LIVE Election Results With TWITCHY! Primary Night in New York, Maryland, and South...
SCOTUS: Rastafarian Can’t Sue Prison Guards for Shaving His Dreadlocks (Scott Wiener Whine...
SCOTUS: Green Card Holders Can Be Stripped of Legal Status If They Have...
Whoopi Goldberg Trapped: New Karmelo Anthony Footage Causes Big Problems for 'The View'
Judge BLOCKS Trump Administration From Restricting SNAP Benefits for Soda and Candy
Come On, Baby, Take a Ride With Me... In My Taxpayer-Funded NYPD SUV:...
Mamdani-Backed Oct. 7 Cheerleader Vying for NY-13 Seat — Gets Rightfully Grilled Over...
WITCH-With-a-B Tara Palmeri Airs Pro-Life Rep's Ectopic Pregnancy Even After She Begged He...
Oh, HONEY: Jemele Hill Pulls a Lotta STUPID Out of Her Arse Blaming...
YIKES! LEAKED Audio of James Talarico Admitting He HATES Christianity Should END His...
John C. Reilly Thinks the Right Lacks Empathy — Bless His Heart
NOT an Airport: Dana Loesch Had the PERFECT Response to Tucker Carlson Taking...
Pick a SIDE, Idiots! Boy Howdy, Did the MLB Botch the Whole Pride...
Mehdi Hasan Thought It Was Smart to Pick a Fight With Brandon Gill...
WATCH Closely, You Can See the ACTUAL Moment Ana Navarro Short Circuits in...

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