Jesse Ventura's reputation

Sua Sponte · Post by **Sua Sponte** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:58 am

milosz wrote:You don't see how being known as the guy who laughed at dead American soldiers and sailors might damage the reputation - and earnings - of a public figure?

You don't see how being known as the guy who sued a widow and her family might damage the reputation - and earnings - of a public figure?

Ventura needs no help damaging his reputation.

Sua Sponte · Post by **Sua Sponte** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:59 am

Good night and goodbye folks. Until another thread.

johno · Post by **johno** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 5:10 am

Ventura is a nutbag and a bully. I treasure the notion that he shot off his mouth & got decked.

PS - Did I ever mention that during Hurricane Sandy I killed a mafioso with a breadstick?

Kraj 2.0 · Post by **Kraj 2.0** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 5:56 am

Sua Sponte wrote:The first, I again wonder why Ventura is believable and Kyle not. I stated the reason earlier. The Navy SEALs at the bar that night and the bar owner himself backed up Ventura's story. There was never any altercation. It was a fabrication by Kyle. It's Kyle's word against Ventura's, the bar owner's, and the SEALs that were there that night. What money did Kyle make from whom in telling this supposed lie? The Jesse Ventura punch story is what put Kyle in the headlines. The guy was trying to drum up sales for his newly released book and then drops the bombshell that he punched Jesse Ventura. You really don't see how he stood to gain monetarily from that?

And you aren't supposed to get sued. The hell you ain't. It's called slander and libel. You most definitely are supposed to get sued if you tell lies about someone. It's a choice. A person makes a statement. That guy's gone. Estates aren't people. The class move is to simply refute the account again and express his condolences at the widow's loss. Wrong. The fact that he's gone is irrelevant. His estate is still benefiting from the lies that he told. If they don't want to be held responsible for the lies that he told then they need to give up all rights to the book and upcoming movie. They can't be cashing out on one hand and then playing the victim on the other. If your husband robbed a bank and then died, you obviously wouldn't get to keep the money. Your hero worship is clouding your reasoning.

Sua Sponte · Post by **Sua Sponte** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 6:13 am

http://www.startribune.com/local/167764165.html

If former Gov. Jesse Ventura didn't like what Navy SEAL Chris Kyle wrote about him in his memoir, "American Sniper," he's going to positively hate what five fellow SEALs -- and the mothers of two of their fallen comrades -- have to say about him.

Kyle's friends and associates have rallied to his defense in a defamation lawsuit Ventura filed in Hennepin County in January. Ventura, whose real name is James Janos, sued over Kyle's portrayal of a bar fight he claims they had six years ago in Coronado, Calif.

Under the heading, "Punching Out Scruff Face," Kyle describes a confrontation with a "celebrity" who served in the military during the Vietnam War. He said Scruff Face winters in Baja California, opposed the war in Iraq and described the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks as a "conspiracy."

Though he didn't name Ventura in the book, Kyle has acknowledged that Scruff Face is Jesse "The Body" Ventura.

Ventura denies Kyle's allegation that he prompted the alleged fight by saying that the SEALS "deserve to lose a few" in Iraq, or that Kyle "laid him out" at the bar during a wake for a fellow SEAL.

The lawsuit has been moved to federal court in St. Paul, where Kyle's attorney, John Borger, filed a motion Tuesday to dismiss two of the three counts as legally deficient. He said he plans to bring a separate motion for summary judgment on the remaining defamation claim as well.

In support of Tuesday's motion to dismiss claims of unjust enrichment and misappropriation of Ventura's likeness, Borger filed a handful of "declarations" from witnesses to the alleged bar fight who describe him as a "jackass" and his comments that night as "anti-American."

Borger describes Ventura in his motion as a "Navy veteran, ex-wrestler, ex-color commentator, actor, ex-mayor, ex-governor, outspoken conspiracy theorist, and frequent fanfaron of future prospects for public office." A fanfaron is a braggart, a swaggerer, a bully.

Ventura to have say in court

David Olsen, Ventura's attorney, said Tuesday he would respond in court and declined to comment further.

Kyle retired from the Navy in 2009. He served four combat tours in Iraq and elsewhere, and was awarded two Silver Stars, five Bronze Stars with Valor, two Navy and Marine Corp Achievement Medals, and one Navy and Marine Corps Commendation.

"The Navy credits me with more kills as a sniper than any other American service member, past or present," he said in a court filing.

Kyle said he and two co-authors wrote "American Sniper." "The events that happened in the book are true," he said. "I reconstructed dialogue from memory, which means that it may not be word for word. But the essence of what was said is accurate."

The witnesses' declarations generally agree with Kyle's description of the alleged fight at McP's Irish Pub in Coronado. Kyle and his friends were having a wake for Mikey Mansoor, a SEAL who threw himself onto a grenade to save his comrades and was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.

Eyewitness accounts

Debbie Lee, who lost her son, Navy SEAL Marc Lee, in Iraq, said the group was mournful and respectful. "It was not a belly-up-to-the-bar type of event," she wrote.

One of her son's SEAL teammates introduced her to Ventura, whom she found offensive. She said she heard him criticize the war and called President George Bush a jerk. Ventura could only talk about himself, she said. "He did not say he was sorry for my loss."

Bob Gassoff, the SEAL who introduced Lee to Ventura, said the former governor wore a beard braided into pony tails and a blue SEAL team hat. "He was badmouthing the war and President Bush. He was upsetting the families of deceased SEALs," Gassoff said.

Andrew Paul, a reservist Navy SEAL, said he notified Mansoor's family about his death and helped carry his body off the plane.

"I grew up watching [the movie] 'Predator' and professional wrestling. I thought it would be cool to meet 'The Body,'" he said.

But Ventura's behavior that night revolted him, Paul said. "He was saying the wrong things in the wrong place at the wrong time. In my opinion, he was being as anti-American as you can possibly get. Now, he would probably argue that he was being very American by challenging the government, but for a bunch of guys who had just laid their lives on the line for their country and who were at a wake for their fallen comrade, he's lucky the punch to the face is all he got."

Most of those swearing out declarations said they didn't see Kyle hit Ventura, but claim they saw the commotion and the aftermath as Kyle took off and Ventura clambered up from the ground with blood on his face.

Jeremiah Dinnell, an active-duty SEAL, was the exception.

"I heard Ventura say that we shouldn't be over in Iraq, doing what we were doing," he said. "And then he said that the SEALs deserved to lose some guys because of what we were doing.

"That's when Chris punched him. All of us wanted to. Chris was just the first one to pop him."

Dan Browning • 612-673-4493

Blaidd Drwg · Post by **Blaidd Drwg** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 6:35 am

Batboy2/75 · Post by **Batboy2/75** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 7:00 am

Whoa, whoa, whoa; What the Fuckity Fuck?

Katrina was a "Beyond Thonderdome" moment in American history. Complete with negros raping, looting, and even eating each other for days on end. The press and the Democrats said so. There was even this shiftless bug eyed negro on some national telethon; that said Bush hated black people and he was to blame. Bush sending in Blackwater operators to randomly kill shiftless democratic voters( as they fought over the roasting corpses of babies and EBT cards) sounds very plausible to me. I'm sure Sean Penn can verify this

Next you'll tell me that the Democratic Governor of LA and the Democratic Major of New Orleans failed to prepare properly, that they botched the relief effort and that they are mostly to blame.

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:18 pm

Batboy2/75 wrote:Whoa, whoa, whoa; What the Fuckity Fuck?

Katrina was a "Beyond Thonderdome" moment in American history. Complete with negros raping, looting, and even eating each other for days on end. The press and the Democrats said so. There was even this shiftless bug eyed negro on some national telethon; that said Bush hated black people and he was to blame. Bush sending in Blackwater operators to randomly kill shiftless democratic voters( as they fought over the roasting corpses of babies and EBT cards) sounds very plausible to me. I'm sure Sean Penn can verify this

Next you'll tell me that the Democratic Governor of LA and the Democratic Major of New Orleans failed to prepare properly, that they botched the relief effort and that they are mostly to blame.

You have an awesome filter. You open a thread about two white conservatives in a dispute and conclude that the real problem is Democrats and black people.

Batboy2/75 · Post by **Batboy2/75** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 6:56 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Batboy2/75 wrote:Whoa, whoa, whoa; What the Fuckity Fuck?

Katrina was a "Beyond Thonderdome" moment in American history. Complete with negros raping, looting, and even eating each other for days on end. The press and the Democrats said so. There was even this shiftless bug eyed negro on some national telethon; that said Bush hated black people and he was to blame. Bush sending in Blackwater operators to randomly kill shiftless democratic voters( as they fought over the roasting corpses of babies and EBT cards) sounds very plausible to me. I'm sure Sean Penn can verify this

Next you'll tell me that the Democratic Governor of LA and the Democratic Major of New Orleans failed to prepare properly, that they botched the relief effort and that they are mostly to blame.
You have an awesome filter. You open a thread about two white conservatives in a dispute and conclude that the real problem is Democrats and black people.

Katrina was brought up. My post was making fun of the over the top "Lord of Flies" bullshit the press and libtards engaged in. Night after night, we were entertained with stories of gripping terror and blood lust in NOLA; 90% of which was proven to be completely false. The great Irony being, the false narrative also reinforced every racial stereotype about black people. Way to go team Liberal!

Yeah, a bit off topic, but Sua Sponte needed some moral support. If we were to believe the worst stories propagated by the media and Democratic pundits/politicians in 2005, it is well within the realm of plausibility that mean old George "he hates black people" Bush to hire Blackwater and Halliburton to randomly murder the black population of NOLA.

Jesse Ventura is a Conservative? In what Universe is Jesse a Conservative? He's not even a fucking good Libertarian. More like a crack pot populist along the lines of Huey Long. Jesse Ventura wouldn't even call himself a Conservative and he's pretty much down with saying any foolish asshat idea that pops into his head.

Bob Wildes · Post by **Bob Wildes** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 7:10 pm

Batboy2/75 wrote:
Grandpa's Spells wrote:
Batboy2/75 wrote:Whoa, whoa, whoa; What the Fuckity Fuck?

Jesse Ventura wouldn't even call himself a Conservative and he's pretty much down with saying any foolish asshat idea that pops into his head.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He seems to be competing with Alex Jones for top asshat.

milosz · Post by **milosz** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 7:33 pm

Interesting take - but the horror stories of big black bucks raping babies in the Superdome were told by people like you, Batboy, not your "Democratic politician" bogeymen.

Sua Sponte · Post by **Sua Sponte** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 8:24 pm

milosz wrote:Interesting take - but the horror stories of big black bucks raping babies in the Superdome were told by people like you, Batboy, not your "Democratic politician" bogeymen.

It appears there is no one side that has ownership of the propagation of stories. The mayor (read Democratic politician) is also indicted.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/19/busin ... wanted=all

Tirofijo · Post by **Tirofijo** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:01 pm

Sua Sponte wrote: The first, I again wonder why Ventura is believable and Kyle not. What money did Kyle make from whom in telling this supposed lie?

I don't know if the Ventura story is true or not, but he could have lied to sell books alone. The first time I heard about Kyle was after he told the Ventura anecdote on the Opie and Anthony radio show and it went semi-viral on Youtube. I'm not really concerned with whether it's true or not.

Nevermind Ventura and nevermind Katrina/Superdome, because we aren't going to get to the bottom of that.

Instead, I'm curious on your take on the gas station shooting. Kyle claims he shot two armed carjackers (in a rather dramatic way, mind you.) And the cops call a number and someone tells them to let the person go because he's GLG-20 classified. No one can find a record of it anywhere. (And yet despite being such a secret, he blabs it to a SEAL writer to include it in a book.)

How do you explain that? You must know that's laughable.

Sua Sponte · Post by **Sua Sponte** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:41 pm

Tirofijo wrote: I don't know if the Ventura story is true or not, but he could have lied to sell books alone. The first time I heard about Kyle was after he told the Ventura anecdote on the Opie and Anthony radio show and it went semi-viral on Youtube. I'm not really concerned with whether it's true or not.

Nevermind Ventura and nevermind Katrina/Superdome, because we aren't going to get to the bottom of that.

Instead, I'm curious on your take on the gas station shooting. Kyle claims he shot two armed carjackers (in a rather dramatic way, mind you.) And the cops call a number and someone tells them to let the person go because he's GLG-20 classified. No one can find a record of it anywhere. (And yet despite being such a secret, he blabs it to a SEAL writer to include it in a book.)

How do you explain that? You must know that's laughable.

I had no idea about it, as repeated above several times, until this morning when I did some digging. Yes, of course, any story of a secret squirrel number that validates former SEALs or any other unit is laughable. So laughable one would almost be given to believe it was said tongue in cheek, except for milosz's report it appeared in Kyle's book, presented as a factual account. Here again, my point was never that Kyle never told a lie, fib, fabrication, whopper or whatever you want to call it. I just don't get why Ventura is more believable, especially in the context of the alleged events giving raise to the lawsuit, the original topic of the thread. As BD raised earlier, it's more than reasonable that they're two sides of the same coin-except Kyle seems to be legitimately credited with helping vets after leaving service.

I have no idea if the story helped sell his book. Given the SEAL nut licking that's gone on here, and the sales of so many other books authored by SEALs that have sold so well, I can't imagine he would need such an artifice to move the product. If I were a lawyer pursuing this and wanted money from the estate on the grounds it was amplified because of this story, I'm not sure how I'd go about proving it was this bar fight story that really moved the merchandise rather than the story itself, the image that the Navy has worked so hard and spent so much money to build around the SEALs, and a certain percentage of the population never being satiated on these types of books. And contrary to the Kraj Two Point O's statement that it was all dried and done, the article I posted suggests there are several witnesses in support of Kyle's story. As mentioned earlier, just because a guy lies, it doesn't mean he's lied every time he spoke. There isn't much impugning the majority of his book about actions in Iraq to my knowledge.

To the apparently unassailable veracity of the NY'er, here's what's actually on the blog of the Michael Mooney, the guy referenced in the NY'er article. http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2013/0 ... n-in-2009/:

Michael Mooney wrote:He said he gave the responding officers a phone number to call. Presumably someone high up in the government explained to the officers who Kyle was.

Here's what milosz said the NY'er said:

milosz wrote:Police officers arrived at the scene. When they ran Kyle’s license, Mooney wrote, something unusual occurred: “Instead of his name, address, and date of birth, what came up was a phone number at the Department of Defense.

Minor difference I guess, one stating that Kyle gave the number to the officers to call, the other referencing Mooney, but claiming this information came up upon running his license number.

Both accounts are preposterous, but it does support the corrupting of a story by the unassailable fact checkers of the NY'er. There are other suspect corruptions and omissions.

Did the shooting ever happen? Not under his arm, no. Again, another one of those SEAL mythology things. Did the police let him go with a wink and a nod-TOM posted he knows somebody who had a similar occurrence but I'd call it, let's say, a rarity. Was there any sort of altercation, carjacking, mugging, name calling.....gun play or not? Dunno. Maybe Jesse Vee will do an episode on his conspiracy theory show about the police cover up.

Tirofijo · Post by **Tirofijo** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 11:24 pm

Sua Sponte wrote: I had no idea about it, as repeated above several times, until this morning when I did some digging. Yes, of course, any story of a secret squirrel number that validates former SEALs or any other unit is laughable. So laughable one would almost be given to believe it was said tongue in cheek, except for milosz's report it appeared in Kyle's book, presented as a factual account. Here again, my point was never that Kyle never told a lie, fib, fabrication, whopper or whatever you want to call it. I just don't get why Ventura is more believable, especially in the context of the alleged events giving raise to the lawsuit, the original topic of the thread. As BD raised earlier, it's more than reasonable that they're two sides of the same coin-except Kyle seems to be legitimately credited with helping vets after leaving service.

I have no idea if the story helped sell his book. Given the SEAL nut licking that's gone on here, and the sales of so many other books authored by SEALs that have sold so well, I can't imagine he would need such an artifice to move the product. If I were a lawyer pursuing this and wanted money from the estate on the grounds it was amplified because of this story, I'm not sure how I'd go about proving it was this bar fight story that really moved the merchandise rather than the story itself, the image that the Navy has worked so hard and spent so much money to build around the SEALs, and a certain percentage of the population never being satiated on these types of books. And contrary to the Kraj Two Point O's statement that it was all dried and done, the article I posted suggests there are several witnesses in support of Kyle's story. As mentioned earlier, just because a guy lies, it doesn't mean he's lied every time he spoke. There isn't much impugning the majority of his book about actions in Iraq to my knowledge.

To the apparently unassailable veracity of the NY'er, here's what's actually on the blog of the Michael Mooney, the guy referenced in the NY'er article. http://frontburner.dmagazine.com/2013/0 ... n-in-2009/:

Michael Mooney wrote:He said he gave the responding officers a phone number to call. Presumably someone high up in the government explained to the officers who Kyle was.
Here's what milosz said the NY'er said:

milosz wrote:Police officers arrived at the scene. When they ran Kyle’s license, Mooney wrote, something unusual occurred: “Instead of his name, address, and date of birth, what came up was a phone number at the Department of Defense.
Minor difference I guess, one stating that Kyle gave the number to the officers to call, the other referencing Mooney, but claiming this information came up upon running his license number.

Both accounts are preposterous, but it does support the corrupting of a story by the unassailable fact checkers of the NY'er. There are other suspect corruptions and omissions.

Did the shooting ever happen? Not under his arm, no. Again, another one of those SEAL mythology things. Did the police let him go with a wink and a nod-TOM posted he knows somebody who had a similar occurrence but I'd call it, let's say, a rarity. Was there any sort of altercation, carjacking, mugging, name calling.....gun play or not? Dunno. Maybe Jesse Vee will do an episode on his conspiracy theory show about the police cover up.

Maybe you should read the D Magazine article before you claim the New Yorker mis-cited someone.

http://www.dmagazine.com/Home/D_Magazin ... le_01.aspx

Here's the paragraph that the New Yorker referenced.

When they arrived, they detained him while they ran his driver’s license. But instead of his name, address, and date of birth, what came up was a phone number at the Department of Defense. At the other end of the line was someone who explained that the police were in the presence of one of the most skilled fighters in U.S. military history. When they reviewed the surveillance footage, the officers found the incident had happened just as Kyle had described it. They were very understanding, and they didn’t want to drag a just-home, highly decorated veteran into a messy legal situation.

You quoted Mooney's blog post. Mooney, who clearly creamed his pants in the presence of Kyle, wrote two different versions, not the New Yorker.

Nevermind the New Yorker or the secret squirrel get-out-of-jail phone number, since you seem to get hung up on the wrong things.

Explain why Mooney, Kyle's hagiographer, couldn't find any evidence that the shooting happened. He stopped at every gas station on the interstate. No one saw anything. All sheriff's denied it happened. Killing two carjackers isn't something that can be kept hush up. The New Yorker writer looked for evidence too. There was none.

Only one explanation. It was utter bullshit, told to an adoring writer/fan by someone with a Texas-sized ego that needed stroking.

Batboy2/75 · Post by **Batboy2/75** » Wed Jun 19, 2013 11:31 pm

milosz wrote:Interesting take - but the horror stories of big black bucks raping babies in the Superdome were told by people like you, Batboy, not your "Democratic politician" bogeymen.

Sure thing cock holster.

CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, and even Fox news are not exactly staffed by people like me. However, all of these "Proffessionals" reported complete false hoods during Karina. Lies that the Democrats used for political advantage.

I was only pointing out the obvious in 2005. If you live in a corrupt city below sea level, you may want to have more preparations that an EBT card and the Rainbow coalitions phone number.

Sua Sponte · Post by **Sua Sponte** » Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:24 am

Tirofijo wrote:Maybe you should read the D Magazine article before you claim the New Yorker mis-cited someone.

http://www.dmagazine.com/Home/D_Magazin ... le_01.aspx

Here's the paragraph that the New Yorker referenced.

When they arrived, they detained him while they ran his driver’s license. But instead of his name, address, and date of birth, what came up was a phone number at the Department of Defense. At the other end of the line was someone who explained that the police were in the presence of one of the most skilled fighters in U.S. military history. When they reviewed the surveillance footage, the officers found the incident had happened just as Kyle had described it. They were very understanding, and they didn’t want to drag a just-home, highly decorated veteran into a messy legal situation.

You quoted Mooney's blog post. Mooney, who clearly creamed his pants in the presence of Kyle, wrote two different versions, not the New Yorker.

Nevermind the New Yorker or the secret squirrel get-out-of-jail phone number, since you seem to get hung up on the wrong things.

Explain why Mooney, Kyle's hagiographer, couldn't find any evidence that the shooting happened. He stopped at every gas station on the interstate. No one saw anything. All sheriff's denied it happened. Killing two carjackers isn't something that can be kept hush up.

Only one explanation. It was utter bullshit, told to an adoring writer/fan by someone with a Texas-sized ego that needed stroking.

Fair enough but why would I read that article? Was it referenced somewhere here? Google "Chris Kyle Mooney" and see what comes up first. And why wouldn't the mighty fact checkers have caught this contradiction? Or choose this particular version without reference to the other? According to milosz's earlier comments when a liar lies his difficulty is keeping his story straight. This moron couldn't keep it straight even after writing it down. Why, do you suppose, the New Yorker would choose to quote such a guy-clearly, from the stream lined decision making process I've been instructed on here, Mooney's a liar. My point in that part of the statement is simply that the NY'er isn't actually an unassailable source of perfectly vetted truth. Clearly nobody put enough credibility in what Kyle said to actually launch an investigation into this blatant violation of the public trust by the local constabulary, even after Kyle wrote about it in a book.

In the blog post Mooney states "After our talk, I called the police chiefs of several towns along 67. Most of them had heard of the incident. One, speaking only on background, said he knew some of his men had at least seen the tape. But request after request provided no police reports and no tape."

So here he states that he did get verbal verification that many had heard of the incident and statements that some had seen the tape. Now he could be lying, and so could they, but then why would he override his claimed man-crush ejaculatory response and go on to state that he never could find the tape or the police reports. Seems very unsmitten of him to point out such a clear refutation of his own story.

I addressed the issue with the phone number because you asked me to-not sure how that makes me hung up on the wrong things. You asked if I believed the story. I said I didn't. I said that there's TOMs story of a similar nature (and TOM has always struck me as an upstanding guy). Then I went on to say such an event would be "let's say, a rarity". I didn't provide an answer about how there would be no record police or video tape because, you know, I said I didn't believe Kyle's story. I then sarcastically replied that perhaps JV would look into the cover up on his conspiracy show.

If you're asking me to speculate against my stated belief, I would guess I'd have to say that if I assisted in the cover up of a killing, I don't think I'd be providing tapes to reporters whether I be the police, gas station attendants, whomever. Alternately, maybe there really wasn't a tape in the camera at the gas station. Or even a camera. Didn't the Sherlock Holmes-cum reporter Mooney at least ask where and when this car jacking took place? If not, couldn't you just have all the tapes in the area subpoenaed given everybody seemingly believed an unreported murder took place? Or if the story wasn't believable enough to affect this course of action, why would you print it?

milosz · Post by **milosz** » Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:47 am

Sua Sponte wrote: Fair enough but why would I read that article? Was it referenced somewhere here?

It was referenced... in the New Yorker article we're talking about.

Google "Chris Kyle Mooney" and see what comes up first. And why wouldn't the mighty fact checkers have caught this contradiction? Or choose this particular version without reference to the other?

Why would the New Yorker's fact checkers fact check D Magazine for contradictions by its writer?
The New Yorker writer specifically refers to Mooney's article and correctly quotes it.

My point in that part of the statement is simply that the NY'er isn't actually an unassailable source of perfectly vetted truth.

This is asinine. You tried to defend Kyle's truthfulness by calling the New Yorker a bunch of bullshit artists, and yet their story is corroborated and well sourced on every front. Just deal with it - Kyle lied about at least two big things and that undermines his credibility regarding the Jesse Ventura story.

Didn't the Sherlock Holmes-cum reporter Mooney at least ask where and when this car jacking took place?

How is Mooney's weak reporting - shockingly, D Magazine doesn't bring in the best and brightest - relevant here?

Tirofijo · Post by **Tirofijo** » Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:56 am

I've already figured out Mooney is a hack that's done shoddy work. So first he writes in a blog that police chiefs "heard" about the incident (does he mean, "heard" about it after an account was published in a best selling book? Cause I "heard" about it then too. Or does he mean the police chiefs heard about it when it happened. It's not clear.)

Then in D magazine he writes:

During the interview in which he discussed the gas station incident, he didn’t say where it happened. Most versions of the story have him in Cleburne, not far from Fort Worth. The Cleburne police chief says that if such an incident did happen, it wasn’t in his town. Every other chief of police along Highway 67 says the same thing. Public information requests produced no police reports, no coroner reports, nothing from the Texas Rangers or the Department of Public Safety. I stopped at every gas station along 67, Business 67 in Cleburne, and 10 miles in either direction. Nobody had heard of anything like that happening.

And here's what the New Yorker wrote.

There is cause to be skeptical. The counties of Erath, Somervell, and Johnson cover the stretch of highway where the incident supposedly happened. Tommy Bryant, the sheriff of Erath County, told me that he could “guar-an-damn-tee it didn’t happen here.” Greg Doyle, the sheriff of Somervell County, said that he had “never heard” the story, which he found “kinda shocking,” and added, “It did not occur here.” Bob Alford, the sheriff of Johnson County, told a local reporter, “If something like that happened here I would have heard of it, and I’m sure you all at the newspaper would have heard of it.”

New Yorker vs Hack Writer: Who cares. When did you become so interested in accuracy in journalism? The story's is bullshit anyway. That's the point.

Sua Sponte · Post by **Sua Sponte** » Thu Jun 20, 2013 1:33 am

milosz wrote:It was referenced... in the New Yorker article we're talking about.

Yeah, except I was going from what you instantiated which had no reference and are just snippets. Nor was the article linked.

milosz wrote:The New Yorker writer specifically refers to Mooney's article and correctly quotes it.

So the NY'er article correctly quoted a person who by your standards is a liar then used as a basis to show that Kyle is a liar and this isn't problematic? Given that Mooney has multiple versions doesn't it defacto mean he's not a credible source and therefore he shouldn't be used as a source to quote what Kyle said to him? Isn't that partially the point of the NY Times article I linked when discussing journalistic integrity?

it's one thing to correctly quote something and reference the source. It's yet another to then use that quote and that source to make an argument or draw a conclusion without establishing it's validity.

milosz wrote: This is asinine. You tried to defend Kyle's truthfulness by calling the New Yorker a bunch of bullshit artists, and yet their story is corroborated and well sourced on every front. Just deal with it - Kyle lied about at least two big things and that undermines his credibility regarding the Jesse Ventura story.

Except for the seemingly minor point that I never defended Kyle's truthfulness. I said "Not too unbelievable" on one issue. Even went on to say that I didn't believe either of Kyle's stories. What I said was you have two versions of a story, and one of the guys is dead. He deserves the benefit of the doubt. You know since the other is not exactly a bastion of integrity himself.

An article should be well sourced shouldn't it, as opposed to say, Kyle's words that are now, I guess, utterly factually reproduced in another article by, again, an established liar?

Not well corroborated I guess if three people had entirely different stories of the same evening per the NY'er. "Three people shared with me varied recollections of that evening: the first said that Kyle claimed to have shot thirty men on his own; according to the second, the story was that Kyle and the other sniper had shot thirty men between them; the third said that she couldn’t recall specific details." How do you explain this anomaly unless one or all are liars?

And here again, I never called the NY'er a bunch of BS artists, that's your method of judgement-if you said something that isn't true you are entirely untrustworthy on any matter thereafter.

milosz wrote:How is Mooney's weak reporting - shockingly, D Magazine doesn't bring in the best and brightest - relevant here?

Um, because you quoted the portion of the NY'er article that quoted Mooney then commented "Yeah, man, it's just like that TV show The Unit - a special help desk for cops to call to find out that they've pulled over a ninja." Because the parts of the NY'er article you quoted were of Mooney's quotes and then used in an attempt to prove your point. And you think that the NY'er, the best and brightest I suppose, uses the not so best and brightest as a source?

To use your colloquialism, just deal with it that Kyle being a liar doesn't make Ventura a truth teller. Just deal with it that somebody lying doesn't mean they lie about everything. Just deal with it that you have a real conundrum if it's shown that both parties have histories of lying and your method of verification is to find the guy who lied before.

BTW, what do you think those 150 Blackwater guys were doing in NO after Katrina?

Sua Sponte · Post by **Sua Sponte** » Thu Jun 20, 2013 1:39 am

Tirofijo wrote:New Yorker vs Hack Writer: Who cares. When did you become so interested in accuracy in journalism? The story's is bullshit anyway. That's the point.

Works for me. I think my interest in journalistic integrity was in the noise before this thread, peaked during it, and is heading back to baseline now.

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Wed Jul 30, 2014 9:26 pm

Ventura wins in $1.8M in damages from Kyle's estate.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/30/us/ventur ... ?hpt=hp_t2

Jonny Canuck · Post by **Jonny Canuck** » Wed Jul 30, 2014 9:32 pm

Grandpa's Spells wrote:Ventura wins in $1.8M in damages from Kyle's estate. http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/30/us/ventur ... ?hpt=hp_t2

God bless America!

buckethead · Post by **buckethead** » Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:02 pm

I like New Orleans but it gets hot there. Ever been there in late summer. Wow. hot.

But i am looking forward to NCIS New Orleans. Scott Bakula. Remember how good Quantum Leap was?

Grandpa's Spells · Post by **Grandpa's Spells** » Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:43 pm

Serious question: how are sniper kills confirmed? It's a little suspicious that the "deadliest sniper in US history" just so happens to be a serial fabricator of his own exploits.

IGX

Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation

Re: Jesse Ventura's reputation