On Tuesday's Hardball on MSNBC, substitute host David Gregory pressed civil rights activist and Reverend Al Sharpton over his double standard in condemning Don Imus's racist comments while refusing to apologize for his own role in the Tawana Brawley false rape accusations against white police officers. Gregory: "You didn't go as far as apologizing to the people who you hurt through that incident. This was, the courts have concluded, a hoax, accusations against whites by a young black woman about a race-based assault. A court ordered you to pay restitution for a defamation suit against people whose reputation you hurt. You didn't apologize for that."
By contrast, as already reported by NewsBuster Mark Finkelstein, during Tuesday morning's Today show, NBC's Matt Lauer only vaguely referred to Sharpton's racist past without filling in viewers on any of the horrific details. Lauer: "You've been around a long time, and you have also, by the way, been the subject of controversy and criticism over the years from various groups. You're also a minister, and in that role you preach the teachings of the Bible. And one of the teachings in the Bible is forgiveness. How does forgiveness apply to Don Imus?" Neither Gregory nor Lauer raised details of how Sharpton on two occasions incited anti-Semitic protests in New York City which led to stabbings, shootings and arson resulting in the murders of eight people. (Transcripts follows)
As Gregory hosted MSNBC's Hardball, he pressed Sharpton's apparent lack of forgiveness toward Imus after the talk radio host's apology. The MSNBC host asked Sharpton about his views on redemption. Gregory: "Let me ask you a question based on your standing in the community, as a politician, as a former candidate for the presidency. Do you believe in redemption?"
After Sharpton contended that he did believe in redemption and argued that he had forgiven a man who had once stabbed him, Gregory moved to point out the civil rights activist's hypocrisy, evoking agitation in Sharpton as Gregory pressed him on the subject.
Gregory: "But in your case, as critics would point out, you didn't go as far as Imus in a controversy that had to do with you and the Tawana Brawley case, a woman who a court-"
Sharpton: "Nor did I castigate a whole race of people-"
Gregory: "I'm sorry, if I could, sir, could I just-"
Sharpton: "Nor did I castigate a whole race of people-"
Gregory: "I just want to finish the question. You didn't go as far as apologizing to the people who you hurt through that incident. This was, the courts have concluded, a hoax, accusations against whites by a young black woman about a race-based assault. A court ordered you to pay restitution for a defamation suit against people whose reputation you hurt. You didn't apologize for that."
Sharpton: "And I still don't apologize. This was a case, as you said, of a young lady accusing people of doing something [to] her. To compare that to a man castigating a whole race. Nobody came to him like this young lady came to me. He was not talking about did he believe in a case. The extremes people will go to compare an individual case, a civil case that, when the courts ruled-"
Gregory: "Right. I'm not, but, Reverend, I'm not comparing the cases. I just want to ask the question."
Sharpton: "Wait a minute, you wanted me to let you ask it. Let me answer it."
Gregory: "Okay."
Sharpton: "And to compare that shows how far people will reach. This man was not talking about a specific case that was information somebody gave him, whether you believe the information or not. This man was talking about a race of people and a sex of people. There is absolutely no comparison. And when the courts ruled against us, we paid that. That case happened 20 years ago. We're not talking about that. What you're talking about is maligning a race and him not having to pay for it."
Gregory: "Well, I'm not talking about that. The question has to do with redemption-"
Sharpton: "Oh, I thought you were the one talking. Maybe somebody else-"
Gregory: "No, I don't think that's fair to talk about that. I'm talking about amnesty. I'm asking a question about your belief in redemption and people whose reputations you hurt, people that you hurt, you haven't apologized for, and you have been a strong person in the middle of this debate."
Below are more of the relevant transcripts from the Tuesday April 10 Today and Hardball shows:
From the Tuesday April 10 Today show:
Matt Lauer: "You've been around a long time, and you have also, by the way, been the subject of controversy and criticism over the years from various groups. You're also a minister, and in that role you preach the teachings of the Bible. And one of the teachings in the Bible is forgiveness. How does forgiveness apply to Don Imus?"
Al Sharpton: "I think that forgiveness is in order. I think that if he meets with those young ladies and they want to forgive him, that is their moral choice to do, and maybe the right thing to do. A man stabbed me once for leading a march that he disagreed with, a man of another race. I went to jail and met with him and said I forgave him. But I didn't say he shouldn't do time for what he did."
From the Tuesday April 10 Hardball:
David Gregory: "Let me ask you a question based on your standing in the community, as a politician, as a former candidate for the presidency. Do you believe in redemption?"
Al Sharpton: "Oh, absolutely. I think that there has to be redemption, as I said this morning on the Today show. A man of a different race, a white man, stabbed me once for leading a nonviolent march. I not only forgave him, I went to jail and met with him and forgave him. But I didn't say he shouldn't pay for the crime. There's a difference between a redemption and amnesty. A lot of people are not talking about redemption. They're talking about amnesty."
Gregory: "But in your case, as critics would point out, you didn't go as far as Imus in a controversy that had to do with you and the Tawana Brawley case, a woman who a court-"
Sharpton: "Nor did I castigate a whole race of people-"
Gregory: "I'm sorry, if I could, sir, could I just-"
Sharpton: "Nor did I castigate a whole race of people-"
Gregory: "I just want to finish the question. You didn't go as far as apologizing to the people who you hurt through that incident. This was, the courts have concluded, a hoax, accusations against whites by a young black woman about a race-based assault. A court ordered you to pay restitution for a defamation suit against people whose reputation you hurt. You didn't apologize for that."
Sharpton: "And I still don't apologize. This was a case, as you said, of a young lady accusing people of doing something [to] her. To compare that to a man castigating a whole race. Nobody came to him like this young lady came to me. He was not talking about did he believe in a case. The extremes people will go to compare an individual case, a civil case that, when the courts ruled-"
Gregory: "Right. I'm not, but, Reverend, I'm not comparing the cases. I just want to ask the question."
Sharpton: "Wait a minute, you wanted me to let you ask it. Let me answer it."
Gregory: "Okay."
Sharpton: "And to compare that shows how far people will reach. This man was not talking about a specific case that was information somebody gave him, whether you believe the information or not. This man was talking about a race of people and a sex of people. There is absolutely no comparison. And when the courts ruled against us, we paid that. That case happened 20 years ago. We're not talking about that. What you're talking about is maligning a race and him not having to pay for it."
Gregory: "Well, I'm not talking about that. The question has to do with redemption-"
Sharpton: "Oh, I thought you were the one talking. Maybe somebody else-"
Gregory: "No, I don't think that's fair to talk about that. I'm talking about amnesty. I'm asking a question about your belief in redemption and people whose reputations you hurt, people that you hurt, you haven't apologized for, and you have been a strong person in the middle of this debate."
Sharpton: "But if I felt, if I felt, if I believed, if I believed that young lady was telling the truth, as I do, then what am I apologizing for? And how do you compare that to a man condemning a whole race? Did I go and condemn a whole race of people? Or did we say we believe this young lady's statement about an individual. I don't know how you even compare the two."
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
No one can definitely prove t
April 11, 2007 - 07:59 ET by securityNo one can definitely prove the Brawley case is a hoaz - because there were no recordings nor admission of guilt by her - in IMUS' case there are recordings and an admission
NO ONE CAN PROVE? Well, for
April 11, 2007 - 08:11 ET by rimskyNO ONE CAN PROVE? Well, for sure I can't, but I'll bet there's somebody out there that can surely make a very, very, very strong case for the Brawley thing being a hoax. Whatever.. Sharpton is so transparent in everything he does, and he knows it, and he knows we know it, and he knows we know he knows it.. I could go on an on. Sharpton is a demogogue, in a shark skin suit, with nothing but prime time exposure in his frontal lobe.
I know, it's the eeeeeeeevi
April 11, 2007 - 08:18 ET by sarcasmoI know, it's the eeeeeeeevil Wikipedia & therefore it might be wrong (as if other news sources are all that hot...) but please read this. I think she ran-off with $300K and has an outstanding warrant, along with her mom, in NY. Sharpton's continuing excuse is that he believed her. I don't, nor do I believe how much the idiot-media pays adoring attention to that charlatan, Reverend Bacon.
JMR
there is an outstanding warra
April 11, 2007 - 09:41 ET by pmohbuckthere is an outstanding warrant and her location is known ... why can't or won't they go after her?
"At some point, the 'public' has to contribute more to society than just exercising its rights" - [PMOH]Buck
It's about like the OJ verd
April 11, 2007 - 10:01 ET by sarcasmoIt's about like the OJ verdict & Nicole's family, I think. You need to be as unpopular as Joe Francis and to go nuts in a court-mandated negotiation to get in trouble over a civil-not-criminal issue, and even though she made off with all that loot, NY's warrant only cares about her non-appearance. (But IANAL, so take all I say with an entire shaker of salt!)
JMR
You may be right about Tawana
April 11, 2007 - 08:15 ET by Gat New YorkYou may be right about Tawana Brawley, but I guess his use of the phrases Diamond Merchants, Bloodsucking Jews, White Interlopers and Jew Bastards which were documented just did not come to Gregory’s mind at the time. And I don’t recall ever hearing an apology to Jews for those remarks.
"You may be right abou
April 11, 2007 - 15:59 ET by ckc1227"You may be right about Tawana Brawley, but I guess his use of the phrases Diamond Merchants, Bloodsucking Jews, White Interlopers and Jew Bastards which were documented just did not come to Gregory’s mind at the time. And I don’t recall ever hearing an apology to Jews for those remarks."
He also called the Central Park Jogger who was gang raped by a bunch of black guys a whore. I don't recall ever hearing an apology for that either. And yet, for some reason, those in the media continue to give this man a stage. That's one thing I don't like about Bill O'reilly. He speaks about this man as if he is deserving of respect. Sorry, he doesn't get mine, and Bill loses some.
I am hoping that this and the
April 11, 2007 - 16:43 ET by Gat New YorkI am hoping that this and the Duke case will be a tipping point to stop this double standard when it comes to racism. Just because you are Black does not give you rights others do not have. What is done to Imus should be done to Sharpton, to Jackson, and to every slanderer of the Duke lacross students. Enough!
Demand a liberal stop using d
April 11, 2007 - 16:47 ET by dscottDemand a liberal stop using double standards? You might as well ask them to be conservatives or listen to reason or actually do a little research before they open their yaps.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Gat and ckc...That is exactly
April 11, 2007 - 16:52 ET by bigtimerGat and ckc...
That is exactly what I have been trying to say elsewhere in other posts!
Where is the outrage!
Hypocrites all!
Well, apparently you reject t
April 11, 2007 - 08:27 ET by GalvanicWell, apparently you reject the findings of a civil court, which ruled against Sharpton and ordered him to pay damages to the former DA that he claimed --- and it was Sharpton as mouthpiece for Brawley --- had raped her and left her in a trash bag with excrement smeared on her person. The court ruled the Brawley story false.
And apparently, the New York State Bar didn't have any doubts, as they disbarred Sharpton's sidekick attorneys --- Mason and Maddox --- for misconduct in the case.
Brawley, it turned out, ran away from home where she apparently had an abusive parent, and concocted the kidnapping story in an apparent attempt to escape the wrath at home.
It's interesting that Sharpton says he doesn't need to apologize for something he believes to be true. Does that mean that if Imus believed the Rutgers women's basketball team was "nappy-haired ho's," he shouldn't have to apologize?
Break-break: I salute an MSMer for whom I've held no respect in the past: David Gregory. While Vieira and Lauer tip-toe around the transgressions of Jackson and Sharpton, Gregory found cajones to hold Sharpton's feet to the fire and point out the hyprocrisy. Sharpton has been a race-baiter for two decades, and while most of the MSM has legitimized him by forgetting his unrepentent past, it is refreshing to see someone like Gregory get it right for once.
Of course, if Gregory's act
April 11, 2007 - 08:32 ET by sarcasmoOf course, if Gregory's actually correct in his grilling, he ought to be asking himself and his bosses the same question a lot of NewsBusters were asking yesterday: "So why is Walter Williams a nonperson on TV?? How come only-Limbaugh occasionally (all-too-rarely...) puts him on the air?"
JMR
There's no telling whether th
April 11, 2007 - 09:47 ET by GalvanicThere's no telling whether that thought has crossed Gregory's mind. We know why black columnists and commentators like Williams, Larry Elder, Prof. John McWhorter, and even the highly respected Thomas Sowell, rarely get on the airwaves of the MSM: they've been blackballed and marginalized by people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
Jackson -- and now more frequently Sharpton -- has always been the Spokesman of African-America in the eyes of the MSM, because (1) he knew MLK and many othe civil rights leaders, and (2) he made himself available, especially and later exclusively, to those media outlets that didn't piss him off. His stature has shrunk to some extent since the revelation of his illegitimate child and the strong possibility that the mother was on Rainbow/PUSH's federally-subsidized payroll. That gave Sharpton an opening to emerge as the new Jackson.
It's interesting to listen to call-in programs like C-Span and hear many self-identified African-American callers disavow Jackson and Sharpton as community leaders.
Is that a point security ?
April 11, 2007 - 09:16 ET by SportPoliticsIs that really a point security ?
[Some accounts leave out important evidence that just adds to the idea that she lie about the whole thing. Some accounts say that she was missing for four days, and others say that a woman while cleaning saw Brawley get in a garbage bag and do this stuff to herself. Brawley later claimed that she had been abducted and raped by six white law enforcement officers.
On October 6, 1988 the Grand Jury Report was released. The Grand Jury said that there “was no medical or forensic evidence that a sexual assault was commited on Tawana Brawley.” They also said “no plant material was found on Ms. Brawley or her clothing” even though she said she was assaulted in the woods. They also said that “items and instruments necessary to create the condition in which Tawana Brawley appeared on Saturday, November 28, were present inside of or in the immediate vicinity” of that apartment.
The case against the police officers never went to trial because in 1988 the grand jury decided that nothing every happened to Brawley, that Brawley had lied about the whole thing. Ten years later in 1997 Brawley’s former advisors Al Sharpton, Alton Maddox, and lawyer C. Vernon Mason were sued by Steven Pagones. Pagones is one of the six men accused by Brawley for raping her in 1987. He was a local prosecutor and fit the vague description he sought damages for defamation. On July 13, 1998 after a eight month long trial a jury found the advisors liable. The jury awarded Pagones $345,000 in damages. Sharpton paid $65,000, Madox $95,000, and Mason $185,000. Brawley changed her name to Maryam Muhammad. ]
Changed her name to Islam. Then the false "child molestation " cases swept the nation for years.
NO medical evidence of a rape, let alone a six banger. Gosh, that's a tough call. No woodsy material evidence for a rape in the woods. At least she didn't have 4 or 5 OTHER mens semen in her, like ahh... hmmm... the one raped by the "the dukes" of late...
Hmmm. LOL Gosh, anyone could be lying... and creating the conspiracy...
offended by comments vs. accu
April 11, 2007 - 09:37 ET by pmohbuckoffended by comments vs. accused of rape ... which is worse, regardless of anyone's admission.
sharpton's role in the brawley case is similar to the 88 faculty members' assignment of guilt to the duke lacrosse players ... disgusting, shameless accusations without any merit ... and while the accused try to put their lives back together, the race baiters move on to the next event.
"At some point, the 'public' has to contribute more to society than just exercising its rights" - [PMOH]Buck
I think Sharpton's over-the-t
April 11, 2007 - 13:52 ET by GalvanicI think Sharpton's over-the-top behavior during the Brawley matter was far worse than 88 faculty members condemning the Duke lacrosse players. For one thing, Sharpton had grabbed the stage and was controlling the action. He wouldn't let authorities interview the alleged victim. He wouldn't let the alleged victim talk to the press. Sharpton, Mason, and Maddox recounted what they'd allegedly been told by Brawley --- and no doubt embellished it with their own 'facts' --- day after day in front of the cameras. It was ugly.
It boggles my mind why Imus w
April 11, 2007 - 09:11 ET by the_red_stateIt boggles my mind why Imus would go onto Sharpton's radio show and grovel. He should have known he was going to be set up. Sharpton is a clever race & poverty pimp whose very existence depends on fanning the flames of incidents such as this. Otherwise, he gets no press and no publicity...and no one pays attention to him...he lives for moments such as these. Imus made a stupid, callous, hurtful comment for which he has apologized and been disciplined by his employers. Apparently that is not enough for the Reverend...who wants him canned. I have yet to see Sharpton apologize for any of his bigoted comments regarding Jews...so what makes him the final arbiter of apologies and punishment? And where is the outrage when "rap music" uses similar language (and worse) to defile and insult women? Congrats to Gregory for having the guts to confront James Brown's former road manager (yes, that's right) on these matters.
The_red_state
April 11, 2007 - 13:57 ET by misterbill"Sharpton is a clever race & poverty pimp whose very existence depends on fanning the flames of incidents such as this."
Like most truths-pithy-to the point. I read your entire post, but that sentence describes Mr. Sharpton.
Where ’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land?
Sir Walter Scott
And I still don't apologize.T
April 11, 2007 - 09:49 ET by dscottAnd I still don't apologize.
That could be a problem for you on judgement day Al Sharpton, those who cling to their sins will be damned by them. We will forgive a racist like you Al if you will but confess your sins. I take it you never thought about the words to "Amazing Grace", written by John Newton, a former slave trader. Obviously, if you don't think you have done anything wrong, then you are "self" justified but not by God. The sinless need no Grace. While I dislike Imus's rhetoric, he has done way more than Al when it comes to acknowledging his hateful actions. Ironic isn't it, Al Sharpton a so called minister is unable to extend forgiveness to Imus and equally unable to ask for it himself. Now that's just ironic.
So Al Sharpton do you remember the words to Amazing Grace? Just in case you have forgotten, I will copy them here below: Come on Al, sing it!!!
Amazing Grace! How sweet the sound!
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, But now am found
Was blind but now I see.
'Twas grace that taught my heart to fear.
And grace my fears relieved;
How precious did that grace appear
The hour I first believed!
Through many dangers, toils and snares
I have already come.
'Tis grace hath brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home!
The Lord has promised good to me,
His word my hope secures;
He will my shield and portion be,
As long as life endures.
Yes, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease;
I shall possess within the vail,
A life of joy and peace!
The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God who called me here below
Shall be forever mine!
In evil long I took delight
Unawed by shame or fear;
'Til a new object met my sight,
And stopped my wild career.
I saw One hanging on a tree,
In agonies and blood;
Who fixed His languid eyes on me
As near His cross I stood.
Sure, never 'til my latest breath,
Can I forget that look
It seemed to charge me with His death
Though not a word He spoke.
My conscience owned and felt the guilt,
And plunged me in despair;
I saw my sins His blood had shed,
And helped to nail Him there.
Alas, I knew not what I did,
But all my tears were vain;
Where could my trembling soul be hid,
For I the Lord had slain!
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Gregory, Sharpton
April 11, 2007 - 10:30 ET by CellaMy comments on this matter are in the Washington Times today.
See the small blurb in "Inside the Beltway".
While I agree with your com
April 11, 2007 - 13:11 ET by sarcasmoWhile I agree with your comments about Anus, the good stuff's on page 1. Paul Wolfowitz apparently can't keep it in his pants...I'm shocked. (NOT!!!!)
JMR
I made this point previously
April 11, 2007 - 11:20 ET by Gat New YorkI made this point previously I and many others feel terrible that the young girls on Rutgers basketball team had to be characterized this way. They didn’t do anything to deserve this. Nor did their parents. Their university came immediately to their defense as did Black leaders like Jesse Jackson.
Later today there will be a press conference in Durham when the NC Attorney General will be dismissing all charges lodged againt those three young Duke students a year ago. Duke University did not come to their defense and kicked them out before any evidence was presented. In fact tensions were escalated by Duke allowing 88 second tier teachers to slander and defame these kids. And Jesse Jackson? He came down to also slander these students and gave a scholarship to the accuser.
There really are two standards in this country and it is time to set the record straight.
To start Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have no moral authority to speak for anyone about defaming people after their own actions.
Was not necessarily "race-based"
April 11, 2007 - 12:56 ET by exLibI was listening to a radio program yesterday and the clip of Imus was played.
As it turns out Imus was COMPARING The Rutgers team to the Tenessee Team.
Granted it was coarse and foul and all that, but he was comparing one team's appearance to the other.
On both the Tennesse Team and The Rutgers team there are white and black women and maybe even women of other ethnicity.
Also, The coach of Rutgers already castigated out society for even considering the possibility of "Forgive and Forget" So I assume she will not be forgiving Imus.