ABC News Chief Political Analyst Caught Pushing Fake Terrorism Claim

Statistics are apparently hard to understand if you're part of the media cartel talking about terrorism, because, as I've reported many times here at PJ Media, they keep getting it wrong.

Today's contestant is Matthew Dowd, chief political analyst at ABC News, who on Twitter yesterday made this astounding claim:

This claim, that more were killed in the Las Vegas shooting last week than by Islamic terrorists over the past decade, is flatly untrue, as I'll show you in a minute.

But when people began to push back on his false claim, he asserted it was a fact (!!!) and then repeated the claim:

Then he doubled down yet again with insults directed towards those challenging his false claim:

In fact, it is Dowd who is factually challenged. As New America documents, Islamic terrorists have killed nearly 100 people in the U.S. since 9/11, most of those within the past decade:

The number of deaths at the Orlando Pulse nightclub massacre by self-avowed ISIS devotee Omar Mateen in June 2016 was 49.

Another 14 were killed by Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik at a San Bernardino office Christmas party in December 2015.

The fatalities from just those two Islamic terror attacks (63) within the past two years are more than the victims of last week's massacre in Las Vegas (59).

There's just no way to spin Dowd's claim for it to remotely be true.

And it gets worse:

As the Heritage Foundation's Daily Signal terror tracker chronicles, there have been 97 Islamic terror attacks and plots in the U.S. since 9/11:

As I've noted repeatedly, the media cartel keeps getting basic facts wrong about Islamic terrorism in America. In August, CBS News host Norah O'Donnell was pushing vastly inflated terrorism stats to falsely claim that so-called "right wing" terrorism was more deadly than Islamic terrorism:

As I noted, the highly suspect terrorism database O'Donnell cited includes Neo-Nazis killing pedophiles in prison:

None of these cases actually involved terrorism charges. Neither did many others in the GAO dataset.

But there was something more peculiar about O'Donnell's claim.

Even the inflated GAO dataset admitted that Islamic terrorists had killed more than so-called "right wing" domestic terrorists, as their own graphic showed:

So how did she conclude that "right wing" terrorism was deadlier than Islamic terrorism? Not by counting the actual number of fatalities -- but by counting the number of "incidents."

As I noted previously, the media has tried repeatedly to downplay the extent of Islamic terrorism by utilizing the analytically useless "incidents" measure. Meanwhile, they whitewash the fact that Islamic terrorists still have killed more than the so-called "right wing":

After the Pulse nightclub killings, I noted that at the time Islamic terror deaths had nearly doubled those of the "right wing":

It needs to be pointed out, but virtually all of these stats cited by the media begin their counts on September 12, 2001 -- thereby excluding those Americans killed on 9/11.

At the current rate, it will take the "right wing" several more centuries just to catch up with the 3,000 fatalities of that one Islamic terror attack.

Why does the media cartel continue to beclown itself when talking about Islamic terrorism?

Well, narratives don't push themselves.

UPDATE: It seems that Dowd is now backing off his bogus claim.

I'm blocked by Dowd on Twitter, so someone just pointed this out to me.

He stated several times that he was talking about "deaths," with no mention of "casualties."

But rather than admit that he was flatly wrong and apologize to those he mocked who were trying to correct him, he retreats to the "here is what I should have said to be more clear ... "

In fact, he was clear. He specifically claimed "deaths," not "casualties." He was wrong, but now won't admit it.

America deserves a better media class.