New York Times Quietly Retracts another bogus story
On January 8th the New York Times published a story, based on unnamed sources, supposedly law enforcement, claiming that supporters of President Trump killed Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick’s with a fire extinguisher:
"Then on Wednesday, pro-Trump rioters attacked that citadel of democracy , overpowered Mr. Sicknick, 42, and struck him in the head with a fire extinguisher, according to two law enforcement officials. With a bloody gash in his head, Mr. Sicknick was rushed to the hospital and placed on life support. He died on Thursday evening."
https://archive.fo/Rxjvc#selection-541.0-545.257
That story helped elevate a riot into a narrative about an "insurrection." Other news organizations didn't bother to check out the story, but simply repeated it. It even was referred to by congressional democrats in their memorandum for the second impeachment of President Trump. The DC medical examiner has been strangely silent on the matter. Can we trust any local DC official?
CNN reported the following of Feb 3rd:
"According to one law enforcement official, medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true."
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/02/politics/brian-sicknick-charges/index.html
Here is the Times retraction:
Cute. Claims, first used to create and inflame a narrative, are quietly taken down after the impeachment trial.
From the "newspaper" that prints opinion & distortion daily.
Tags
Who is online
79 visitors
"Yet, as early as the morning of January 8, KHOU in Houston reported that Sicknick had died from a stroke. "
A stroke brought on by being beat to death.
That's truly unique. Death caused by stroke, caused by death by beating!
The beating brought on the stroke leading to his death/murder by the former occupant of the White House and his mob.
I see. The beating brought on the stroke. For a minute there, I thought you had him dying twice.
Can you give us a link to this info?
Being beaten by the former occupant of the White House's mob would tend to be a catastrophic event leading to a stroke leading to his death, therefore, all who supported the former occupant of the White House and his mob, are complicit, are responsible for the Officer's death.
Can you give us a link supporting your claim that a beating led to a stroke?
Of course she can't.
She can't ignore the question either!
I'm not the topic of your seed.
That sounds strange coming from you.
Care to provide a link to your claim? Yes or No?
What's strange about it? You and Greg are referring to me. I'm not the topic of the seed.
You can't point fingers after at others who do what you have done.
Done what?
Make comments personal.
But mom, she started it!!!
Typical
wouldnt a beating leave evidence of blunt force trama of the type that is said not to have been found?
I would think so. Do you ever get the feeling the people in power keep stuff from us?
'Blunt force trauma' appears to be the latest talking point regarding this man's death by the former occupant of the White House and his mob.
Whatever this man died from, it was brought on by this insurrectionist mob incited by the former occupant of the White House 'We're storming the Capitol' 'It's a Revolution'!
doesnt even have to be people in power Vic .people have been keeping things from others since humanity came into existance , it is hard wired into anything thats considered alive.
Your entitled to your opinion , whats is making people all harpy and banshee like is they cannot make others agree with their opinions or positions , welcome to humanity.
Yes, I recall that is sometimes a female affliction as well.
people have been keeping things from others since humanity came into existance , it is hard wired into anything thats considered alive.
It just burns a little more when it comes from someone who promised to always tell us the truth.
making it sound like a norman rockwell picture , like the kid finding the santa suit in his dads dresser.....
With the national anthem playing in the background.
Look, the New York Times actually prints retractions! I doubt that the impeachment trial had much to do with the timing of the retraction. Besides, I don't see a retraction from FOX every time one of their golden boys blatantly lies and distorts the truth. It would take more time than there are hours in a day.
What lies and distortions? We'll wait for your list.
Take your pick of any Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity show. They lie daily and provably so. If one checks what they are saying against reality, this fact becomes abundantly clear.
Do your own homework.
The "Bash Fox" article must be that-a-way!
What does the death of Sicknick have to do with 43 Republican Senators voting to acquit Donald Trump for reasons that have nothing to do with Sicknick or the January 6th insurrection at all?
Is that a question or a diversion? How each Senator voted has nothing to do with a false story from the New York Times. I might add, it was another false story that created another useful narrative for the left.
Back at ya. What does the 43 Senators who voted to acquit Mr. Trump have to do with the death of Mr. Sicknick? You know. The topic........................
Which of the two is more important to you?
The untimely death of Mr. Sicknick and the truth about the events leading up to it. You?
Being beaten to death led to Officer Sicknick's death or should I say being murdered tends to lead to death.
What is the truth about the events leading up to the untimely death of Mr. Sicknick?
Could you give us a link showing the cause of death?
The New York Times lied about it. The DC medical examiner won't say. What have you heard, Buzz?
So he was beaten to death only to subsequently die AGAIN.
Sorry but your comment makes no sense
"What does the 43 Senators who voted to acquit Mr. Trump have to do with the death of Mr. Sicknick?"
They were complicit in the Capitol insurrection so they are also responsible for his death along with the former occupant of the White House and his mob.
You do realize that the vote took place weeks after the events at the Capitol right? Just what involvement did they have?
No and no
You mean it's kind of a circular argument?
Just because it took place weeks later, doesn't mean they weren't complicit in supporting of the former occupant of the White House and inciting his mob, THEY WERE.
Yes and Yes
On your end . . . .
As they all ran from the breech................did they leave notes/instructions? Just HOW did they support the "mob"?
Nothing. This is the first I've heard about it. I don't read the New York Times.
Are you sure? Over where you are it might be referred to as "The People's Daily"
The fuckin' truth is what's important to us.
I don't read "The People's Daily" either.
NOT A SINGLE THING, SO WHY ARE YOU DEFLECTING FROM THE TOPIC AT HAND????????????????????????
Deflect? I thought I'd try posting similar comments to those that reply to mine for a change.
R-i-g-h-t.
I am sure THAT is what you were thinking when you attempted to derail the conversation.
Just curious, did you read the article?
If not, at least THAT would be a plausible excuse for not knowing what the topic is.
IMPASSE
Trump was literally on trial because of the events of January 6th. They have everything to do with it. It was, in part, the reporting of those events that generated the outrage, which led to impeachment. As you see from this seed, at least one very dramatic component of that story was false. This particular bit of fiction was submitted for the jury's consideration at his trial. I certainly hope you don't support the idea of anyone being convicted based on false information.
Of COURSE I don't support the idea of anyone being convicted based on false information. I support a person being convicted by those who have sworn to provide a just decision based on the preponderance of evidence placed before them, not those who cowardly hide behind an alleged technicality that has been pooh-poohed by countless legal scholars.
So a 42 year old man healthy enough to function as a front line police officer had a stroke out of the blue for no other reason than that it was his time to go. Why didnt everyone think of that on January 7th?
-
I've seen a lot of absurd rationalizations but this is right up there.
I don't think that the NYT has issued a "retraction" in this story. This is what a NYT retraction looks like
This is how todays story about Brian Sicknick reads
Thats not a retraction.
And the original headline on the Times story still stands
He Dreamed of Being a Police Officer, Then Was Killed by a Pro-Trump Mob
Perhaps the New York Times should demand a retraction from the writer of this Newstalkers article.
The bottom line though, is that it is inexplicable how anyone would think all this makes what Trump did was any less worthy of impeachment or the mob was any less violent. There are many videos of them being violent.
So you think the cause of death was obvious? Funny, because I notice many here don't like conclusions based on what's obvious. How about a formal cause of death? Better still how about our grand old legacy "newspaper" wait until they had some facts, instead of feeding us more BS from unnamed sources.
I don't think that the NYT has issued a "retraction" in this story.
They are sticking with the fire extinguisher story? Maybe we should let them know. (They even backed off on the claim that it came from two law enforcement officials)
And the original headline on the Times story still stands
Not according to Marc Santora, Megan Specia or Mike Baker. They claim they have "new information" for us, as in THEY LIED!
BTW, How many headlines on this story?
Perhaps the New York Times should demand a retraction from the writer of this Newstalkers article.
This writer called it.
I think it is fair to say that you don't get it. The New York Times did not retract their story because the original story was not a mistake on their part, but was based on information they were given by the police department. They have nothing to retract . They updated the story based on new information.
The more troubling thing though is that you seem to think this gives some cover to Trump and the rioters, which is not the case at all.
You are really going to try and argue that? John, why not just admit that it is what it is? They did what they have been doing for 4 years - putting out distortions to create narratives.
Here is what the Times initially said:
“Mr. Sicknick, 42, an officer for the Capitol Police, died on Thursday from brain injuries he sustained after Trump loyalists who overtook the complex struck him in the head with a fire extinguisher, according to two law enforcement officials.”
Indeed, this update changes nothing, yet they act like it does.
The only distortions to further narratives are on your end . . . . .
They didnt need to create a "narrative", the rioters and Trump did that.
Evidently they felt the riot wasn't enough. They needed at least one cop killed by the rioters to elevate the story.
Elevate the story? The truth of the Officer being beat to death??????
You keep saying that, but you can't prove it.
It's true.
Funny pro Pacifica reported the the day after the riot after talking to sicknick’s brother that that sicknick said he wasn’t hurt at the riot and that sicknicks brother was told he died of a stroke. The information was out there.
Yet the times reported he was beaten to death by a fire extinguisher and the house impeachment managers submitted article as “evidence”.
Prove it!
Tessy is doing a great job demonstrating how these made up narratives stick with the public no matter how much actual evidence comes out to rebut the false premise.
She’s destroyed johns argument for him.
There is at least an hour of compelling video of the riot that indicates what was happening there. The dead cop is just a small part of it. 150 or so cops were injured, some of them hospitalized.
By your reasoning, now that Mitch McConnell knows Sicknick wasnt hit in the head with a fire extinguisher he will immediately retract every thing he said about Trump being practically and morally responsible for the riot. Sure. /s
By my reasoning the New York Times promotes propaganda and they should be banned from MBFC and this site.
How's that?
lol.
I'm not the topic of this seed.
The topic is the New York Times lying about the death of a police officer.
Then stop making it about me.
Also, they didn't lie, they updated their story.
They said he "died on Thursday from brain injuries he sustained after Trump loyalists who overtook the complex struck him in the head with a fire extinguisher."
That was a lie.
they updated their story.
And what is it now?
I would think that if the information was actually coming from the police department, it wouldn't have been credited anonymously. The story would have been "according to Capitol Police spokesperson [insert name]." This was another in a long line of vague unnamed sources.
It's convenient because when it turns out later the story is bullshit, there is no one to blame.
More manufactured outrage, just as Trump always loved.
The story still stands. It was not retracted, but it was updated .
The fact is that Mr. Sicknick most probably died as a direct result of the attack. I do not think that is in dispute. The bloody gash in his head is still mentioned in the story. Was that not somehow related to the story? It matters not that he died after the attack or that his death was not directly due to a blunt force trauma. The man is dead as a result of the attack. As are the others. Your tap dancing on his grave because the NYTimes had to update their article hardley makes that any less of a tragedy and in no way absolves any of the rioters or their apologists.
That's all his supporters appear to have
No one here is apologizing for the rioters or their actions.
No one is absolving them for anything.
Some of us are questioning the Times for its shoddy reporting.
Shoddy reporting? They got everything in the story correct except the one detail, (which was confirmed by more than one source) and they printed an update to correct that detail. That sounds like good practice to me. The correction timing seems coincidental to me, and Vic's article seems closely mirrored to those of and the trackback .
Probably because it shouldn't change their minds. They got the essential story correct except for one detail, and that detail they corrected.
What I was taking issue with is the way that certain members of this forum take a correction and scream, "It was a Lie! The leftist media lies! Burn Her! She's a witch!" and then make up or spread a story about that change that fits their own political narrative. Usually, with a little bit of research, one can expose this narrative as hyperbolic, and for the most part, untrue. The veritable tempest in the teapot.
Corrections are part of good journalism: They show that the authors and editors are conscientious and make efforts, even after the fact, to make sure that they are reporting the story correctly. Now, with that said, most news outlets do not make these changes as prominent as they once did. There should be an accounting for newspapers, radio, TV internet media based on the frequency of publication. This accounting should be prominently displayed. I am not holding my breath.
As for the AG article, I think that the author states it best when she says:
Yes.
Please don't quote others' posts to me as if I stated those things. Argue what I write with me and what others write to them.
Thanks!
Well, it was all related topically, and it wasn't a member of this forum whom I quoted. I thought that was obvious from positioning. It was all cogent to the discussion at hand and my original response was to VIc.
Your Welcome!
My healthy, 39 year old brother (6'3" and muscular, going to school for radiology) just passed away in his sleep a few weeks ago. Nothing found on his autopsy, nothing found on lab results from tissue and blood samples.
Strokes can be caused by many things... there are plenty of cops that have high blood pressure, but are still healthy enough to be cops. High BP can be caused by lots of things... if he had higher than should be cholesterol, a blood clot could've formed and caused a stroke. I'm just throwing out examples; I don't know the cause and don't claim as such.
Yeah. It happens. I've seen it. Many strokes - particularly in younger, healthier people - are idiopathic (meaning they don't know what caused it).
The cop texted his brother that night. He told him he'd been hit with pepper spray a couple of times during the chaos, but he felt fine. Later, he died. This has actually been known since at least January 8.
He didn't say anything about being beaten. No one has reported seeing signs of a beating on his head or body.
So you're a Medical Examiner now?
Pardon me but aren't you the one who has evaluated the situation fully and arrived at his cause of death? Some of your posts seem to indicate that as your stance.
I dont know , what i do know is i have worked recently with some i would consider "kids" because they are 20 years younger than me (59 here), that have developed problems from chugging energy drinks , and high caffine containing things such as that 8 hr energy boost crap or living on coffee and Mnt dew and have been doing so for a long time if not years since they started working. and in the oil and gas patches or on the rigs , thats common and every day , thing is that stuff catches up to you.
last one i worked with during beet harvest in oct , was 35 and had a heart condition because of it and its doubtful he will ever go back to work as a full dot certed cdl driver.
hell at 59 , im still healthy enough to serve as a front line police officer if i so chose , but thats no longer my thing , i got being a cop out of my system when i was a lot younger.
New Capitol Video Shows Trump Mob Beating Face-Down Officer
CAPITOL SIEGE NEW VIDEO SHOWS OFFICER BEATEN ... By Trump Insurrectionists
1/10/2021 12:35 PM PT
The moment the Trump mob was strong-arming its way into the Capitol can now be seen from a new, frightening view -- where a fallen police officer getting pummeled on the ground.
Check out this gruesome clip of insurrectionists breaking into an opening on a side entrance to the building, which was being guarded by a line of cops in tactical gear ... one of whom ended up laid out on the ground, face first ... right at the feet of rioters.
The crowd showed him no mercy ... immediately trampling him, bludgeoning him with objects and projectiles, dragging him down the steps they were storming -- pretty much having their way with his limp body as his colleagues tried pulling him away.
There's even an overhead shot of the scene, and it's absolutely surreal. You hear someone off-camera yell, "Get that motherf***** out of there! Take him out!"
Now, there've been rumors this officer might've been the one who was killed -- Officer Brian Sicknick , who died from injuries he sustained during the siege -- but that has NOT been confirmed. Some social media users say this officer is actually with Metro D.C., not Capitol Police, but again ... we haven't been able to confirm.
Whether this was Sicknick or not - the stroke was absolutely caused by the insurrection
That says it all.
Where is the cause of death, Tess?
The former occupant of the White House and his mob - that's your cause of death, right there!
Obviously, you've tried to fit that in. Unfortunately, we are discussing America's legacy "newspaper" becoming a myth maker.
You mean the truth?
The lie that has been exposed as a lie.
What lie? Since when is an update to a story, a lie????
When the original story was reported as fact, not speculation or rumor!
The original story was factual, the update also
The Fishwrap of Record has proven that journalistic "standards" are anything BUT standards.
MBFC says they're just left of center, that's all!
I guess we can conclude this sad story by declaring that a "newspaper" which egregiously exploited a man’s untimely death to score political points against a man they hate, has yet to be held accountable.
Your conclusion is incorrect
Tragically, millions of Americans already believe the original story as truth
There are no lies to be found in the original story or the update.
It is rather funny that the Times couldn't be bothered to check out the original story BEFORE publishing their lies.
I wonder if the Times will say that the doctors who spoke to Sicknick's family were all liars?
The New York Times did nothing wrong as regards this story. They reported Sicknick's cause of death as relayed to them by police sources.
Hence, they have an "update" now and not a retraction.
This incessant whining by the political right, which has exploded since Trump lost the election, is beyond anything imaginable before Trump took office. He has degenerated the entire right wing media-sphere.
And they ignored his family's published statements contradicting the anonymous sources until the impeachment was over.
IT's not okay to run fake stories because they come from anonymous sources. Do you ever get tired of being manipulated by these lies? Think how many times during the Russia investigation the liberal media breathlessly hyped lies based on anonymous sources only to have to quietly retract them later.
The New York Times is hardly the only source that reported Sicknick's death by fire extinguisher. I bet you there are some conservative publications that did so too.
To say you and Vic and others are making a big deal out of nothing is putting it mildly. Should we get into all the false reporting by right wing media? It is encyclopedic in scope.
Oh, it's okay if you're the Fishwrap of Record and your dedicated sycophants hang on every word you publish as the truth, even when it clearly is not.
They have to keep their righteous indignation finely tuned and therefore stories like this.
This retraction might have been worth noting but it certainly does not justify hair on fire...
Out of power all they have is impotent rage they have to express by kvetching about whatever is their daily outrage.
It could have been AOC or the unions.
JR claims that there was no retraction.
Maybe ya'll should get your arguing points in order!
It is getting worse every day.
Oh the irony ....................
They use sensationalism to go for the initial desired effect and only much later file a barely noticed retraction.
How was it 'barely noticed' if this article was posted? It wasn't a retraction, it was an update.
And they can't even agree amongst themselves whether it was a retraction or not!
Simple fact is the original story was wrong. Period.
Any attempts to say otherwise is just silliness and refusal to accept reality.
But we already knew that, right?
Correct me if I am wrong. If a couple of thieves break into a person's home and that person has a heart attack, due to stress and dies... that is considered felony-murder, even if no physical assault took place. I think this is federal law and law in many states.
Correct me if I am wrong, but all the deaths surrounding the felonies of 1-6-2021 and persons committing the felonies, are subject to these charges, even the death of the woman shot by the police. The manner of their deaths become irrelevant as it would be judged that none would have died without the felonies being committed.
Here is what I found:
Criminal Law Criminal Homicide :: Justia
Criminal Law Criminal Homicide :: Justia
You're correct. The Officer died as a result of the former occupant of the White House and his mob's brutal attack.
Oh, it was a stroke. Well that changes everything. /s
What’s next? Were they actually chanting “Thank Mike Pence!”