Latina Lista: News from the Latinx perspective > Life Issues > Women > Whatever Happened to Rebecca Aguilar?

Whatever Happened to Rebecca Aguilar?


(In an ongoing miscarriage of justice that defies reason, Dallas-based Latina reporter, and my friend, Rebecca Aguilar is starting the new year still under suspension from her FOX News station. Her crime? Doing her job. The following is a column I wrote distributed by Hispanic Link through Scripps News Service.)
There was nothing extraordinary about the news footage showing a neatly dressed female reporter, umbrella in one hand, microphone in the other, calmly standing between the open car door and the unseen driver behind the wheel in the middle of a sporting goods store parking lot.

FOX News reporter Rebecca Aguilar

In fact, if the sound had been muted, you would have wondered what was so newsworthy about it. There was no mad chase or a microphone thrust in a face or even the subject trying to slam the door shut to get away from the reporter.
The reporter was just doing her job: asking hard questions of a man who, in separate incidents in the span of just three weeks, had killed two people who were burglarizing his machine shop and welding business, which also happened to be his home.
The reason why the reporter was questioning the man now was because he had called her to tell her that he was buying a new gun to replace the one the police took away from him after he killed the second intruder.
Because of that infamous interview, the reporter, a 26-year, award-winning industry veteran, received an indefinite suspension from her station.

What was the big deal?
The big deal was that the man was 70 years old.
The old showbiz adage: Never work with animals and small children evidently extends to senior citizens, too. That’s the only rational explanation for the initial torrent of public hostility that rained down on Dallas-based, Fox News affiliate reporter, my friend Rebecca Aguilar.
Dallas viewers, bloggers and media critics swarmed in vilifying Aguilar for the interview when it first aired. They have taken her questions out of context to paint her as a cold-hearted journalist.
They have been especially quick to focus criticism on Aguilar for asking this two-time shooter: “Are you a trigger-happy kind of person? Is that what you wanted to do, shoot to kill?”
They conveniently disregard how she balanced her hard line of questioning by following it with the sympathetic: “So basically you were scared for your life?”
The last thing Aguilar expected after such a routine interview was that her professional career would be at risk
It has been more than two months since Aguilar was suspended from KDFW TV. At first, only Aguilar was disciplined but when red flags were thrown by her supporters as to why she was singled out from a team of superiors who authorized the story for broadcast, other reprimands were dished out — two weeks later. The managing editor for that segment received a 3-day suspension, while the editor was suspended for two days and the cameraman got a write-up that went into his file. They all went back to work, or never left, except Aguilar.
The question needs to be asked. Why?
Media analysts, fellow industry colleagues and even the online site of the eminent journalism school, the Poynter Institute, have all chimed in with their analyses of Aguilar’s interview and their disbelief at her station’s extreme disciplinary measure.
All agree that the interview was “very even-handed,” and she treated the subject with “respect.”
In a Poynter Online interview with Forrest Carr, news director at WFTX-TV in Cape Coral, Fla., and a 2002 Poynter Ethics Fellow, said, “My thoughts are that her conduct toward the shooter was not as her critics described it. Her words were polite. Her demeanor was professional. Her questions, which set off the critics, were for the most part appropriate.”
So, why all this continued hostility?
It might have something to do with the fact that the shooter is white.
A quick scan of the latest comments and blog entries show that what started out as the public’s knee-jerk reaction to a routine story that had a sympathetic perpetrator has evolved into the latest example of a backlash against Hispanics stemming from the emotional immigration debate gripping the country.
Comments such as, “They should check this Mexican reporter’s green card. She is most certain an illegal.” or “I say send this guy down to our border to help out with national security. Maybe if he was there we wouldn’t have to put up with unbelievable people like Rebecca Aguilar,” are indicative of what is transpiring in this country and fueling a story that ceased being newsworthy a long time ago.
It’s one thing for Aguilar’s station to listen and respond to its viewers’ wishes, but her continued suspension only endorses a racially charged extremist viewpoint and trivializes the career of an individual who was honored just last year as the National Association of Hispanic Journalists’ “Broadcast Journalist of the Year.”
At this writing, both sides have hired lawyers.
In the meantime, Aguilar is left to wonder what she did so wrong in this one interview, singled out from the thousands she conducted throughout her career, that has jeopardized her professional future.
It’s a thought on the minds of a lot of us.

Related posts


  • yave begnet
    December 31, 2007 at 11:17 am

    Journalists may want to consider the possibility that they will not be able to do objective reporting free from censorship at Fox News, which has made establishing its partisan bona fides a key part of its business plan.

  • publius
    December 31, 2007 at 12:58 pm

    “It might have something to do with the fact that the shooter is white.
    Comments such as, “They should check this Mexican reporter’s green card. She is most certain an illegal.” or “I say send this guy down to our border to help out with national security. Maybe if he was there we wouldn’t have to put up with unbelievable people like Rebecca Aguilar,” are indicative of what is transpiring in this country and fueling a story that ceased being newsworthy a long time ago.”
    I suggest that you have more evidence before you start calling their motivation racist. Your opions carry weight in the Hispanic community, so what you say may be passed on as fact, when it isn’t. Also, pulling the race card without proof makes you sound like the boy who cried wolf if you’re wrong. Pulled too often, the race card becomes worthless in effecting your goal. People become anesthenized to its impact.

  • Liquidmicro
    December 31, 2007 at 8:31 pm

    From reading your link to Poynter online, it seems they all pretty much agree that Mrs. Aguilar ambushed Mr. Walton.
    Mrs. Burdick, I think sums it all up with the following:
    “Burdick said there are steps Aguilar could have taken to make the interview seem like less of an ambush and more of a purposeful interview.
    Burdick suggested Aguilar could have added a line of copy explaining that Walton had agreed to the interview as long as he wasn’t on camera; knelt down beside Walton’s car rather than standing in front of it and giving off the impression that she was blocking him inside of it; and asked more open-ended questions such as “Can you tell me why you were crying?” instead of “Are those tears of remorse?”
    “The perception created here was that a frail, older man was trapped in his car by an aggressive reporter,” said Burdick. “I suspect that’s not true and [that it’s] unfair to Ms. Aguilar.””

  • Horace
    January 1, 2008 at 9:02 am

    “……….which has made establishing its partisan bona fides a key part of its business plan.”
    This is typical of overreaching of Yave, as if he were privvy to Fox’s business plan. No, “I suspect”, which would all for a certain amount of error in understanding, just abosulte knowledge.

  • Evelyn
    January 1, 2008 at 7:27 pm

    After doing some research on this issue, I tend to agree with Liquid, and his statement, “it seems they all pretty much agree that Mrs Aguilar ambushed Mr Walton.”
    After watching the video of her report, and reading the blogs, it’s clear to see, no one took the facts into consideration when giving their opinion. Their mind was made up. Because she is Hispanic, she was demonized.
    The lies that were told, and the venom that was spewed was vile. It was clearly turned into a racists issue by the anti-immigrant especially Hispanic bigots. Faux news is a racist network anyway, everyone knows that.
    If just for the sake of appeasing the foaming at the mouth illiterate racists, faux news saw fit to punish Rebecca, she should not have been fired. She did nothing wrong, and it was Mr Walton who asked for the interview, and her superiors who saw fit to send her to do it.
    Having 1 door slammed in her face for no apparent reason other than the color of her skin can be a blessing. Many doors are opened to possibilities one thinks are impossible.
    Maby she could have done things differently, although I don’t think the outcome would be different, because of the fact that she is Hispanic, and the racists are fueling a climate of hate towards Hispanics which must be stopped.
    In my heart I feel faux news did Rebecca a favor, now the possibilities for her are endless! Good Luck Rebecca!

  • Evelyn
    January 2, 2008 at 12:20 am

    On this forum their are several racists who post. The man I am going to expose in this article is the one who pulls their strings. He is known as the “puppeteer”.
    Hitler is probably turning over in his grave with envy. This vile man pulls the strings of every BIGOT, RACISTS, FEARMONGER, ZEALOT, and XENOPHOBE. The saying goes, Ignorance creates gullibility. Racists should be ashamed they are letting a man without principals, and lacking in morals guide them.
    I believe Rebecca Aguilar was also a victim of his.
    John the “Puppeteer” Tanton is the founder of FAIR asa Federation for Immigration Reform. It is an anti-immigrant especially Hispanic hate group.
    These are a few of the organization’s FAIR supports.
    1. Pioneer; support white supremacists causes, waged war on civil rights, defended and promote the idea of black inferiority.
    2. New Century Foundation; hate group whose leader promotes clear concept of the U.S. as a nation ruled by and for whites.
    3. National Policy Institute; mission is to elevate the consciousness of whites to ensure their biological and cultural continuity, protect their civil rights.
    4. Institute for the Study of Man; promotes the superiority of whites.
    These are organizations spawned by FAIR to support the lies and venom the racists spew, to demonize immigrants.
    The Social Contract Press, Center for Immigration Studies, California Coalition for Immigration, Numbers USA, American Immigration Control Foundation, American Patrol/ Voice of Citizens Together, California Coalition for Population Stabilization, Population-Environment Balance, Pro English, Project USA US English, US Inc., You Don’t Speak for Me
    The majority of American anti-Immigration hate groups were either formed, led or in other ways made possible through Tantons efforts.
    …retrograde of the human species….savages….bacteria…. these are some of the names these groups use when referring to Mexicans.
    The blueprint envisage creating a whole array of organizations that serve the overall ideological and political battle plan to halt immigration.
    They camouflage the links between these organizations, to their origins, so that they appear to have arisen spontaneously. But in fact they have the same creator, Tanton.
    The idea was to create the illusion of a grassroots movement that was supported by a significant number of Americans , to confuse the press.
    More recently, FAIR’s tax records established that the Center for Immigration Studies, which has become an influential Washington Institution, was a spin off from FAIR. those facts aren’t widely known by the public.
    FAIR helped defeat federal immigration reform in 2007 and has played a key role in fueling the fierce anti-immigrant backlash in the U.S.

  • Evelyn
    January 2, 2008 at 12:35 am

    I have given you the link that states the minuteKLAN has members who are also members of the largest Neo-Nazi group in America. Here it is again!
    Now give me the link where it states Chikanos are affiliated with the KKK. Then you can defend your right to call them chikkkanos. Ha! Ha!
    Just because you have a reading comprehension problem, will not change the facts, as matter of fact, they wont change even if you post something different to what they state. LOL!

  • Evelyn
    January 2, 2008 at 1:25 am

    On another thread you state undocumented Immigrants were to blame for the good law abiding people of Texas and the taxes they pay, having to be spent on medical care for undocumented immigrants. LOL!
    Undocumented Immigrants in Texas
    A financial analyses of the impact to the state budget and economy.
    “This is the first time any state has done a comprehensive financial analysis of the impact of undocumented immigrants on a state budget and economy, looking at gross state product, revenues generated, taxes paid and the cost of state services.”
    The absence of the estimated 1.4 million undocumented immigrants in Texas in fiscal 2005 would have been a loss to our gross state product of $17,7 BILLON. Undocumented Immigrants produce $1.58 BILLION in state revenues, which exceed the $1.16 BILLION in state services they received. However, local government bore the burden of $1.44 BILLON in uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement cost’s not paid for by the state.
    The Comptroller’s report estimates that undocumented immigrants in Texas generate more in taxes and other revenues than the state spends on them.
    THIS FINDING IS CONTRARY TO TWO RECENT REPORTS, FAIR’s “the cost of immigration”, and the Bell Policy Center’s “cost to federally mandated services to undocumented immigrants in Colorado”, BOTH OF WHICH IDENTIFIED COSTS EXCEEDING REVENUE.
    Carol Keeton Strayhorn
    Texas Comptroller
    Stop demonizing immigrants, you only look foolish. Liquid

  • Frank
    January 2, 2008 at 7:38 am

    Again Evelyn of which you choose to ignore is that “most” law abiding Americans are not anti-immigrant, they are anti-illegal alien. Apparently you don’t know there is a difference. These Americans of which I am among are not anti-Hispanic either. They don’t care what skin color an immigrants has either. There are radicals in every group such as the MM but that doesn’t make the whole organization racists any more than the members of Hispanic organizations are all racists.
    You are the one spewing hatred against White Americans and spreading racism and lies in here.
    Again, I am not that “Frank” in the MB forum. If you had any brains you would compare our writing styles for proof. He uses words like “chikkkano”, not me. I debate civilly and don’t call people names unless they insult me first.

  • Frank
    January 2, 2008 at 7:42 am

    Evelyn, if you don’t agree with the sources of information that us law abiding Americans use to prove that illegal immigration is a negative to our country, then attack the sources, instead of personally attacking everyone in here.
    As I said before, even if you were to prove to me that they are a net benefit to this country I would still be opposed to their presence here because they are here illegally. That is what throws you into a fit. You can’t argue with the rule of law. If you don’t like the laws then seek change but don’t attack your fellow Americans who believe our immigration laws are in place for good reasons.

  • Liquidmicro
    January 2, 2008 at 9:17 am

    Old Granny Strayhorn, boy she is a fun one. The one who tried this and lost.
    On May 9, 2006, Strayhorn turned in 223,000 voter signatures to the office of Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams. Only 45,540 were required to place her on the November general election ballot. “I told you, Texas,” Strayhorn said while standing in front of 101 boxes stuffed with signatures. “We have blown the barn doors off this petition drive.” Media reports later confirmed that the boxes were substantially less than half full (for comparison, her opponent, Kinky Friedman put 169,000 signatures in 11 similar boxes). On June 22, 2006, Texas Secretary of State Roger B. Williams declared that only 108,512 signatures on her petition were valid, about 35,000 less than Friedman’s count.
    Do some research, her report that you describe has been shot full of holes. She has been shown to lie and cheat.

  • Liquidmicro
    January 2, 2008 at 9:20 am

    As usual your link to the report you claim is null and void.
    Sorry, the page you requested was not found.
    The requested URL was not found on this server.
    If you are having trouble locating a page on Window on State Government, try visiting the home page or WoSG Search.

  • Liquidmicro
    January 2, 2008 at 9:38 am

    All she can do is attack us personally, Frank. She can’t and hasn’t disproved/rebutted anything presented to her. Her own lack of comprehension from her own links limits her ability to be unbiased and read the information that is given. She is now bringing up FAIR and its organizations, because she is at her last straw. She clouds the difference between ‘Legal’ and ‘Illegal’, which does a disservice to law abiding aliens that come here and distorts their true impact, which is positive. She likes the fact that the illegal aliens are exploited, she wants them legalized so that they remain a permanent underclass of citizens working the fields so that she doesn’t have to get her hands dirty.
    By the way, Evelyn, had you looked up the hospital post I gave you, you would have noticed it came from the Dallas Morning News, and not from FAIR. It also has the comptrollers information, from Mrs. Combs information, and not out of politics Good Ol’ Granny Keaton Strayhorn.

  • Liquidmicro
    January 2, 2008 at 10:30 am

    Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues, which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received. However, local governments bore the burden of $1.44 billion in uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement costs not paid for by the state.”
    — Carole Keeton Strayhorn, Texas Comptroller
    So lets do the math, shall we.
    1.58B (State Revenue) – 1.16B (State Services) = 42M+ (State Revenue)
    42M (State Revenue) – 1.44B (Uncompensated Health Care Costs not paid for by the state) = 1.02B- (State Revenue)
    -1.02B (State Revenue) + -49.1M (Law Enforcement Costs) = 1.069B- (State Revenue)
    So you see, if Ol’ Granny would have included all the state costs, which include all county/local costs, which would give the entire picture of the state of Texas economy, She would have concluded that ‘Illegal Immigrants’ costs the Great state of Texas over $1B dollars in expenses. But because Ol’ Granny likes to fib and pretend, like she did with her signatures and boxes, we all know the reasons why she was not elected as the Gov. of Texas, and she no longer has a political career.

  • Liquidmicro
    January 2, 2008 at 3:08 pm

    Just so you know, Evelyn, the Strayhorn report, your side doesn’t use it anymore as an argument, simply because they also see how Ol’ Granny didn’t give the complete picture of the fiscal impacts. She has been discredited and so has the report. Now if you are through with trying to yell wolf in the hen house, and think you can argue sensibly to come to a conclusion, we can continue, otherwise if you keep on with the race card and mud slinging due to your own ignorance, we will keep pointing out your fallacies, and continue to make you look like a raging bafoon.

  • Evelyn
    January 2, 2008 at 5:10 pm

    Your writing was sent to be analyzed, 17 likenesses were found.
    You know I never make false accusations. I always do my homework first.
    In this forum you have no choice but to act civilly!
    Don’t get too dizzy trying to put a SPIN on the truth to wiggle your way out of this one. The public is much smarter than you give them credit for!

  • Evelyn
    January 2, 2008 at 7:03 pm

    One of the people with his foot in his mouth is you. You might ask the psychic for help in trying to put a spin on the truth!
    Immigration’s Economic Impact
    Council of Economic Advisers to the President
    (this is the fine print I referred you to, of course you choose to ignore it)
    The National Research Council estimated that Immigrants and their descendants would contribute about $80,000 MORE in taxes than they would receive in public services.
    This is a link to the truth about those you call CRIMMIGRANTS, Frank, when referring to Immigrants especially Mexicans.
    Crime and Immigrants
    Myth: Immigrants and Disease

  • Frank
    January 2, 2008 at 7:24 pm

    Liquid, is it just me or does Evelyn seem “DEElusional”? LOL!

  • Evelyn
    January 2, 2008 at 8:58 pm

    Mu cho Loco Horace livin la vida loca, ans his delusional statements referring to Mexicans,
    “Those people have NO RIGHT to cash a paycheck in this country”. and on the same issue Frank says “You need to check with our federal gov., Illegal aliens DO NOT have the same rights as citizens do” also stating “That is a big fat lie”
    I proudly stand by my statement boys, which was “anyone who lives within the borders of the U.S. has the same rights as you, except the right to vote, and the right to run for public office”
    Frank and Horace perpetrators of ANOTHER big fat LIE.

  • Liquidmicro
    January 2, 2008 at 11:32 pm

    Naw, Dee, knows when she is wrong, she abruptly changes the subject. Evelyn, on the other hand, I am betting is late teens early 20’s, freshman, maybe sophomore in college, though her poor spelling, plagiarism, lack of comprehension, and juvenile wit, makes me believe she is closer to just being out of High School.

  • Liquidmicro
    January 2, 2008 at 11:55 pm

    Actually, Evelyn, I read your entire report at whitehouse, the CBO report I alluded to in another topic is a takeoff from your report. You failed to distuinguish the earnings summary between ‘immigrants’ and ‘illegal immigrants’. Please read your section 2. on page 5, paragraph 2, sentence #6: “The surplus is
    larger for high-skilled immigrants ($198,000) and slightly negative for those with less than a
    high school degree (-$13,000).”
    The $198,000 would be high skilled immigrants, those here legally, while the -$13,000 would be the ‘ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS’ due to the fact that most here ‘ILLEGALLY’ don’t have a high school education. Therefor, ILLEGALS are a NEGATIVE to the ECONOMY over their lifetime.
    Sine Frank, Horace, and myself are spinning facts, as you put it, where is all your back-up? The only thing you have gotten semi-correct is that yes, even ‘illegal immigrants’ have some rights according to our Bill of Rights, however from your own link the following:
    “In conclusion, while in this country, illegal immigrants are covered by all the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Exercising those rights may subject them to deportation because of their alien status. Additional laws apply if the illegal immigrant is suspected of being a terrorist but that is not the subject I am attempting to address.
    When illegal entry is treated as a matter of criminal law, instead of being expelled through an administrative proceeding, those accused have the right to a jury trial and all the rules of evidence apply. The government is burdened with “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” Imagine the cost and the caseload.”

  • Liquidmicro
    January 3, 2008 at 12:02 am

    Crime and Immigrants
    As usual another bad link by Evelyn.
    The file you requested was not found on this Web site.
    Click here to return to the previous page.
    Error Code: 404
    As far as your SPLC link, it is talking about ‘IMMIGRANTS’ there is no mention what so ever on that page of ‘ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS’ or ‘UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS’. So, Yes, IMMIGRANTS, because they come here with health screening checks and up to date shot records, are less likely to bring in with them diseases.
    But, alas, as usual, Evelyn, you can’t differentiate between ‘LEGAL’ and ‘ILLEGAL’, and since most ‘ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS’ don’t have health screenings or up to date shot records, they are much more likely to bring in diseases to this country.
    Now if you want to keep playing this word game, I can continue making you look the BAFOON.

  • Liquidmicro
    January 3, 2008 at 12:04 am

    Don’t get too dizzy trying to put a SPIN on the truth to wiggle your way out of this one. The public is much smarter than you give them credit for!
    I certainly hope so, since they quit referring and using this report early last year, but I guess you never got the memo.

  • Publius
    January 3, 2008 at 8:59 am

    Evelyn said: “I proudly stand by my statement boys, which was “anyone who lives within the borders of the U.S. has the same rights as you, except the right to vote, and the right to run for public office”
    Granted, they do have most of the rights of citizens, including the right to counsel for prosecution under our identity theft laws and misrepresenting themselves as citizens. Not only Mexican illegal aliens, but all illegal aliens, regardless of national origin, have the obligation to follow our laws. If they claim equality, then they must accept the responsibility for their actions and submit to the scrutiny of our legal system.

  • Frank
    January 3, 2008 at 9:07 am

    Liquid, don’t be too sure. Dee has been know to be a little sneaky. Sometimes she changes the subject when confronted with the truth and other times I have seen her fight to the death to defend her lies anyway. Remember that the Strayhorn data was brought up in MATT and how she became totally beligerant over it?

  • Matt
    January 8, 2008 at 9:09 am

    She acted like a sensationalist moron… I’m glad she was taken off the air. It was clear that she had an agenda by the words she chose and the tactics she used. She’s not a real journalist. I don’t care what color she is or what her ethnic background is; journalists are supposed to report the news, not hassle the innocent elderly in parking lots. So instead of learning from her mistake, she’s taking legal action!? What else do you expect from a moron with a sense of entitlement.
    I tried to post this before, but apparently the moderator of this site wants to prevent another point of view from seeing the light of day… LAME!

  • andy
    March 6, 2008 at 5:26 pm

    It’s not her “fair” questioning, its her tone of voice. by the way she asks if he it trigger happy, she obviously thinks he already is. He didn’t anything illegal or wrong, and paining him in that light reflects poorly or her and the news station. It’s not because she was latina or whatever adjective people use now. Playing the race card just makes you look like a complainer.

  • jarave
    April 30, 2008 at 10:56 pm

    why are there so many white males participating on this blog? are they interested in a latina perspective? that is sooo metroish.
    i for one miss ms. aguilar. i feel that in a very a diverse media market such as dallas, a latino reporter added representation and helped latino “immigrants” feel a part of the mix and as such, begin the acculturation process that our paler brethen so desire. now this has been made a little more difficult by the expulsion of a reporter that was doing, by all accounts, what every other reporter does, be over the top.
    i used to watch the channel 11 news until one day i realized how lilly white that news team was. now i only watch channel 8. i feel it is much more representative of the dfw.
    good luck in dealing with these minute men (tiny).
    i got to hand it to you, evelyn, for being patient and dealing with these galletas.

  • reed
    May 4, 2008 at 4:07 am

    this woman was a terrible “reporter”. she ambushed an old man who obviously was very troubled by what he had to do and wouldn’t let him be. she accused him of being a “trigger happy” and filmed him without his consent. “Turn the damn camera off” he said – that means turn it off, not put it on the ground. She was also biased because the two guys who got shot were also hispanic. People like the writer of this blog are always hunting for a reason to play the race card.

  • Marisa Treviño
    May 4, 2008 at 8:51 am

    Speaking purely as a journalist, Rebecca was and is not a terrible reporter. The fact of the matter is this was no ambush and Walton called her to tell her where he was going to be and what he was doing. Did you ever see her running after him? Did you see him try to push her away from him or slam the door? No. Am I always trying to play the race card? That depends. If it’s warranted, you bet I will. And from your statements, the time has not come to where it can be said everybody is equal and should be judged only on their skills. Thanks for underscoring the point.

  • reed
    May 21, 2008 at 8:43 pm

    I honestly don’t care what color she is, it’s just that she was obviously motivated by bias. She is Hispanic and so were the two men who were killed trying to rob that old man. I highly doubt Walton called her, look at his reaction to her. She made him cry, for goodness’ sake.
    “Are you a trigger happy individual?!” is not objective reporting, she was accusing this guy of blowing people away willy-nilly and that is simply not acceptable, it doesn’t matter what race the person making the accusations is. Stop trying to act like anyone opposed to this “reporter” is a racist.

Comments are closed.