Select Page

New York Times Report Slanders Police

New York Times Report Slanders Police

Before getting into the details of the New York Times’ report on police response to the demonstrations and riots that followed the killing of George Floyd, there are a couple of overarching issues that need to be addressed and understood.

The Times used hindsight reports of a few police departments to smear ALL police enforcement across the nation.  The publication claimed that “independent inquires … revealed a widespread failure of American policing.”  It is arguable whether the “inquiries” were truly “independent” since such investigations rarely are.

It is clear that – despite the claim – the inquires cited did not come close to covering the broad issue of “American policing.” 

This was an example of taking miniscule, dubious and arguably biased anecdotal information and applying it to all policing.  It was nothing less than a propaganda attack on American policing by constructing a false narrative on minimal questionable examples. This is just another case of starting out to prove a preconceived political premise.

What makes the New York Times’ report on the riots in the aftermath of the Floyd killing particularly noteworthy is how starkly hypocritical the same publication viewed the police response to the Capitol Hill riots.  Basically, the New York Times views the Capitol Hill Police as the victims of a violent rioting mob. At the same time, they view several police departments in our major cities as provocateurs of violence against “mostly” peaceful demonstrators in the case of the Floyd riots.

One specific example of hypocrisy involves the uniforms worn by police.  In terms of the Floyd riots, the Times alleges that tactical military-style uniforms and equipment – as opposed to police street attire – added to the hostility of the rioters.  Yet, the same publication has reported that the reason the riots swelled on Capitol Hill was the lack of the national guard – and its tactical military attire and equipment.

The Times turns one of the basics of riot control on its head. 

Professionals generally believe that a strong presence quells rioting.  The New York Times even alluded to that in its previous report on Capitol Hill and the police.  In view of the past reporting, this piece of investigative propaganda is amazingly hypocritical.

Consistent with the left’s contention that the police were to blame for the destructive and deadly rioting, the Times wrote that the “police officers nationwide did not prepare to calm the summer’s unrest, and their approaches consistently did the opposite.”  (My emphasis.) 

The Times went on to claim it was “aggressive tactics that had infuriated many of the protesters to begin with.”

The article was riddled with repetitions of this claim. “The reports repeatedly blamed police departments for escalating violence instead of taming it,” sayeth the Times.

And more.  “In places like Indianapolis and Philadelphia … the actions of the officers seemed to make things worse.”

The other central criticism found in the various reports – according to the Times — was that the police lacked sufficient training in handling riotous crowds.  Actually, America’s police forces – for the most part — have handled unruly crowds quite well in the past.  And it takes both the show AND use of force.  “Pretty please” tactics embraced by the left do not work – and never will.

Arguably, it has been the restrictions imposed on police that have created these uncontrolled situations. 

The anti-police radical left opposes the use of deadly force.  They also oppose the use of non-lethal rubber bullets, tasers, tear gas, pepper spray, etc.  As we have seen in many cities, the tactic of choice is to order the police (or the National Guard) to stand down and watch the rioting – even to the point of passive toleration of volleys of missiles – pop bottles, fireworks, rocks, Molotov cocktails, urine, etc. etc. etc.  With all those restrictions, there is no way a police force can quell a riot. 

The “lack of training” and “police as provocateurs” was so prevalent and repetitious in the Times 2500-word article that if it had mentioned them only once, the opinion piece could have just been a photo caption.  Essentially, those were the only two points they made – over and over and over and over and …

The Times bias against policing in the case of largely left-wing rioting and violence is not surprising. However, the amazing hypocrisy between the evaluation of law enforcement’s role in the many destructive and deadly urban riots – still going on in Portland — and the riot on Capitol Hill is astounding.

The Times article is nothing less than a politically motivated hit piece on the thousands of great men and women in blue who do “serve and protect.” 

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.

8 Comments

  1. Russell Bateman

    One thing is certain. The Left will not oppose the use of deadly force when, down the road, they send out thugs to round up us wrong-thinking people and march us to ballpark re-education camps.

    Reply
    • KJ

      When they start that process I can pretty much guarantee they will need all the deadly force they can muster up Russell.

      Reply
    • Jud4justice

      In case my comment doesn’t get posted, I’m going to put it here, if you don’t mind. I’m not a political spearker, etc, just a private citizen concerned about how, and why, is being trampled on::
      SOOOOO SAD. these men and women are out there TRYING to keep PEACE, trying to keep us all SAFE, but TIMES are accusing them of such a thing. Why doesn’t the TIMES go out and deal with the crimes, etc that ARE going on in this nation RIGHT NOW. instead of smearing them for their JOBS !!!!???? They were defunded, NO HELP from Pelosi and the others to bring reticular charges upon them, run their names through the mud !!!! Why don’t these IDIOTS, start where the real problem is. I’ll tell you what. Start with the IDIOTS that refused to allowed all police forces to take complete control of these riots, killing innocent people, beating old seniors down, burning their businesses down, ETC, ETC !!! Why don’t the TIMES SMEAR the ones behind all the nonsense. Go after these criminals, but I guess they’re AFRAID to. It’s all about George Floyd’s death. Sure the police that were there, contributing to the crime and Do nothing to help the guy, and all this ridiculous actions that were not stopped. Then here we go all over again !! All of this that went on and still is, is okey with PELOSI and HER brood, are doing the unthinkable, trying to cut out people from this country, and Turn this nation into a communist country. Why NOT SMEAR THEM !!!!!???? 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬

      Reply
  2. John J

    NY times is a piece of shit

    Reply
  3. Rat Wrangler

    This, along with many other articles stating allegations and falsehoods, are good reasons to move slander and libel out of the civil courts and into the criminal. If that were the case, the Times could have easily been required to provide real evidence of “lack of training” and “widespread failure of American policing”. Since anyone who has worked with the police for any length of time in this once-great nation knows that neither of these statements is true for all police departments, criminal slander laws would apply. The problem we have now is that civil courts have different rules by which they play, and someone would have to pony up thousands of dollars for a lawyer before they could hope for any redress for wrongs committed against them. Many of our news media can no longer be trusted to just report truthful news, and show no evidence of changing their ways. The social media sites have the same problem, because no one is holding them responsible for allowing and banning anything they please, based on someone’s whim rather than clearly defined rules.

    Reply
  4. Judy

    SOOOOO SAD. these men and women are out there TRYING to keep PEACE, trying to keep us all SAFE, but TIMES are accusing them of such a thing. Why doesn’t the TIMES go out and deal with the crimes, etc that ARE going on in this nation RIGHT NOW. instead of smearing them for their JOBS !!!!???? They were defunded, NO HELP from Pelosi and the others to bring reticular charges upon them, run their names through the mud !!!! Why don’t these IDIOTS, start where the real problem is. I’ll tell you what. Start with the IDIOTS that refused to allowed all police forces to take complete control of these riots, killing innocent people, beating old seniors down, burning their businesses down, ETC, ETC !!! Why don’t the TIMES SMEAR the ones behind all the nonsense. Go after these criminals, but I guess they’re AFRAID to. It’s all about George Floyd’s death. Sure the police that were there, contributing to the crime and Do nothing to help the guy, and all this ridiculous actions that were not stopped. Then here we go all over again !! All of this that went on and still is, is okey with PELOSI and HER brood, are doing the unthinkable, trying to cut out people from this country, and Turn this nation into a communist country. Why NOT SMEAR THEM !!!!!???? 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬

    Reply
  5. Judy

    Cance this message that has Judy on it please. Didn’t realize it was under moderation !! Thanks

    Reply
  6. Judy

    We’re both comments canceled

    Reply

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.

Follow Us