Remember when we all called BS on Warren’s claim of being fired for being pregnant because the record itself refuted her claims? The NYTimes was busy playing partisan protector.
Out on the campaign, Elizabeth Warren told us (repeatedly) that story about her job as a teacher, and how she was so cruelly let go for being pregnant. She’s a ‘victim’ you see, and she is willing to FIGHT for other women who are ‘victims’ like herself.
It wasn’t long at all before evidence refuting her claim started adding up, — including an interview where Warren herself gave a very different telling of that tale — and showing that it was JUST as much bullsh*t as her high-cheekbones Pow-Wow-Chow nonsense.
You might think that the press would want to make public a lie like that. Wouldn’t the press WANT to make sure that public servants weren’t wrongfully maligned by a political opportunist?
Guess not. Here’s proof.
A reporter who now works for the New York Times failed to report on public records, which he obtained in April, that cut against Senator Elizabeth Warren’s (D., Mass.) claim that she was fired from a teaching position in 1971 due to pregnancy discrimination.
Reid Epstein, who was then working for the Wall Street Journal, filed an open-records request with the Riverdale Board of Education on April 2 seeking “to inspect or obtain” copies of public records relating to Warren’s time teaching at Riverdale during the 1970-1971 school year. In response to his request, Epstein on April 10 received school-board minutes that challenge Warren’s story, according to documents obtained by National Review through the New Jersey Open Records Act.
Epstein, who moved to the Times on April 19, never broke the story. Reached for comment, a Times spokeswoman said that the “records were inconclusive” and the potential story required further sourcing.
So much for ‘all the news that’s fit to print’.
There is a reason the Andrew Klavan’s joke, ‘The New York Times, a former newspaper’ has stuck to them.
- LEAKED: New York Times Staff Meeting Reveals The NEW Plan On How To Cover President Trump
- Hey NYT: Why Is The ‘Paper Of Record’ Revising History On The Sly?