Journo’s love this method:
The New York Times Retracts Sicknick Story
In a quiet but stunning correction, the New York Times backed away from its original report that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was killed by a Trump supporter wielding a fire extinguisher during the January 6 melee at the Capitol building. Shortly after American Greatness published my column Friday that showed how the Times gradually was backpedaling on its January 8 bombshell, the paper posted this caveat:
UPDATE: New information has emerged regarding the death of the Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick that questions the initial cause of his death provided by officials close to the Capitol Police.
The paper continued to revise its story within the body of the original January 8 story: “Law enforcement officials initially said Mr. Sicknick was struck with a fire extinguisher, but weeks later, police sources and investigators were at odds over whether he was hit. Medical experts have said he did not die of blunt force trauma, according to one law enforcement official.”
What’s missing, however, is how the Times first described what happened to Sicknick.
“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.”
The account of Sicknick’s death was reported as fact, not speculation or rumor. Further, it appears that the anonymous sources were not law enforcement officials but people “close” to the police department—which means they could have been anyone from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to inveterate liar U.S. Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) to the Democratic mayor of Washington, D.C., Muriel Bowser.
Not only was the Times’ untrue story about Sicknick’s death accepted as fact by every news media organization from the Wall Street Journal to the Washington Post, political pundits on the NeverTrump Right also regurgitated the narrative that Sicknick was “murdered” as did lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
Push a false story, get everyone upset about it, and then when its purpose is achieved, completely ghost the story.
Even if the story is obviously false they do this method. It is a very useful tool by the manipulators to control the narrative of the useful idiots that won’t research for themselves.
The entire reason the capitol protest became all dramatic was because “Trumpists killed people”. But now we know that is not true. Trumpists killed zero people. Unlike the comparable BLM or Antifa protests where a lot of deaths have been stacking up.
If it had not been made dramatic, they could not have pushed forward with their true objectives such as banning every conservative on social media, shutting down our websites, banning us from financial services, calling for domestic terrorism charges against innocent protestors, having the FBI hunt down innocent protestors, and ignoring the massive election fraud that is the obvious leading story that they were trying to shift away from. It all is interconnected, it all serves a purpose. If they don’t have a scapegoat to use, they will simply make one up, as in this story.
Now that we know they are fake news and lied about this, will they retract the things they did to us in response to it? Absolutely not. That was the goal.
The only person murdered at the Capitol protest was Ashli Babbitt, who was murdered by a leftist fed. But they won’t report that. That doesn’t help them justify labelling us as domestic terrorists for the sole reason of not wanting our country to not be taken over by communists.
In the comments section of the article, Mario made a good point:
Ya mean the story was fake? Like virtually everything else we hear? OK.
I know, shocking, right? The election is fake, the markets are fake, the media is fake… It’s no surprise that this story is fake too.