Hot Take: The Hostages Could Have Been Returned on Day 3 If Israel...
Bulwark Host Thinks Anti-Trumpers Who've Had It With Biden Are 'Children'
Ben 'Hamas' Rhodes Spreads the Terrorist Group's Propaganda with Zero Shame
Joe Biden Says Cutting Off Military Aid to Israel Is 'Preposterous' and 'Beyond...
'SNL Skit, Right?' MSNBC Analysts Add Paranormal Spin to Stormy Daniels' Trump Trial...
'Walkable City' Enthusiast Tries to Talk Up City Life... But WHY Did He...
If 'Greta Thunberg Protests with Anti-Semites' Was the Last Square on the...
White House Says It's Withholding Aid to Israel Because Hamas Has Suffered Enough
LOL! Everyone Laughs at 'Climate Defiance' as They Try (and FAIL!) to Talk...
Biden-Harris HQ Still Opposes Extra Measures to Ensure Illegals Can't Vote in Federal...
Biden's Latest Betrayal of Israel a Possible Harbinger of His November Defeat
POINTLESS: New Swiss Army Knife Will Be Knife-Free Due to 'Crime Waves'
Fani Willis: Funny Now That They Have a Bunch of Black DAs They...
Jury Awards Students Expelled From Woke California Catholic High School Over 'Blackface' $...
A Lavish Donation to the Miami Police Department Ruffles Some Feathers on Twitter

NYT left some pretty major details out of their coverage of girl who aborted, burned, and buried her baby

Various

As you unfortunately may have heard, Nebraska teen Celeste Burgess has been sentenced to 90 days in jail after pleading guilty to illegally concealing a dead human body, the dead human body of her third-trimester baby that she, with her mother's help, aborted, tried to burn, and repeatedly buried in April 2022. The details are incredibly grisly, although you'd never know it from this New York Times' tweet:

Advertisement

No mention in there of the fact that Burgess was in her third trimester and that the baby could have been viable. No mention of the fact that Burgess and her mother buried the body multiple times. No mention of their attempts to burn the baby. Those seem like pretty significant details that should've been included in the tweet, no?

And the headline isn't any better:

Yeah, let us find our shocked faces. We're sure they're around here somewhere ...

More like crafty. It's quite obvious what the New York Times is trying to do.

Advertisement

The New York Times is counting on outrage from pro-aborts who can't be bothered to actually click the link and read the article.

In what universe does that information not deserve to be front and center in the New York Times' — and any outlet's, for that matter — tweet about this story?

At this point, we're honestly not sure that the New York Times even knows what actual journalism is. Or, more likely, they know but just couldn't possibly care less.

Advertisement

Ridiculous and shameful and disgusting.

Sick.

***

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.  Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement