(RepublicanInformer.com)- Despite all parties involved going on record to dispute NPR’s fake news report about a brewing mask dispute between Justices Sotomayor and Gorsuch, the far left, taxpayer-funded “news” outlet is standing by its story.
Last Tuesday, NPR Supreme Court reporter Nina Totenberg released a story claiming that at the request of Sonia Sotomayor, Chief Justice John Roberts asked the nine justices to wear masks in court. But, according to Totenberg’s “source,” Justice Neil Gorsuch refused, thereby forcing the 67-year-old Sotomayor to attend hearings remotely out of concern for her health.
The story had the desired effect. In no time, every news outlet was blasting the story of what a mean, selfish, disrespectful man Neil Gorsuch is for selfishly refusing to mask up out of respect for his colleague.
Blue-check “journalists” and leftwing activists on Twitter took the bait and ran with it.
Even the right-leaning click-bait site The Gateway Pundit fell for the story.
But less than 24-hours after NPR released the report, everyone involved in the story went on the record to debunk it.
Justices Gorsuch and Sotomayor released a joint statement expressing surprise at the claim that Sotomayor demanded mask-wearing, adding “It is false.” The statement noted that although Gorsuch and Sotomayor may disagree about the law at times, “we are warm colleagues and friends.”
Chief Justice Roberts also released a statement saying he did not ask Gorsuch or any other justice to wear a mask.
After the on-the-record denials, Nina Totenberg doubled down, tweeting that she stands by her source. Then NPR published a statement saying it stood by Totenberg’s story, arguing that it was “incontrovertible” that all justices started wearing masks except Gorsuch, and Sotomayor is attending hearings virtually.
Well, that might be, but that doesn’t mean Roberts asked everyone to wear masks at Sonia Sotomayor’s request and Gorsuch refused, forcing Sotomayor to attend remotely.
When everyone involved in the story says the facts are incorrect, your story is incorrect.
The source Nina Totenberg stands by is either a liar with a political motive or someone with no first-hand knowledge within the Supreme Court. Either way, Totenberg should find a better source.
