Jared Lee Loughner
FakeNews Media (CNN, NYT, etc.) and the Democrats blamed Republicans (Sarah Palin) for a political ad with crosshairs target the district, for the shooting. Something Democrats had run multiple times as well. It came out that Loughner had never seen the ad, oh and he was a fan of Karl Marx, conspiracy theories, and far left political views. Also a known drug and alcohol abuser, sent letter threatening to assassinate Gifford. Stopped by Joseph Zamudio a CCW holder. For years, the media continued to blame Republicans/Sarah Palin after admitting the facts in other places. Palin sued NYT, but lost because NYT successfully used incompetence as a defense. (Their own editors and fact checkers couldn't be expected to read their own paper and know the facts).
| 2011.01.08 - Tucson Shooting
Jared Lee Loughner (26)
|Known drug and alcohol abuser with history of mental issues and arrests, suspended from college (sent a letter to his parents for his disruptions), rabid fan of Zeitgeist: The Movie, sent letter threatening to assassinate Gifford and attended her events. Left a message on friends answering machine and on myspace, was stopped for running a red-light, then took a cap to event where he shot Gabby Giffords. Stopped by Joseph Zamudio a CCW holder.|| ❌ Gun Control can't help: legally owned|
❌ Assault Weapon ban can't help: he used pistol
|2011.01.08 Gabby Giffords|
Incompetence is their best Defense - The NYT charged Sarah Palin/Tea Party with being responsible for Gabby Giffords shooting in 2011, because she once ran a campaign flyer that had crosshairs of various weak districts (including hers), and a conservative loon had obviously followed their suggestion. The Democrats had of course done the same exact thing to Republican districts (or used targets), but the Times doesn't let moral consistency get in the way of slander piece. Everything was wrong in their assumptions: the shooter was an atheist, loved John Kerry and the communist manifesto, hated Bush, and wasn't aware of the flyer. They were forced to publish retractions/corrections on all that in their News Pages, but continued to write/allow articles blaming Palin in their Editorials, long after those corrections were issued in their own paper. Palin sued, and their defense was that they were negligent but not malicious, and the Judge sided with them. The NYT can't help it if their editors and fact checkers don't read their own Newspaper or retractions, nor be expected to know the basic facts before writing on them. Seriously. more...