'Major Milestone’: Home in Pacific Palisades Receives Final Approval From the City
When Jake Tapper Said the J6 Pipe Bomber Was a ‘White Man’ and...
Rep. Jerry Nadler Explains Why States Are Refusing to Hand Over SNAP Data:...
Pramila Jayapal: ‘Being Undocumented Isn’t a Crime’ – Federal Law and Half of...
Jim Acosta Says Trump Should Be Impeached Over Hateful Comments About the Somali...
Another ‘Police Brutality’ Story Collapses: Woman Refuses ID to Protect Illegal Boyfriend
JD Vance Is Hearing Rumors That the EU Commission Will Fine X Hundreds...
George Clooney's Casual Muslim Brotherhood Flex: Bragging About Wife's Terror Ties on Barr...
Mayor Brandon Johnson Refuses to Entertain Racist Question About Teen Violence in Chicago
Rep. Ilhan Omar Claims She Knew Nothing About $250 Million Welfare Fraud Scheme
Dumbo Gumbo: Leftist Pro-Illegal Alien Protesters Disrupt Council Meeting Over New Orleans...
Mollie Hemingway Nails It — FBI Sat on Jan 5 Pipe Bomb Intel...
Local News Reports on the Rich History of Somali Integration in Minnesota
Walz Complains People Are Driving By and Yelling the ‘R’ Word—X Replies With...
ME! ME! ME!: Senator Mark Kelly Wants Us to Know His Recent Media...

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