual link to support it.
I don’t have time right now to go over it closely and respond, but I am struck by this line which seems to cast doubt on the whole article you provided:
“None of this, Fried underscores, proves anything.”
Out of context much?
At least you open-mindedly cherry-picked one line out of the entire source and used it to characterize the content of the entirety before actually reading it, by your own admission.
(suddenly has no time to comment on an overwhelmingly enormous amount of suspicious coinkydinks).
admittedly, it is fairly convincing.
Is this the same Joseph Fried?
“Joe Fried CPA Election Central
Debunking the election debunkers
Launched 6 months ago”
“Joe Fried is an Ohio-based CPA who has performed and reviewed hundreds of certified financial audits. He is the author of the new book “Debunked? An Auditor Reviews the 2020 Election — And the Lessons Learned” (Republic Book Publishers, 2022).“
So he’s a CPA who “has reviewed hundreds of certified financial audits”?
So there’s nothing to indicate he knows anything about elections, election law, voting machines and tabulators or the differing election process in all 50 states?
Sorry, I’ll defer to the United States Attorney General’s assessment that the claims the election was stolen are “bullshit”.
no way to read that and arrive at your conclusion without deliberate obtuseness.
So here’s the problem with the article you linked, there’s zero source or citations for the assertions made within the article.
But some of them can be researched, such as this for instance:
“There were also some abstruse mathematical observations. A mathematician named Edward Solomon noticed unusual patterns in the Georgia and Pennsylvania votes: in some precincts, the total vote and the Trump vote had a much lower percentage of co-primes (i.e., numbers that don’t share a common factor other than one) than would be expected. Some co-prime patterns were oddly repetitious: one Trump vote to 18 for Biden; one Trump vote to 24 for Biden. Solomon found this suspicious.”
So who is Edward Solomon and is his claim valid?
“OAN’s Christina Bobb interviewed the man, Ed Solomon, on January 27 in a segment about the 2020 election, which President Joe Biden had won nearly three months earlier.
In the interview, Solomon said he conducted a mathematical analysis showing that the results in Fulton County, Georgia, “can only have been done by an algorithm.” He added that the probability of Biden’s victory in the county was “1 over 10 to an exponent so large there’s not enough stars in the universe, there aren’t enough atoms in the universe, to explain the number.”
It’s not clear where Solomon got his data set. Factcheck.org compared the numbers he used in his analysis with the data available from Georgia’s secretary of state and found that they did not match. An audit of the ballots cast in Georgia in the 2020 election found that the results were correct.
Dominion’s lawsuit says Solomon is not an “expert mathematician” but “was in fact a convicted felon with no college degree.” The lawsuit adds that Solomon’s “current job was setting up swing sets in Long Island, New York.”
A spokesperson for Stony Brook University, with which Solomon said he was affiliated, previously told Factcheck.org that he took several math classes over the course of seven years at the school but never received an undergraduate degree.
A person who appeared to be Solomon was arrested in 2016 on drug-related charges and served two years in prison, Vice reported.
Dominion included these claims in a lawsuit filed Tuesday against OAN, alleging defamation over election conspiracy theories and seeking over $1.6 billion in damages.”
Here’s Solomon’s arrest info:
“Suffolk cops seize $1 million in drugs and arrest 155 dealers”
Yep, this stuff is just bullshit, that you folks are using to justify your support of wannabe dictator Trump.
Why y’all worship that racist grifter is beyond me.
Here’s another claim, that completely lacks specificity or attribution:
“In no fewer than 353 counties in 29 states, there turned out to be more registered voters than voting-age citizens.”
Where is this info, do they have an appendix containing this info? Where did they source the info from, oh link to the database?
This is hilarious:
“Last year, a study by Dr. Shiva, commissioned by the Arizona Senate… “
And now for reality:
“‘Audit’ expert Shiva Ayyadurai didn’t understand election procedures. He made a number of false signature claims.
BY: JEREMY DUDA – OCTOBER 1, 2021”
Your linked article discusses Arizona:
“Arizona. In the Grand Canyon State, the focus of observer skepticism was Maricopa County (Phoenix and environs), by far the state’s largest county.”
But there’s no mention whatsoever of the Cyber Ninja’s multi-month long detailed audit, which found that Joe Biden actually received more votes than was reported.
Why does this report not mention that at all, is it dated information or do they not mention that their own intense audit found no fraud because they’re liars trying to push a fraudulent agenda?
So don’t you even re-search the articles you link? It might save you some embarrassment…
Context is everything. The media is trying to say that Tucker was pretending there was evidence of fraud by Dominion while he secretly knew otherwise. THAT is the propaganda. Sydney Powell was the one claiming fraud by Dominion. Tucker invited her onto the show to present her evidence. When she couldn’t explain it to him, he said it was pointless to have her on his show. He literally told his audience this when it happened. As I recall, some people were mad at Tucker because they believed Powell at the time.
Also, saying there is no fraud because there either isn’t any fraud by Dominion, or there isn’t any provable fraud by Dominion, is being disingenuous at best. The claim of Dominion vote tampering was a drop in the bucket of the shenanigans that went on in 2020. It is interesting that Dominion was caught lying about the ability to access their machines.
Oh sure, Tucker eventually had Sidney Powell on his show and indicated his skepticism. But he continued to endorse her claims of stolen election:
“On Monday’s show, though, Carlson opened by saying the January 6 protesters “believed that the election in which they had just voted had been unfairly conducted — and they were right. In retrospect, the 2020 election was a grave betrayal of American democracy. Given the facts that have since emerged about that election, no honest person can deny it.”
“Carlson introduced the January 6 footage Monday, which House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) gave him exclusively, by saying the rioters were “right” to believe “that the election they had just voted in had been unfairly conducted.
Carlson’s program Monday went on to downplay the January 6 attack and its violence, using footage he obtained to claim “the video record does not support the claim that January 6 was an insurrection” and likening the rioters to peaceful “sightseers.”
Miner, sometimes I’m not sure if you’re attacking a straw man out of desperation or out of ignorance. Claiming it was reasonable to believe there was election fraud is NOT the same thing as endorsing Powell’s Dominion claims.
When did Tucker have her on the show after the election? That’s a serious question. It’s my understanding that he invited her onto his show to present her evidence. I thought he gave her a preliminary interview where she couldn’t give him a good reason to bring her onto the show. There was a backlash against Tucker for that. Here’s an article he published on 11/19/20 explaining what happened.
Note that he never said election fraud didn’t exist. He wanted to report what happened.
Giuliani did not conclusively prove that, but he did raise legitimate questions and in some cases, he pointed to what appeared to be real wrongdoing.
Jacob goes on to say that her supervisor told her not to check the photo IDs of voters when they arrived. She says she saw city employees coaching voters on who to vote for, as well as voters voting more than once.
Tucker: “Is any of that provable? Is it true? Well, we should find out…”
Then he moves onto to Powell’s claims:
“So we invited Sidney Powell on the show. We would have given her the whole hour…But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of polite requests. When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her.”
“Dominion was caught lying about the ability to access their machines“
So I Google searched your phrase above and I could not find anything about this.
Would you be kind enough to provide details about your assertion?
The claim was the machines would be inaccessible when the Dominion VP, who happened to be an antifa-supporting Trump hater, is on video demonstrating how to access the machines. Some entity (possibly a local commission) also claimed the machines weren’t capable of being connected to the internet. That also proved to be a lie. I don’t have time to sort through the more recent bevy of lawsuit articles to find you references. If you really want to find it, I would start by dumping google.
“The claim was the machines would be inaccessible when the Dominion VP, who happened to be an antifa-supporting Trump hater, is on video demonstrating how to access the machines. Some entity (possibly a local commission) also claimed the machines weren’t capable of being connected to the internet. That also proved to be a lie.”
I would give more credit to this if you could answer a few simple questions and/or provide a link.
Who made the claim?
What was the exact claim, specifically what was meant by the word “inaccessible”?
What video? And what sort of accessibility was the dominion executive demonstrating?
“Some entity”? And what was their specific claim about the machines not being capable of connection to the Internet?
Who proved this wrong and how?
As long as you continue to post these vague claims it will be difficult to address them. I suspect this is some of the same problem the 60 different failed lawsuits encountered, all the way up to the Supreme Court.
“Who made the claim?”
Everyone who said the 2020 election was the most secure election in the history of the world. Dominion just said that “U.S. voting systems are designed and certified by the federal government to be closed systems that do not rely on Internet connectivity for use.” That isn’t the same as saying they don’t connect to the internet, so technically, that isn’t a lie. It was most likely the local, state, and/or federal authorities. Start with Arizona. Good luck finding the links among the sea of lawsuit articles. Here’s a link to some obscure site I don’t know anything about. I’m only showing you this because all of the videos and tweet links have been deleted:
The Dominion VP I was referring to was Eric Coomer. See the below video of him discussing internet capability. Even this video was difficult to find. Everything is about the lawsuit. Other vids and tweets have been erased because the Tech Giants went crazy with censorship after the election. Now why would they do that? They wouldn’t even let people question it. This is after years of allowing the conspiracy theory of Russia colluding and “hacking” the 2016 election. Of course if the machines can be accessed, placed online, and data altered, then switching votes is at least possible. That’s a serious vulnerability.
For the record, I’m more interested in other areas of fraud concerning the 2020 election. I don’t know about Dominion, but Coomer is definitely a shady individual.
FYI if you haven’t heard of Eric Coomer, (former?) VP of Dominion. Not the most trustworthy guy around. Here’s a video of him lying and being arrested, even after being caught red-handed.
“I should disclose I am a regular FOX News viewer.”
So in other words, they don’t need to change because they already own your eyeballs. How many lights are on, 4 or 5?