Connect with us

The New York Times

Tucker Carlson just destroyed The New York Times with one epic truth bomb

Published

on

The New York Times picked a fight with Tucker Carlson.

It did not go well for The Times.

And Tucker Carlson just destroyed The New York Times with one epic truth bomb.

On Monday night, Carlson mocked New York Times reporter Taylor Lorenz for claiming her life has been “destroyed” by online harassment.

“Please consider supporting women enduring online harassment. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the harassment and smear campaign I’ve had to endure over the past year has destroyed my life. No one should have to go through this,” Lorenz wrote on social media.

Lorenz is a tech reporter for the paper that critics contend simply trolls on TikTok harassing teenagers.

Carlson ridiculed Lorenz’s statement and said the notion that a Times reporter could claim their life had been “destroyed” when they enjoy one of the most privileged positions in America is the height of absurdity.

The next day, The New York Times released a statement claiming Carlson mentioning Lorenz’s name and criticizing her work amounted to targeted harassment and incitement of violence.

“In a now familiar move, Tucker Carlson opened his show last night by attacking a journalist,” The Times statement read.

“It was a calculated and cruel tactic, which he regularly deploys to unleash a wave of harassment and vitriol at his intended target. Taylor Lorenz is a talented New York Times journalist doing timely and essential reporting. Journalists should be able to do their jobs without facing harassment.”

Fox News defended Carlson and promised he would respond.

That night Carlson ripped Lorenz and The Times’ whining about his comments explaining that criticism was not harassment, but that this is standard for the Left in 2021 who like to claim speech they don’t like is “violence.”

“Normally we’d be deeply sympathetic to this. Harassment is awful, harassment is a crime, and it should be a crime. If a mob of screaming lunatics showed up at Taylor Lorenz’s house and threatened her, we would condemn that mob immediately, no matter what political position they claim to represent. But that’s not even close to what Taylor Lorenz is talking about. According to Taylor Lorenz, saying mean things about her on Twitter is ‘harassment.’ Disagreeing with her on the Internet at all is ‘harassment.’ Failing to affirm her as she self-actualizes and attempt to realize her hopes and dreams in this world is ‘harassment. ’And so on. There’s a lot of real harassment out there. This is not it,” Carlson stated.

Carlson added that social justice warriors like Lorenz play the “speech is incitement” card because it shields them from any criticism or accountability for their attempts to silence speech.

“It’s a pretty good little scam The Times has going. They get to hurt you at will, but you’re not allowed to notice. Notice what they’re doing and you are ‘calculated and cruel,’” Carlson concluded.

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

The New York Times

The New York Times was forced to admit Democrats told a massive lie about gun control

Published

on

By

The Biden administration is determined to enact every bad policy under the sun.

Rolling back Second Amendment rights is no exception to his radical agenda.

But The New York Times was forced to admit Democrats told a massive lie about gun control.

Joe Biden and other prominent gun-grabbers love to tout the 1994 assault weapons ban as a meaningful piece of legislation, but even members of the Left begrudgingly admit that isn’t true.

New York Times writer Nicholas Kristof, a proponent of gun control, was forced to admit the bill did not save lives:

“It’s also true that while liberals loved the assault weapons ban for the 10 years it was in effect, there is no strong evidence that it saved lives — but it did turn the AR-15 into a conservative icon, so that today there appear to be more AR and AK rifles in private hands than in the United States military . . . And most crime and deaths involve handguns, not rifles.”

Democrats want to make it as difficult as possible for law-abiding citizens to get a gun, which makes them more susceptible to criminals.

Gun grabbers also ignore the deterrence of gun ownership that keeps would-be attackers and thieves at bay.

Kristof isn’t the only liberal to lament the fact gun control doesn’t work.

Data researcher Leah Libresco wrote a 2017 op-ed in The Washington Post that read:

“I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans.”

Former NPR CEO Ken Stern did an about-face on guns when he stepped outside his liberal echo chamber and lived among conservatives for a year.

He chronicled his journey in the book Republican Like Me where he admitted to changing his mind on several contested issues, including climate change.

When honest people actually delve into the numbers, it’s difficult to maintain most Democrat positions.

Gun control is at the top of the list.

The statistics simply don’t add up for the Left.

Biden is a perfect exemplar of an ignorant Democrat spouting nonsense about guns – on more than one occasion, he suggested police officers shoot armed attackers in the leg.

Gun sales skyrocketed in 2020, and 40% of those purchases were made by first-time gun owners.

Pants on Fire Official Polling

Continue Reading

The New York Times

One New York Times writer said something so racist it’s nearly impossible to believe

Published

on

By

The Left has veered into insanely radical territory over the past few years.

Donald Trump either broke their brains, or gave them an excuse to express their true opinions.

And one New York Times writer said something so racist that it’s nearly impossible to believe.

New York Times contributor Damon Young proved once again that there’s no political opinion that’s too extreme for the Left.

Writing for the far-left outlet The Root, Young wrote a piece entitled, “Whiteness Is a Pandemic.”

It’s even more radical and disturbing than the title would suggest.

The piece opens, “Whiteness is a public health crisis. It shortens life expectancies, it pollutes air, it constricts equilibrium, it devastates forests, it melts ice caps, it sparks (and funds) wars, it flattens dialects, it infests consciousnesses, and it kills people – white people and people who are not white, my mom included.”

Scapegoating and dehumanizing an entire group of people was something that the Left used to call out as despicable.

But the ascendant Left is much more radical in their pursuit of a socialist order.

In their Marxist paradigm, white people are the oppressors, and nonwhite people are the oppressed.

However, immigrant groups of various stripes have exploded this narrative because they’ve come to “white supremacist” America and found success.

Asians do better financially than any demographic in the United States, which is why the Left has decried them as “white adjacent” for years.

But because a white assailant killed six Asians in a horrific attack at three separate massage parlors in Atlanta, the Left is now trying to build a grand narrative about whiteness killing Asian people.

It’s a sick and twisted tactic by the Left, but they’ve proven for years they have no shame whatsoever.

Young continued, “White supremacy is a virus that, like other viruses, will not die until there are no bodies left for it to infect. Which means the only way to stop it is to locate it, isolate it, extract it, and kill it. I guess a vaccine could work, too. But we’ve had 400 years to develop one, so I won’t hold my breath.”

What that’s supposed to mean is anyone’s guess, but it certainly isn’t fostering “unity” that the Left proclaims to care about.

Radical leftists are destroying the country by dividing people along identity lines, and the worst part is they know exactly what they’re doing.

They want to “dismantle” the entire American system, and they’re cynically using identity politics to do it.

Pants on Fire Official Polling

Continue Reading

The New York Times

This judge’s bombshell ruling is about to change everything for The New York Times

Published

on

By

The conduct of the corporate-controlled media is one of the biggest scandals in America.

But pro-Democrat media outlets may finally pay a price.

And this judge’s bombshell ruling is about to change everything for The New York Times.

Federal judge Laurence Silberman authored an opinion that took the corporate media to task.

Judge Silberman accused The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal’s news pages of “rather shocking” bias against the Republican Party.

Silberman argued that the rest of the media took their cue from these three papers and acted like a “Democrat Party Trumpet.”

“The orientation of these three papers is followed by The Associated Press and most large papers across the country (such as the Los Angeles Times, Miami Herald, and Boston Globe),” Silberman wrote. “Nearly all television – network and cable – is a Democratic Party trumpet. Even the government-supported National Public Radio follows along.”

Silberman warned that media lining up as the mouthpiece for one political party was a ticket to authoritarianism and that it could increase extremism in ideological opponents.

“It should be borne in mind that the first step taken by any potential authoritarian or dictatorial regime is to gain control of communications, particularly the delivery of news,” Silberman added, noting that “it is fair to conclude, therefore, that one-party control of the press and media is a threat to a viable democracy. It may even give rise to countervailing extremism.”

Finally, Silberman argued that the Supreme Court should repeal the 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan case that makes it nearly impossible for public figures to sue the press.

“The First Amendment guarantees a free press to foster a vibrant trade in ideas. But a biased press can distort the marketplace,” Silberman wrote that. “And when the media has proven its willingness – if not eagerness – to so distort, it is a profound mistake to stand by unjustified legal rules that serve only to enhance the press’ power.”

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

Continue Reading

Sign Up For FREE Alerts

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

Trending