Connect with us

The New York Times

The New York Times is attempting to demonize one organization for this ridiculous reason

Published

on

The Supreme Court leak lit a match inside the Democratic Party.

Politicians and media outlets are on the warpath.

And the New York Times is attempting to demonize one organization for this ridiculous reason.

Pro-abortion zealots are terrified over the Supreme Court leak that signaled the overturning of Roe V. Wade.

In response, Democrats have activated full-on assault mode.

Activists are illegally protesting outside the homes of Supreme Court justices, and the corporate press is attacking anyone that harbors pro-life views.

Now, The New York Times is going after crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs).

In a comically dishonest piece, The Times tried to present CPCs as somehow nefarious.

In an op-ed entitled, “Pregnant? Need help? They Have an Agenda,” The Times lamented the fact that CPCs currently outnumber abortion facilities three to one.

The Times wrote that “a large share of women who visit C.P.C.s are not pregnant or undecided but are parents who in many cases have been failed by a society that does little to help poor mothers. The anti-abortion movement takes advantage of their economic vulnerability.”

So CPCs are taking advantage of women by trying to convince them not to get an abortion?

And unlike Planned Parenthood, CPCs do not charge money for their services.

Planned Parenthood is a moneymaking enterprise that performs almost zero services beyond abortion.

Democrats do not want see see a cultural shift away from abortion, which is why they despise CPCs that provide free resources.

For example, CPCs have ultrasound machines; when women see that their baby is alive, they keep the baby at a rate of 80%.

Conversely, Planned Parenthood does not allow women to view ultrasounds.

The so-called pro-choice movement is fine with a woman’s choice so long as she opts to kill the baby.

If they were really about choice, they would provide women with all of the pertinent facts.

But Democrats have to lie in service to the pro-abortion position.

Roughly two-thirds of Americans believe that abortion becomes legal if Roe V. Wade is overturned when in reality the issue simply goes back to the states.

Also, 65% of Americans are against abortion after the first trimester.

That number jumps up to 81% after the second trimester.

CPCs are partly why people are getting the real data about abortions.

Pants on Fire Official Polling

The New York Times

Bill Maher ripped The New York Times for the horrible thing they did to this Supreme Court justice

Published

on

Bill Maher is one of the few prominent liberals making any bit of sense at all.

He can’t stand what “wokeness” is doing to the country even though he still has Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Now Maher ripped The New York Times for the horrible thing they did to this Supreme Court justice.

Democrats continue to raise the political temperature in America.

The latest escalation occurred when someone—presumably a progressive clerk—leaked a Supreme Court draft opinion from Justice Samuel Alito that forecasted the overturning of Roe V. Wade, one of the worst-decided cases in court history.

The leaker’s plan to create a Democratic reaction worked, and suddenly the left-wing shock troops gathered outside the homes of conservative Supreme Court justices.

And one of the far-left lunatics traveled from California with weapons with the intent to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The corporate press barely covered the story, a fact that liberal comedian Bill Maher noticed.

During a panel discussion on his HBO show, Maher said, “The New York Times buried this…If this had been a liberal Supreme Court justice that someone came to kill, it would’ve been on the front page. And that’s what’s so disappointing about a paper like The New York Times. Because they wear their bias on their sleeves and if it’s not part of something that feeds our narrative, f*ck it, we bury it.”

If Maher took this incident and multiplied it by 1,000, he would begin to understand why conservatives do not trust The New York Times or any other so-called mainstream media institution.

It’s not just the lies, but it’s the lies of omission.

Another sterling example occurred in 2020 when Big Tech and the corporate press conspired to suppress the Hunter Biden “laptop from hell” bombshell report from The New York Post.

Despite the story being completely true, The Post was locked out of its Twitter account for the flimsy excuse that the story violated Twitter’s “hacked materials” policy, never mind Twitter had no problem with Donald Trump’s tax returns being disseminated on the platform.

The censorship was so absolute, the story could not be shared through private direct messages.

And the corporate press dismissed the story as “Russian disinformation.”

Media corruption is rampant, which is one reason why Trump became so popular in 2016; he was not afraid to call it out.

Maher is slowly getting toward the truth.

If he can get over his bloodlust for Trump, he might realize that the Democratic Party is no longer concerned with the plight of the average American.

Pants on Fire News will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.

Continue Reading

Politics

Top Obama adviser called out the New York Times for one ridiculous column about January 6th

Published

on

The Democrats are going all in on Orange Man Bad.

They have no other appeal to voters.

But a top Obama adviser called out The New York Times for one ridiculous column about January 6th.

Joe Biden’s approval ratings are circling the drain, and Democrats are staring a colossal midterm election defeat in the face.

Democrats are hoping their “Trump” card to turn around their fate is to fear-monger about January 6th, an incident that happened 17 months ago.

The New York Times recently ran a piece hyping up the January 6th House Select Committee hearings that are going to be broadcast on primetime network television.

But former Barack Obama advisor David Axelrod thinks hyping up the spectacle could backfire.

Axelrod tweeted, “If I were a member of the 1/6 committee, stories like these, casting the hearings as a political cudgel, would make me very unhappy. Conversely, Rs, who hope to dismiss damning findings as partisan, will seize on them. Let facts speak for themselves.”

The Democrats are going for broke, and they’re not even being bashful about it.

The Times wrote, “As it tries to deliver the equivalent of the Watergate hearings for the streaming era, the committee has brought on the former president of ABC News, James Goldston…to help fit the hearings into six tight episodes, running between 90 minutes and 2.5 hours.”

Goldston was the head of ABC News when host Amy Robach got caught on a hot mic lamenting the fact she had the Jeffrey Epstein bombshell a full year before everybody else, but the network spiked the story.

Nobody ever asked Goldston or anyone else at ABC News precisely why the story was killed.

It’s quite telling that the Democrats are bringing in a television producer to turn the hearings into some hit miniseries like Shogun or North and South.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio called it out when he said, “Instead of focusing on $5 gas, 6,000 illegal immigrants a day, record fentanyl deaths, or the violent criminals terrorizing America democrats use taxpayer money on a TV producer for the prime time political infomercial from the Jan 6th circus.”

The Democrats’ plan is to scare people to the polls with warnings about white supremacy and a Handmaid’s Tale dystopia coming to America.

Pants on Fire Official Polling

Continue Reading

The New York Times

The New York Times hands the reins over to Joe Biden. The result is every bit as awful as you’d expect

Published

on

The New York Times is supposed to contain “all the news that’s fit to print.”

But these days it reads more like a press release for Democrats. 

And this week the New York Times handed the reins over to Joe Biden with results that are every bit as awful as you’d expect. 

Joe Biden keeps claiming he doesn’t want to start World War 3. 

But his actions are calculated to take a dangerous situation and cause it to escalate as quickly as possible. 

Through one blunder after the next, he’s been stumbling closer to turning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine into a much bigger mess. 

Now, he’s published an op-ed in the New York Times basically throwing gasoline on the fire. 

 “We have moved quickly to send Ukraine a significant amount of weaponry and ammunition so it can fight on the battlefield and be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table,” Biden wrote. 

“That’s why I’ve decided that we will provide the Ukrainians with more advanced rocket systems and munitions that will enable them to more precisely strike key targets on the battlefield in Ukraine,” he added.

His rambling explanation to anyone bored enough to read the New York Times op-ed columns has to be baffling career government employees. 

It’s a diplomatic disaster and a strategic military failure. 

Remember the collective gasp from the diplomatic community when Donald Trump took a congratulatory call from the president of Taiwan when he was first elected? 

The US has been selling military equipment to the tiny island nation for decades, according to diplomatic etiquette government officials were supposed to pretend the independent Republic of China doesn’t exist. 

If that was considered a serious gaffe, Biden’s op-ed is tantamount to a declaration of war. 

He isn’t merely slipping some weapons to Ukraine on the sly, he’s turning Volodymyr Zelensky loose with the big guns. 

Not only that, but he’s providing Vladimir Putin with an inventory so the world can properly engage in an arms race. 

“We will continue providing Ukraine with advanced weaponry, including Javelin anti-tank missiles, Stinger anti aircraft missiles, powerful artillery and precision rocket systems, radars, unmanned aerial vehicles, Mi-17 helicopters and ammunition,” Biden wrote. 

Anyone remember how World War 1 started? 

Nothing makes weapon manufacturers happier than countries comparing notes on who has the biggest, baddest, and most guns. 

The most disturbing part about this latest piece is that Biden’s Administration can’t blame any foolishness on the president going off teleprompter in a demented fit. 

This is the best he and his handlers can come up with. 

And the most honest coverage the New York Times can provide is to let Biden and Friends literally have free rein over exactly what gets printed.  

Pants on Fire News will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.

Continue Reading

Sign Up For FREE Alerts

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Trending