Trolling Trump: President-Elect Sends Sarcastic ‘Season’s Greetings’ to Those on His Naugh...
What the Puck? Trump Suggests NHL Superstar Wayne Gretzky Replace Justin Trudeau
Church of England Warns Clergy About Christmas Carols With 'Problematic Words'
Matt Yglesias: Why Aren't Conservatives Bothered by Crime in Conservative States?
Taylor Lorenz Extremely Stressed About Getting a Rush Visa ASAP
People Have Fun With Idea That 'Hunnikah' Celebrates a Jewish Gorilla War
Christmas Is a Miracle and You Don't Need to Look Further Than North...
Happy Holidays Tweet from the ATF Doesn't Warm The Heart
If What the Teamsters Prez Told Tucker Carlson Is True It's No Wonder...
Merry Christmas: A Special Bonus Gift of Christmas Funnies Just for You
Simply ‘Wonderful’: Classic Holiday Film Reminds Generations It’s Okay to Cry at Christmas
A Lump of Coal in Her Stocking! Crypto Influencer Gets BURIED for Not...
Political Pivot? Many Question ‘Young Turk’ Cenk Uygur’s Sudden Willingness to Talk with...
'The View' Panelist Says Problem for Dems Is That Gov't Won't Regulate Social...
Man Vs. History: Bear Grylls Gets DROPPED by Community Notes for Awful Take...

'It's falling apart': 1619 Project architect Nikole Hannah-Jones' 'small' clarification is actually a pretty big deal

The New York Times’ 1619 Project has come under fire even from liberal-leaning historians for its liberties with history, facts, and the truth. For what it’s worth, project architect Nikole Hannah-Jones recently made a “clarification” to one of the its many dubious claims:

Advertisement

It’s just a “small” clarification, though. No big deal:

That’s putting it mildly, Nikole.

But we’ll get back to that. Here’s the rest of Hannah-Jones’ thread on the subject:

Advertisement

Maybe if you’re going to write “sweeping passages of history,” you should make sure you know what the hell you’re talking about first. Unless, of course, that gets in the way of your narrative.

Anyway, back to the idea of the “small” clarification:

Advertisement

You weren’t clear enough? You know, if the whole project weren’t an exercise in historical revisionism, we might be a little more inclined to take Hannah-Jones’ contrition at face value. But she hasn’t really demonstrated that she deserves the benefit of the doubt.

It’s really not.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement