Mina Kimes Is Still Lying About OutKick

For more than a year, ESPN NFL analyst Mina Kimes has accused various members of OutKick of lying about her and spreading racism. Over the weekend, she claimed that Dan Dakich is "targeting" her and other "non-white employees." She has also said in the past that I was once a good person who now writes mean things about women in media.

I don’t care to defend myself. If Kimes truly wanted to know my views on women in media, she could ask any number of women in the industry who know me. I assume she hasn’t. What caught my attention, though, were her comments about Dakich. He hosts hours of live radio every day, covering sports, media, politics, and culture. Naturally, he both praises and criticizes a wide range of people—regardless of race. When Kimes says he "targets non-white people," what she really means is that he doesn’t exempt them from criticism. In today’s industry, that’s unusual.

And that’s the heart of her issue with OutKick. Kimes seems to believe she should be shielded from even modest scrutiny. The bloggers, the Dan Le Batards and the Stephen A. Smiths, have convinced her she is such a trailblazer as the first Asian woman to be an ESPN NFL analyst that any level of criticism must be rooted in racism or sexism.

Last summer, Kimes accused OutKick of "spreading horrible lies about her and her family" and of "inciting racism and harassment." In a text to OutKick writer John Simmons, she wrote:

"Hi John, I don't have a comment for you, but I do hope you know that your horrible lies about me have led to racism and harassment towards me and my family for some time now. Please don't ever text me again."

For context, I wrote an article questioning ESPN—not Kimes personally—about why she was allowed to endorse Karen Bass for Los Angeles mayor and Tim Walz as Kamala Harris’ running mate, while colleagues Ashley Brewer and Sam Ponder were punished for far less. ESPN declined to comment on the record. My story caught the attention of Michele Tafoya, who engaged in a back-and-forth with Kimes. Simmons planned to cover the spat and I gave him Kimes and Tafoya's numbers to contact for comment.

As you see, Kimes didn't want to address the issue. Clearly, questioning her special treatment struck a nerve.

Afterward, she posted screenshots of random trolls sending her nasty tweets as supposed proof of OutKick's damage, tagging Clay Travis in the process:

At this point, you are probably expecting us to address the "horrible lies" she insists we spread. Honestly, we would like to do that. Clay and I have repeatedly asked Kimes to identify them so we can correct the record. She refuses. I asked her again this past Saturday:

She won’t say what the supposed lies are—not publicly, not privately. That’s because there aren’t any. I’ve reviewed every piece we’ve written about her. If anyone can point to a lie, please contact me.

In truth, OutKick isn’t her problem. Her problem is the rest of the media, which has coddled her and turned her into a pampered diva. 

ESPN pays her around $2 million a year to appear on television. And yet, she apparently takes screenshots of posts from @Johnny69Me to prove she is a victim.

That’s insecurity. She comes across like a spoiled brat who wants all the benefits of a public platform but can’t handle the negatives.

And let’s be clear: she is, by definition, a liar. Neither I nor anyone at OutKick has ever lied about her. No one has said a word about her family. We aren’t Ryan Clark—we don’t drag spouses into debates to score points.

Kimes appears to think that by accusing us of lying and racism, we’ll be too afraid to cover her fairly. That won’t work. If anything, her habit of playing those cards only invites more mockery from the very trolls that so clearly trouble her.

Finally, if Kimes feels the need to constantly defend her qualifications as an NFL analyst, perhaps she’s the one with doubts that she’s qualified for the role.