Immigration

Cable News: Where Being Loud Makes Up for Being Wrong

|

A couple weeks ago on John Stossel's show, I debated sex crimes with Wendy Murphy, the TV pundit and former assistant district attorney for Middlesex County, Massachusetts (where, like Scott Harshbarger and Martha Coakley, Murphy fought the release of Cheryl Amirault in the bogus Fells Acres sex crimes case). During the debate, Murphy threw out a statistic that only 2 percent of sex offenders are actually on sex offender registries. I'm still not sure where she got that figure. I'm also not sure what it's supposed to measure, or what conclusions we're supposed to draw from it. I still haven't been able to find any study that produces that statistic.

Last night I saw another clip from Murphy in a segment from The Daily Show. This time she was discussing birthright citizenship and the "anchor baby" issue. The Daily Show's clip was so completely outrageous, I looked up the interview that the clip was pulled from to make sure Murphy wasn't taken out of context. She wasn't, but more on that in a bit.

When I found the full interview (watch it here), I saw that Murphy again threw out a statistic that sounded preposterous on its face. At the two minute mark in the immigration debate Murphy says:

In prisons, half—half—the prisoners in California are illegal aliens.

She even pauses for effect. I can find no study, report, or government data to support that assertion. In January, the Sacramento Bee cited California state government data that put the number at 13 percent. This incoherent Fox News scare story (note that the final few graphs negate the entire premise of the article) puts the number at 12.4 percent (that figure is as of 2004, which the article says is the most recent year figures were available).

The only support I can find for Murphy's claim is this passage from a 2005 Investors Business Daily editorial:

Some estimates show illegals now make up half of California's prison population, creating a massive criminal subculture that strains state budgets and creates a nightmare for local police forces.

It isn't clear what "some estimates" means. The claim is unsourced. My guess is that the figure comes from the same number crunchers who gave us Lou Dobbs' Mexicans-and-leprosy figures. This particular IBD passage was excerpted by Newsmax in 2006, and has since been cut-and-pasted by immigration opponents on message boards all over the Internet. (Murphy's underlying premise is wrong, too. The evidence increasingly shows that border cities and states have lower crime rates than the rest of the country.)

So where did Murphy get her "half" figure? I'd hate to think an adjunct professor at the New England School of Law would carelessly pull a bogus statistic from Internet message boards, then repeat the figure to a television audience. But then, we're talking about the same woman who once said that disgraced North Carolina prosecutor Mike Nifong "deserves to be promoted and celebrated."

Murphy's continuing saturation of the cable news airwaves is nauseating. Her punditry career should have ended with the Duke lacrosse case, when she appeared all over cable news to defend Nifong and to damn the falsely accused lacrosse players, first prematurely, then even as it became clear to the rest of the world that they were innocent. (As late as last year Murphy was still griping about the lacrosse case). K.C. Johnson wrote of Murphy at the time, "In addition to the outrageous quotes highlighted above, on at least 18 occasions over the past nine months, Murphy has made demonstrably untrue statements. She also has engaged in a pattern of wholly unfounded speculation and has routinely denigrated due process." Johnson ably shows his work in that post.

Murphy never apologized for repeatedly slandering the Duke players (she once claimed, with no evidence, that they had "ripped open" the accuser's vagina). Yet her punditry career took off. She was rewarded with a book contract and dozens more TV appearances. William Anderson noted earlier this year that Murphy was recently invited onto the Today show to vouch for Catoosa County, Georgia's shameful sex abuse persecution of Tonya Craft. (Craft was acquitted on all counts.)

In a 2007 interview with the American Journalism Review, here's how Murphy justified going on TV to publicly convict potentially innocent people in spite of the evidence against them:

"Lots of folks who voiced the prosecution position in the beginning [of the Duke case] gave up because they faced a lot of criticism, and that's never my style." She notes that she's invited on cable shows to argue for a particular side. "You have to appreciate my role as a pundit is to draw inferences and make arguments on behalf of the side which I'm assigned," she says. "So of course it's going to sound like I'm arguing in favor of 'guilty.' That's the opposite of what the defense pundit is doing, which is arguing that they're innocent."

It's all theater, you see. She's just playing a part. It's fine if she slanders some people, ruins some reputations, spouts flat falsehoods, and generally dumbs down the public discourse. Because it's just entertainment. It's what pundits do.

The sad thing is, Murphy is mostly right. Cable news is about lining people up on either side and letting them go at it. There's no room for subtlety. There's certainly no time for fact-checking a guest's claims, even after the segment airs. Murphy is pretty, provocative, and confrontational. She's great TV. That she's inaccurate, slanderous, and hysterical is beside the point.

Let's get back to that segment on immigration. Here's what Murphy had to say about birthright citizenship:

I know we're talking about babies, and it's hard to be tough on babies, but let's remember, we're talking about illegal aliens coming to this country for the purpose of birthing a child, not because they love the kid, but because they want the child to provide them with the benefits of U.S. citizenship. In other words, that's not the kind of child who's going to be raised well and be a productive citizen. The child is barely loved. It's more like a thing and a commodity than a human being.

At some point you have to wonder, is it even possible to be too shameless for cable news?

NEXT: Did IMF Say USA Is DOA?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s all theater, you see. She’s just playing a part. It’s fine if she slanders some people, ruins some reputations, spouts flat falsehoods, and generally dumbs down the public discourse. Because it’s just entertainment. It’s what pundits do.

    Hey, man, she’s just an entertainer! Don’t blame Murphy if you’re too dense to appreciate her dry humor and subtle wit.

  2. Anyone who fought to stop the reversal of the judicial travesty that befell the Amirault family deserves to have their entire career destroyed and be placed in a maximum security prison where they get sodomized repeatedly under false pretenses.

    The Amirault case is one of the most embarrassing moments in Judicial malfeasance in the history of the Bay State.

    I would not piss on this lady if she were on fire.

    1. Yeah, but why is Stossel trying to end the Bush tax cuts and increase spending?

    2. I’m curious as to what being “sodomized repeatedly under false pretenses” entails…

      1. It involves use of the phrase “I love you” right before the big plunge.

  3. Last year, Ms. Murphy, in regards to the Duke lacrosse case, stated that she would be vindicated once all of the records were released. I heard her make this statement on the Tom Finneran and Todd Feinberg morning drvie time talk show, 680 AM, WRKO, Boston.

    What a BITCH!

    1. Wendy …
      all the records of the Duke Lacross Hoax HAVE been released, with the exception of the prostitute/stripper/pole dancer’s medical records.
      Crystal Gail Mangum (aka “Precious”) changed her story innumerable times. She repeatedly contradicted herself.

    2. Wendy …
      all the records of the Duke Lacross Hoax HAVE been released, with the exception of the prostitute/stripper/pole dancer’s medical records.
      Crystal Gail Mangum (aka “Precious”) changed her story innumerable times. She repeatedly contradicted herself.

  4. I’m still not sure where she got that figure.

    You saw and heard it fly out of her big fat ass. Have CATO review the video for an impartial source.

  5. At some point you have to wonder, is it even possible to be too shameless for cable news?

    No, you don’t; and no, you can’t.

  6. In other words, that’s not the kind of child who’s going to be raised well and be a productive citizen. The child is barely loved. It’s more like a thing and a commodity than a human being.

    I didn’t realize the Ramseys were illegal aliens.

    1. Seriously. As a lawyer, I would say the children of half of my co-workers fit this description.

      1. And I shouldn’t leave out my own pot-smoking, Prius-racing offspring.

        1. Could my body physically withstand the amount of pot I would have to smoke to make a Prius race entertaining.

          (Shoeseum)

  7. At some point you have to wonder, is it even possible to be too shameless for cable news?

    No.

    I’d hate to think an adjunct professor at the New England School of Law would carelessly pull a bogus statistic from Internet message boards

    She, and lots of other ‘professors’, would (assuming they didn’t pull them out of their asses). (cf. Krugmann, Paul)

    1. The proper cf. here is

      cf. Little Pauli Krugnuts.

      1. You mean Paulie Baggadonnutz? Lil’ Paulie from Amherst? What a jabroni.

      2. Pauly Krugnuts…

        1. What a schmendrick.

  8. “That she’s inaccurate, slanderous, and hysterical is beside the point.”

    You’re opening yourself up for a blindside anytime you use the word “hysterical”. I know you mean she’s hilarious as in “laughable”, but if you use it on a show somewhere, someone’s gonna blow you up for the ancient origins of “hysterical”–a woman in need of a hysterectomy. …especially when you use it to describe a woman.

    Avoid that trap.

    “In other words, that’s not the kind of child who’s going to be raised well and be a productive citizen. The child is barely loved. It’s more like a thing and a commodity than a human being.”

    She’s obviously a horrible human being, and it makes me think of Sting singing [Do the “Russians Love Their Children Too”?

    I’m trying to think of anything that’s worse than purposefully dehumanizing people of a certain ethnicity just for the sake of being a hit on television. She’s evil.

    Even if 1 in 12 babies born in the United States are born to illegal aliens, advocating for stripping them of citizenship and making them second class citizens on the basis of dehumanizing them is the definition of evil…

    We had second class citizens in this country before 1964, based on popular delusions regarding those second class citizens’ supposed inhumanity, and it’s unconscionable to advocate for that on the basis that some dehumanized group of people don’t love their children.

    She’s a sick human being.

    1. Seconding Mr. Shultz on the use of hysterical. One must be careful about the use of language so as to avoid making easy openings for derailment by opponents.

      Everything else is great though. She truly has no shame at all.

    2. I think you could make an argument that she should not reproduce solely based on her career.

    3. She’s obviously a horrible human being, and it makes me think of Sting singing [Do the “Russians Love Their Children Too”?

      You were supposed to include a Youtube link.

      Thank you for reminding me of a song that’s right up there with “Eve of Destruction” and “In the Year 2525” for most retch-inducing leftie agitprop out there.

    4. You can’t strip them of citizenship, because they’re not citizens to begin with. (Read the debates that led to the passing of the 14th Amendment.) But if you want to pay out of your pocket to support a Mexican family in Mexico, be my guest. Just save your phony moral bombast, as you pick my pocket, to pay for the welfare, medical, and education benefits for your illegal alien maid and gardener and their illegal alien kids.

      To play the Civil Rights card is not only morally obscene, but historically and juridically misleading. Blacks got equal rights through the same amendment that gave them equality before the law, in 1866, not 1964. (I thought this was a libertarian, not a socialist/communist/whatever site.)

      You’re evil and sick, and a traitor to boot.

      (I can’t believe that I’m defending Wendy Murphy, but Balko’s closing quote was the weakest part of his article.)

  9. All jokes aside, someone should sue this bitch for slander if she’s completely making shit up. Even if they didn’t win, it might force her to tone it down.

    1. She’s worse than Gloria Alred.

      1. But is she worse than Nancy Grace? It is even possible to be worse than Nancy Grace?

        1. I’m guessing I could come up with something worse than Nancy Grace, but I had a large lunch and would like to keep the contents in my stomach.

          1. then you should take up horror writing.

        2. “But is she worse than Nancy Grace?”

          Until someone literally commits suicide after being on her show, I’d say the answer is “no”.

          Oh, and although only one person I know of committed suicide after an interview with Nancy Grace, I suspect hundreds of people have killed themselves while watching Nancy Grace.

          …and their lives should weigh in on that too.

          1. “But is she worse than Nancy Grace?”

            On second thought, I don’t think Nancy Grace ever advocated creating a class of second class citizens by dehumanizing their ethnicity…

            That’s a toughie.

            They should both be shunned.

          2. Until someone literally commits suicide after being on her show, I’d say the answer is “no”.

            Wouldn’t that be the Jenny Jones show?

        3. I don’t know. Let’s see. You would need to start with random, unsubstantiated accusations couched in pretend reasonableness. Something like…

          John|8.12.10 @ 6:42PM|#

          Would it be too much to ask for the asshole who is building this thing to say that he is glad to live in a country where religious diversity is tolerated and to say the Muslim counties should be as tolerant?

          Being an American means taking it in the ass. This shithead wouldn’t life a finger for tolerance of anyone else’s views. But preys on our tolerance for his.

          But I think you need to add in some “danger to our children” stuff in your screeds to be worse than NG.

          BTW This is said about a man who wrote a book about how he is glad to live in a country where religious diversity is tolerated and to say the Muslim counties should be as tolerant.

          http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Ri…..0060582723

    2. A little roof tar and two down pillows will do the same thing for less money.

      You will need a 12 pack and some duct tape as well to make the evening easier and a little more lively.

  10. “So where did Murphy get her “half” figure? I’d hate to think an adjunct professor at the New England School of Law would carelessly pull a bogus statistic from Internet message boards, then repeat the figure to a television audience.”

    You had better start thinking it there Radly. This woman continues a long tradition of academics pulling bogus scare statistics out of their ass. Ever hear a good feminist academic talk about the percentage of women who have been “raped”?

    It is pretty much a given that anyone who is an academic and has time to go on TV, doesn’t have a clue what the hell they are talking about.

    1. The rapes stats have slowly risen from 1 in 10, to now somewhere between 1 in 4 and 1 in 3.

      I honestly don’t known if they are pulling them out of the air or applying the grossly over-expanded definitions of rape they created.

      1. In answer to your question, yes. In their mind anything short of a signed notarized consent form done by a woman who is not your wife (all marital sex is rape) is rape. And even then it is questionable because the guy might be pressuring her by threatening not to buy her shit thus voiding the consent.

        1. Scary. John’s comments that is.

          The 1 of 3 statistic is not for rape, but for sexual assault. The Justice department estimates are that 20% of US college aged women will be a victim of rape or attempted rape. The figure most often cited for rape in the US is about 3% of people, with over 90% of victims being women that puts the figure at about 5% with good research indicating that this estimate is low as it relies on rapes reported to police. Whether that gets you to 10% or 20% depends upon the estimate of under reportage.

  11. I still haven’t been able to find any study that produces that statistic

    Missed your period there Radley.

    1. Radley’s pregnant?!?

      1. Not necessarily, just late.

  12. Wendy Murphy deserves to die a slow, agonizingly painful death from ovarian cancer.

    1. She should die in a fire.

  13. Anyone who thought the Amiraults deserved to be in jail, should never be allowed to speak with any authority on any subject relating to criminal justice again. Period. I really hate the media, Fox included. Both sides recycle the same shitbags no matter how wrong or horrible said shitbags are.

  14. My only recollection of Wendy Murphy is on Stossel’s show. I thought she was an idiot. Whatever side she ends up “punditting” for, she represents idiocy quite well. Keep up the good work, Wendy.

    1. Stossel needs to get her and that blond chick named MeMe on at the same time. He could call it the Ultimate Moron Championship I.

      1. Listening to MeMe talk makes me want to blow my brains out. She is such a bitch. When they had her on the recent P&T Bullshit they didn’t really need to make fun of her because she is worse than any parody.

    2. MeMe and Wendy are powerful, persuasive ‘strawwomen’ which should make sense in a world that delivers idiot political discourse on a regular basis and explains the successful careers of Loretta Sanchez, Sheila Jackson-Lee and Babs Boxer.

  15. At some level this really isn’t worth getting upset about. It is just theater. Being angry at this woman is like being angry at the Iron Sheik. Best to treat her like a rash and hope she goes away.

    1. Best to treat her like a rash and hope she goes away.

      Yup, just like the Iron Sheik.

  16. Is this a slam at Stossel for putting her on his show? Should it be?

    1. Yes. But in Stossel’s defense, you tell me a person he could have on that would defend sex offender registries that is not just as crazy as this broad.

      1. You’re right, but that’s part of the problem. The idea that every issue has two (and only two!) equally valid perspectives perpetuates sports-bar politics as much as anything else.

        If your position can only be represented by a mendacious nitwit, how ’bout we don’t bother with validating that perspective on our show today?

        1. but then libertarians would never get on cable news!

          disclaimer: I don’t think the good folks here at reason are mendacious nitwits, but one man’s fringe looney who wants to legalize drugs is another man’s hero.

      2. I disagree. Sadly, most people (esp. women)have an irrational hatred of older man with younger woman. It gets played out in the sex-offender list to some degree. Bring on the milfy cougars. They will finally bring sense to the table.

  17. I know we’re talking about babies, and it’s hard to be tough on babies, but let’s remember, we’re talking about illegal aliens coming to this country for the purpose of birthing a child, not because they love the kid, but because they want the child to provide them with the benefits of U.S. citizenship. In other words, that’s not the kind of child who’s going to be raised well and be a productive citizen. The child is barely loved. It’s more like a thing and a commodity than a human being.

    Wow. I do believe that’s the broadest brush I ever saw anybody try to paint with. I’d congratulate her, if I weren’t so appalled.

  18. It isn’t clear what “some estimates” means.

    That’s WikiPedia speak for “some friends I know”.

    1. It isn’t clear what “some estimates” means.

      It means “A friend of my brother-in-law’s co-worker knows some guy who said”

  19. It’s a well established scientific fact that 78% of statistics are made up on the spot.

    1. I heart irony. Nice one.

    2. 78%? I absolutely maybe heard that the somewhere between approximately 0% and 100% of scientific facts are neither necessarily scientific nor factual, except, according to some estimates, in some cases. But of course that depends on whether the purported facts are coming from over the border. By contrast, here at home, it is a well-known fact that, on the other hand, some estimates put the figure more accurately between 100% and 0%. nd you can quote me on that, but don’t quote me.

  20. Her punditry career should have ended with the Duke lacrosse case, when she appeared all over cable news to defend Nifong and to damn the falsely accused lacrosse players, first prematurely, then even as it became clear to the rest of the world that they were innocent. (As late as last year Murphy was still griping about the lacrosse case)

    So, she’s different than the fine women of Feministing, Jezebel, and any and all other blogs which claim to give a feminist perspective… how, exactly?

  21. A quick Google search shows that there’s another Wendy Murphy who is a Patriot’s cheerleader. I believe there is a 100% chance that I would enjoy watching her on TV more than Wendy Murphy, the well-known anchor baby hater.

    1. I just wasted five minutes trying to find a picture of her. WTF? I’m a nobody and can find a picture of myself online in about five seconds. How is it that I can’t find a picture of a (presumably) hot cheerleader for a professional fucking football team?

      1. Time spent looking for pix of hot cheerleaders is never wasted.

    2. This Wendy Murphy also the cheerleader. Supposedly with the Patriots for one year in the 80s. Internet details are scant.

  22. Murphy threw out a statistic that only 2 percent of sex offenders are actually on sex offender registries.

    If you include practitioners of the “male gaze” and other various and sundry thought criminals who inhabit the rape culture, that number is probably high.

    1. When feminist ideology procreates with right wing social conservatism, it makes for a really scary baby.

    2. When I lust after ‘underage’ girls, it is only with my once-upon-a-time boy body…and that makes it all okay.

    1. After that one you put on the other thread of that fat cow from hell, I am not looking. fool me once.

      1. Click it. You know you want to. Cleeeek it.

        1. My firewall blocks it. Thank God. It was sitting there taunting me.

  23. I’d hate to think an adjunct professor at the New England School of Law would carelessly pull a bogus statistic from Internet message boards, then repeat the figure to a television audience.

    I work in academia. Very few professors bother to check their facts. If it confirms their prejudices, it must be true.

    1. If it says PHD after your name, that is enough.

    2. I guess that’s the disadvantage of having an engineering degree. When I hand numbers to people they’re either correct to the best of my knowledge and ability, or labeled as a SWAG and treated as such.

    3. I don’t think that’s true of the broad term “professors.” I’ve seen some shady numbers come out of poli sci professors, but most economics and business professors I see at least check the numbers that might be considered outliers or state a possible bias if they think there is one.

      I called a Poli sci professor on his numbers using a published paper from an econometric professor at the same school. The argument was short, not resolved, and never discussed again after I emailed him the paper. You’d think he might have walked the 2 blocks to ask the guy who pretty much destroyed his argument and get some position, he didn’t.

      1. …get some insight into the reason his position and numbers were wrong…

        I swear I’m buying myself a shortbus.

  24. I know we’re talking about babies, and it’s hard to be tough on babies, but let’s remember, we’re talking about illegal aliens coming to this country for the purpose of birthing a child, not because they love the kid, but because they want the child to provide them with the benefits of U.S. citizenship.

    So the parents only pretend to love the baby for EIGHTEEN LONG YEARS just until the very moment the parents become US Citizens?

  25. Lying happens every minute of every cable-news day. It’s what they do, and most people know it. Not that the people are not averse to spreading those same lies when they happen to justify and reinforce their own biases and political philosophy.

  26. Shouldn’t that be cable “news” channels in scare quotes. It’s not the duel of the babbling opinionheads actually constitutes news.

    1. Ok, let me try that again:

      Shouldn’t that be cable “news” channels in scare quotes? It’s not like the duel of the babbling opinionheads actually constitutes news.

      There, much better…

  27. Carless
    Undeserving
    Nitwit
    Talking

    1. And what if she has a car?

  28. Maybe she meant only 2 percent of the sex offenders in the entire history of sex offensing…

    1. yeah, i looked it up. there are 716,725 registerd sex offenders in the us. I guess she is saying about 11% of the poplulation is sex offenders. 38.5 million.

  29. During the debate, Murphy threw out a statistic that only 2 percent of sex offenders are actually on sex offender registries. I’m still not sure where she got that figure. I’m also not sure what it’s supposed to measure, or what conclusions we’re supposed to draw from it. I still haven’t been able to find any study that produces that statistic.

    Did you look in her ass? That’s the only place shit like that comes from.

  30. I wonder if she’s ever taken a strap-on to Mary Beth Buchanan.

  31. From what I’ve seen of the neo-knownothing movement, Lou Dobbs could say 90% of immigrants are Taliban baby-eaters from Venus, and the rank and file would take it as gospel…

  32. Wendy murphy is fighting crime. the numbers are not as important as the drift. As a card carrying liberal i object to the large numbers of dealers coming over the Arizona border. the Governor was right and nobody ever dropped dead from pulling out a few papers. As for terrorist babies, no probably not, but what stops the parents of these newborn citizens from becoming citizens themselves? nothing it is fairly easy. and why a mosque at Ground Zero if people get uncomfortable ? i have hired people here on visas and they want whatever they can get so they can go home. A green card? too much trouble. One gal from europe on a work visa said they “laugh at us ” and this from a country we liberated in WW2 and gave Marshall Plan to.I fired her! At this point i want to stop aid, wars, charity, and turn our attention to saving this beautiful country.
    Muriel Schnierow

  33. A more complete list, not all, of her BS can be found here, there are some real gems: http://justdamn-vdog.blogspot……s-red.html

  34. “I’m still not sure where she got that figure.”

    I am pretty sure she pulled it out of the same place she used to anchor herself to the chair during the interview.

    Next time you meet Wendy Murphy, if you want to get her to lose her cool, bring up her infamous statement about how she “never met a false rape case” and Nifong. Every time I comment on her articles, I bring it up. Works like a charm. Somehow between all those TV interviews, she’s STILL trying to explain herself to bloggers commenting on her articles.

    http://www.patriotledger.com/o…..t-critical

    Feel free to check it out. She is good for a laugh! And one last thing, congratulate her for winning a 2009 Shiitake Award!

  35. What sells?

    1. Sex
    2. Taboo
    3. Nauseating

  36. She comes out of Massachusetts, so what else is new?
    Massachusetts has long led the nation in “social reform” laws purportedly well-intended that turn out to be short-sighted, and devastating to innocent people. Our courts hand out court orders and restraining orders like candy. In this state which boasts some of the finest law schools and one of the toughest bar exams in the country, it is almost impossible to get honest legal representation in divorce court or family court or probate any criminal proceeding in which a certain set of marginally trained and minimally supervised people called social workers claim an interest.
    But speaking of lying lawyers, what of what of our unprincipled president. I couldn’t vote for the guy after he brazenly reversed himself on the FISA telecom immunity bill three days after he secured the nomination manifesting his complete contempt for liberals and civil libertarians and the essence of constitutional law? Libertarians have little to be smug about — you are leaving your ideas to dreamy academics like Rand Paul and overt nut-cases. You haven’t done a good job of persuading.

  37. Bart Torvik of the Gillette-Torvik blog offers a defense of Murphy. http://gillette-torvik.blogspot.com/

  38. people still watch info-newstainment channels? people expect info-newstainment to be anything other than opinion? wow, i thought i was naive.

  39. The survival of Wendy Murphy’s television career after the Duke case has always been a mystery to me. She exposed her true self – a nihilistic bloodthirsty witch – but the cable show bookers keep inviting her back.

  40. How on earth does this C**T make it on TV? Shame on her, and the mindless producers who employ her.

  41. we’re talking about the same woman who once said that disgraced North Carolina prosecutor Mike Nifong “deserves to be promoted and celebrated.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.