Former New York Times reporter and Howard University professor Nikole Hannah-Jones has long been controversial as a writer who expressly rejects objectivity and neutrality in journalism. That was most evident in her “1619 Project,” which was ridiculed by historians and law professors in claiming that slavery was the driving force behind American independence. Nevertheless, the project was awarded the Pulitzer Prize despite glaring historical errors. Yet, this month, Hannah-Jones is back on the pages of the New York Times again rewriting history. This time, she is praising cop-killer and 1960s revolutionary Assata Shakur (left).
Hannah-Jones has been a lightning rod in her writings, from declaring “all journalism is activism” to spreading conspiracy theories against the police. Yet, mainstream media, including the Times, has run interference for Hannah-Jones, including the dean of the University of North Carolina trying to shut down criticism by reminding a reporter that they must all defend Hannah-Jones.
Hannah-Jones’s latest project of historical revision is a sorrowful memorial to Shakur, which shows the same disregard for facts in favor of a preferred narrative.
Born JoAnne Deborah Byron (and later adopting the names of Joanne Chesimard and Shakur), the violent revolutionary was a member of the Black Panther Party and the Black Liberation Army. In 1977, she killed New Jersey police officer Werner Foerster, 34, a U.S. Army Vietnam veteran who left behind a widow and a young son. She later escaped prison and fled to Cuba, where she died earlier this year. In 2005, she was declared a domestic terrorist. In 2013, the Obama Administration put her on the most wanted list.
You would know little of that from the New York Times column. After all, all journalism is activism, according to Hannah-Jones, and, if the facts do not fit the narrative, the facts have to go.
In her column, Hannah-Jones seems to dismiss the conviction as the result of an “all-white” jury. What is omitted is that Shakur had a long and violent criminal record. She was previously shot in the stomach during what was believed to be a drug-connected crime at the Statler Hilton in Manhattan.
She was sought in other crimes, including a 1971 bank robbery. When asked, Shakur later shrugged off such crimes as a type of racial reparations: “There were expropriations, there were bank robberies.”
She was also linked to a grenade attack that injured two police officers after being identified by witnesses. In 1972, she was identified by Monsignor John Powis as one of the suspects in the armed robbery at Our Lady of the Presentation Church in Brownsville, Brooklyn. During the robbery, the priest was told “We usually just blow the heads off White men.”
She was also tied to the murder and ambushing of police officers for years before she was stopped on May 2, 1973 on the New Jersey turnpike by State Trooper James Harper who was backed up by Trooper Werner Foerster in a second patrol vehicle. The resulting shootout left Harper wounded and Foerster dead.
Her trials spanned a variety of charges ranging from bank robbery to kidnapping to attempted murder, and other felonies. However, while there were acquittals and a mistrial (due to a pregnancy) on different charges, she was ultimately convicted of murder before her escape.
Yet, the Times and Hannah-Jones brush over that history to gush about Shakur and the effort to shield her, even describing the criminal network as akin to the famed system used to free slaves before the Civil War: “Shakur had been hidden in the United States for several years by a sort of Underground Railroad.”
The Times column bewails how “freedom came with shattering costs for her and her family.” Not a single line of sentiment for the widow and son that her victim left behind in New Jersey, let alone the other victims in murders and attacks that she was connected to as part of the Black Liberation Army.
Of course, such sentiment is not allowed for true victims. For example, Hannah-Jones was again published by the New York Times, warning in a column that memorials to Charlie Kirk are “dangerous.”
Hannah-Jones has also chastised other writers for covering shoplifting stories because “this is how you legitimize the carceral state.”
Yet, the New York Times is still actively involved in projects to rewrite history with Hannah-Jones. This is the same newspaper that barred columns from Senator Tom Cotton for arguing for the deployment of National Guard troops to quell violent riots, but published columns by “Beijing’s enforcer” in Hong Kong and a University of Rhode Island professor who previously defended the murder of a conservative protester.
It is the same newspaper that forced out a variety of editors who published opposing viewpoints or challenged biased coverage and journalistic activism.
The Times column ends with a line that is breathtaking in its ahistorical and amoral message: “Shakur, who saw herself as an escaped slave, died free.”
A convicted murderer and wanted terrorist died in one of the most blood-soaked, repressive regimes in the world . . . but Hannah-Jones and the New York Times want everyone to know that she “died free.”
That is comforting. As for Werner Foerster, he just died and was not mentioned once by name in the Times column.
N.B. This column also ran on Fox.com
No one, alive or dead, is free in Cuba.
Unless they flee that nightmare.
No kidding, how bad would it be for you to try to float 90 miles across the shark infested Florida Straits on an inner tube raft to get to freedom?! That horrible oppressive land of America!
The important takeaway is that she’s dead. There was no justice, but the world is a better place now that it is unburdened by such irredeemable trash.
The same can be said about Charlie Kirk.
How many cops did Charlie Kirk shoot? How many armed robberies did Kirk commit?
Why would that matter? What matters is he’s dead and the world is a better place. Not everyone was a fan.
Here to see for all. One sick mind.
Mom must be proud of you
DustOff,
That is the one upside with all the anonny moron comments. They show us all exactly what kind of people they really are: Sick.
Wow, great comeback, did you come up with that all by yourself?
Is it really a “comeback” if all I did was point out what you said and put your mentality on full display for all to see?
None Mikedix
Charlie Kirk was a Christian. A young man that simply expressed his opinion and in doing so the logic he putforth exposed these Woke idiots for what a sickness they are.
Two young children now get to grow up without a father, a lost young Utah man twisted by the same sickness Charlie exposed gets to face a death penalty while his family gets to live in shame for the rest of their lives.
A big Yahoo for our Anonahole!
What thing did Kirk do that Christ would have recognized as following His teaching?
Anonahole
You’re a despicable person, now crawl back under your rock.
It appears that CBS news staff follow the same principles of The New York Times. Bari Weiss stopped the presentation of the CECOT episode because it was one sided. Now former and present journalists are writing to the Ellison’s claiming that she is ruining independent journalism. Do they think the rest of the world are just sheep and have no interest in learning the whole story? Try reading Wikipedia vs Britannica and see the stark difference in reality of today’s journalism.
I wish Bari the best and sincerely hope that the Ellison’s do not give up on her.
This just in – Bari Weiss is doing a Nazi special to provide a balanced view of the extermination of Jews.
Neither Wikipedia nor Britannica are journalism.
Byron was Pro-Choice (i.e. selective, opportunistic) and so is Hannah-Jones, Diversitist (e.g. racist), too. #HateLovesAbortion.
Were these people also drug addicts as was the hero George Floyd? Life as seen through a drug stupor or pain of withdrawal? The Shakur woman wasn’t free at all in such case.
. It’s like reading about wild dogs and and wolves isn’t it. The call of the wild or maybe whitefang.
Yes, yes, Noah’s ark just isn’t some of gods best work.
Have a civilized new year…
Come on! The NYT also won a Pulitzer for their fictional Russiagate reporting. It is no surprise they would continue to print fiction.
If its no surprise, why are you screaming about it?
That is not screaming. That is your projection. What I wrote was common sense and pointing out the obvious, which you missed.
One question. Do you read the NYT daily? I’ll have to assume the answer is a big NO. So then, how can you claim that the NYT prints FICTION?
Commonsense!
He read the article by Turley. Turley is a lair? Is that what you are saying ANON #2 ?? Get a life!!
I don’t read anything that deliberately lies with malice–except your comments.
It’s just a fictionalized life. Jones is a writer of fiction.
Daily? No. Read the paper once. It was mostly fiction. Once in a while, long while, they actually print something that resembles “news.” Otherwise, if I want to be misinformed, I would read the NYT, daily.
Agree, Upstate. We buy the news to have them factcheck for us, not for us to factcheck the news. If I catch them in an obvious and calculated lie, I’m done.
Diogenes: That is an important point that you make. Fact-checking is often relegated to “fact-checkers,” who in themselves are mostly* partisan and politically biased. https://arxiv.org/html/2505.08048v2
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/fact-check-bias-chart
(Notice the disclaimer at the bottom of the chart: ” This chart does not rate accuracy or credibility. A fact checker can be accurate, yet biased.”) well, that’s nice to know.
*Mostly” –notice how few of the “fact-checkers” are in the center….
Polls have similar disclaimers. That’s a legal necessity against being sued. As a lawyer you should know that.
Fact-checkers also have facts to back up their work. The only way to dismiss their work is mere association with a left or right leaning organization or being smeared as biased.
really, clown? Maybe you should look at the MEANING of the disclaimer posted below the chart. I’ll post it for you.
Don’t recall the TV networks or online pollsters ever including this in their “poll” results,
“How can Fact Checkers be biased?
“Fact check websites like Snopes and Politifact reveal their bias in numerous ways. These sources may be seen as more reliable or credible than other news outlets because of their focus on ‘facts.’ But often, fact checkers will analyze information for the reader and draw a conclusion about what the facts mean, which is subjective in nature. Other times, they’ll display bias based on what facts they choose to downplay or to highlight. They also show bias based on story choice — for example, primarily fact checking left-wing politicians, or only fact checking right-wing claims.”
RELATED: Six Ways Fact Checkers Show Bias”
The first step is linking to the source. If one fails to do that, it shows extreme bias.
https://www.allsides.com/blog/6-ways-fact-checkers-are-biased
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/fact-check-bias-chart
Let’s recall the time that the Trump administration introduced the concept of alternative facts. That is, not the truth of any situation, but claiming their interpretation of what they wanted to be true were facts.
“As a lawyer you should know that.” Whenever I see that, I know it is georgie trying to strike back but afraid to use his X signature.
But the NYT, along with the WP, are on the top of the Google search engine when one searches for information. That is one reason so many on the left remain in ignorance.
S. Meyer: Yes! (Notice the chart I just posted in response to Diogenes, ^
I did, but the so-called center column doesn’t seem the center to me. It’s more on the left from my perspective.
S. Meyer,
Your being a radical conservative extremist makes the center look leftest in comparison.
Far right” is a lazy label you use when you run out of arguments. BBC and Reuters are plainly to the left of center. Pretending otherwise just shifts the baseline to win rhetorical points.
I started as a Democrat and never moved right. The left moved further left. My views are anchored in economics, not fashion, and lie with Friedman, Hayek, and others who understood incentives, scarcity, and unintended consequences. Calling that “far right” demonstrates your disconnect from reality.
You read it only once, but know what it contains all the time enough to know that sometimes they print something that resembles news? Seems quite critical of a publication that you don’t read but have no other news source to be the contrast to.
Libraries keep newspapers in the fiction section now. Pulitzer prize for fiction?
USF
Quite meaningless now, I read a Kenyan idiot from Indonesia got one for being half black.
“ I dealt a bit, just some weed and a little blow”
“I make love to men every day in my mind”
BHO
Just as the majority of the sane have rejected woke, reparations, green ecology panic, DEI, and CRT; it is about time to say that we are just plain tired of hearing the radical, fanatical screeds from unjustifiably angry aging blacks who have lost their war against the western world.
Sunshine is the best disinfectant and I think it is time to bring these unhinged assertion out into the bright lights of public discussion and out of the dim fog of a faculty lounge and let sane adults judge these manifestos for what they are. Fictions based on the unrealizable dreams planted in their noggins decades ago by those whose hearts were never with America. Assata Shakur was a putrid cop killer and that is all she was, so let’s not allow another fanatic to sanctify her in academia and spread that poison to yet another clueless generation.
“time to bring these unhinged assertion out into the bright lights of public discussion… by sane adults…” You mean the “sane adults” that populate this blog? Don’t know if you realize it, there are just a couple of perceived sane ones here. You ain’t among them.
such predictable and pitiable replies – you are such a failure at this.
I’m glad she was able to flee into Cuba. Was she an opium addict?
Stories like these from Professor Turley have one positive outcome. They lead to a deeper reading of the story he is criticizing and further proof that even Turley leaves out a LOT that shows why Hanna-Jones is a better writer.
For example, Turley criticizes Hanna-Jones for leaving out the name of the murdered Trooper, even though her essay is essentially an obituary about Assata Shakur. A particular fact that would reasonably explain why it’s not appropriate to bring up the name, in her view, as a requirement for her to make sure she mentions the murdered cop’s name and the fact that he had a child. Seems rather petty when you consider the context and purpose of the essay.
An interesting fact about the case against Assata Shakur is that the cop who survived admitted to lying on the report after the shooting. Big surprise there. Then there’s the jury. An all white jury, a biased jury that had members with ties to the New Jersey State Troopers, and some expressing prejudice before the trial, creating a conflict of interest. Again, big surprise there. ( sarcasm ).
Then there was the lack of evidence. No gunpowder residue was found on Shakur’s hands, and medical testimony indicated her severe injuries (shot in the arm/shoulder) would have made firing a weapon impossible. Seems more like a rigged trial than a fair one. No wonder she’s deemed a hero to some, and that’s why she fled to Cuba, where she would not be subject to smears and labeling her as a terrorist by the U.S. Government. Oddly enough, this is how Kilmar Abrego Garcia has been treated. Smeared as a gang member without proof and labeled a human trafficker without proof, all to punish him for having the audacity to challenge his deportation orders, which apparently he did not have. Big surprise, again.
You should be a fantasy writer. Thanks for the laugh. Made my day.
Maybe once she was shot, she could not fire a gun, but the cops did not start the shooting.
And, while every juror may have been white, there were no allegations that Black ppl were kept off the jury.
How do you know the cops did not start the shooting? One of them admitted he lied on his report at trial. That would raise suspicion that the cops are lying and that they started the shooting. Evidence showed there was no gunpowder residue on her hand, meaning she may not have even fired a shot. Could one of the cops accidentally shoot his partner and lie about it?
If the cop already lied in his report, it’s plausible he also lied about who shot first. That is why the allegations against Shakur are suspect.
The jury was white, but it also had members who had links to the New Jersey state Troopers, and some expressed prejudice before being seated. The jury was already primed to find her guilty.
Then we have the government’s interest in painting her as an enemy of the state, like Trump is doing with ANTIFA. She was targeted by the FBI long before the shooting because she was once a member of the Black Panthers and then became a member of a more radical group, the Black Liberation Army. Remember, just being a member of a group is not a crime.
Just the fact that one of the cops admitted to lying should have been enough for an unbiased jury to have reasonable doubt about the shooting and who started it.
An immigration judge ruled in 2019 that A-G was a member of MS-13, and tbe BIA upheld this determination. At this point, AG has 30 days to appeal this decision to the Circuit Court, but, although amply represented by counsel, A-G did not. Thus he conceded he was a member of MS-13, a fact that Judge Xinis chooses to ignore.
“Thus he conceded he was a member of MS-13, a fact that Judge Xinis chooses to ignore.”
Nope. He never concede he was a member of MS-13. The immigration judge used the testimony of a cop who was removed from his position because he had been lying in his reports. Matter of fact he has successully shown enough evidence the government has been engaging in vindictive prosecution. The government is on the defensive now and that is a good sign for Abrego Garcia. It’s strange that the government lied to the judge about Costa Rica not wanting to take Abrego Garcia when he told them he would accept a deportation to Costa Rica. They don’t want to deport him there because they want to deport him to a sh!thole country as punishment. Keep this in mind. The government had an opportunity to deport him to Costa Rica and they refused by lying to the judge that Costa Rica did not accept him when in fact they did. They could have ended this whole boondogle when he agreed to be deported ot Costa Rica and they refused. Thus proving vindictive prosecution and Abrego Garcia is likely to succeed in remaining here and free on bond while his other case is dismissed.
I have always believed that objective truth exists for any inquiry. It may be more complicated than we we expect, it may be more simple. We may discover along the way that our inquiry is poorly formed or that it is just plain stupid. We may come very close to knowing a truth, or pieces of it, we may not be capable of even getting close. One thing seems certain, it is more difficult to work towards knowing the truth than it is to head in the other direction. It takes a lot more time and effort to build something useful like a house than it does to burn it down.
Hannah-jones looks like a lazy arsonist to me than an historian. Will her future articles be about how all of Western science was built by black people?
The only reason you may be seeing Hanna-Jones the way you do is because of how the right portrays them. It’s the irony of the whole thing that requires you to fully understand the whole story. Hanna-Jones won a Pulitzer precisely because she explored the whole story, every detail. Not just the snippets and labels designed to impugn her character because of their ignorance of history and context. She wrote the Assata Shakur story from her perspective as a black person who IS familiar with the injustices and prejudices that only those like her can see not those who have never experienced it or been subject to it. You know…the opposing view Turley is always ironically defending.
Who is the right? And who is them? Who is their?
So only black women have “perspective” and “they”, the others, do not? Because they’re not black? So, black perspective is truth? “they” perspective is lies?
Got it. Good to know.
You’re a bad joke. HJ’s work has been derided by serious professionals in both journalism and history. And here you are, whoever you are, defending her garbage in the face of valid criticism. The only unknown quantity here is your IQ, and that is clearly well below average.
Apparently, you can’t seem to name these so-called “serious professionals”.
Turley is not offering any “valid criticism”. He’s joining in on petty criticisms with other conservative pundits and authors because they can’t stand the idea that she admires someone who is a hero to so many and an enemy to others, who seems more intent on remaining ignorant than expanding their knowledge of the story regarding Assata Shakur. Because there ARE compelling facts and reasons to believe she was the victim of a biased jury, and a lying cop. Even the evidence against her was suspect. Of course, Turley doesn’t want to bring it up because that would mute the purpose of his petty grievance against Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Hanna-Jones.
The existence of racially skewed injustice, widespread or otherwise, does not mean that it is a solid basis for understanding every piece of history.
Here is where it gets interesting and not so surprising. Turley is ignoring the whole story. Hanna-Jones is not some sloppy writer. She’s good, good enough to win a Pulitzer. In her essay lamenting the death of Assa Shakur, there is a mention of a very familiar scenario that today points to the implied innocence of Shakur.
“In 1977, an all-white jury found her guilty of murdering a New Jersey state trooper who died in a shootout after a car that Shakur and her colleagues were riding in was stopped by the police. Officers later claimed Shakur fired the first shot. Shakur, who was shot twice, said her hands were in the air, and she didn’t shoot anyone.”
How do we know the cops didn’t start shooting first? We already have a record of cops lying about incidents and shooting black motorists for being black or being “afraid for their lives”.
The criticism of Hanna-Jones’ essay is a petty complaint about leaving out the name of the murdered cop and mentioning how Shakur was tried by an all white jury from people who didn’t take the time to understand Shakur’s story or even bothered to read it. Ironically, Turley’s criticism of Hanna-Jones’ past statements that journalism is an activist pursuit seems borne out by Turley’s own take on the story. Focusing on Shakur’s crimes and terrorist label without taking the time to read about… the other side of the story, Shakur’s story. An objective journalist would at least explore or write about Shakur’s side of the story and why it resonated with many at the time. Instead, Turley, inadvertently or not, chose to focus on only the worst parts of Shakur’s life while lamenting the lack of mention of the murdered cop, how he left a family because… he was an upstanding citizen? A true professional? We don’t know, because the point is to maintain the worst aspects of the story and the idea that this is about race, and continue to perpetuate stereotypes associated with them. For all we know, that cop could have been a racist bigot or just another power-tripping cop with a serious chip on his shoulder about black people. Trying to cast the cop as some innocent victim without knowing all the facts, while at the same time casting Shakur as some terrorist criminal because of an incident that the cop himself may have started, is taken at face value is an awfully familiar views like those borne out of the George Floyd murder and led to nation-wide protests and a renewed focus on police conduct.
“Instead, Turley, inadvertently or not, chose to focus on only the worst parts of Shakur’s life…”
For 99% of the population their “worst parts” are not anything like the relentless violence of this vicious criminal. Any person diminishing what a dangerous scumbag she was is himself or herself a danger to humanity. Hannah-Jones has coprolite for brains.
You only know she was a dangerous vicious criminal is because the government, one already biased against her, labeled her as such without any context about HER side of the story. Hanna-Jones provided her side of the story to bring greater clarity and a different perspective about the reasons for her behavior, and choices. This is where Turley fails at his most cherished princiople. Hearing the opposing view. Hanna-Jones provides that and Turley is focused on attacking her character and her crediblity as a writer while being a sloppy and disingenious one himself. There is a reason why she won a Pulitzer and Turley still writes books destined for the bargain table at Barnes and Noble. He;s attacking her for omitting certain things from an obituary. Turley is being a petty putz.
The bonus for him is at the same time he gets to write something to feed the rage economy he allegedly despises so much.
Here’s another whopper. Gotta ask, what’s your point X? Its a jumble of postulations.
You’ll never see any recognition for your screeds, while is greeted with adulation and recognition. Hurts huh?
Any explanation would be wasted on you. You have no ability or want to understand. It’s as basic as that when it comes to you.
Hands up don’t shoot? Who knows maybe this time it is true… because people arrested always tell the truth and all cops always lie. At least the cops still alive always must be liars… for the others mortui non mordent
Oh oh, here’s one of those Latin quoting pencil heads.
Sorry Anonymous for being pencil head. “Dead men tell no tales” since the latin offends you.
Offends? na… just wanted to see how an idiot like you would respond. Pompous clown.
And you’re too lazy to bother looking it up.
I prefer the direct translation, the dead do not bite. More pithy, but that’s lost on too many here.
oldfarmer, there’s plenty of video evidence that cops have shot people while running away for for “fearing for their lives” because a person is black. Lying to cover up their “mistakes” is also common. Cops are allowed to lie to you for any reason. There’s ample justification to claim that cops cannot be trusted with telling the truth. Even the DHS has been caught outright lying to a judge. Why would be assume a cop is being honest when they can legally lie to you all day long without repercussion?
“George Floyd murder”……uh-huh.
Assata Shakur was,a wanted fugitive for questioning in connection with a January 1972 shooting of a police officer and a March 1972 bank robbery in Brooklyn, at the time the NJ state police stopped the car in which she was riding.
X
Riiiight… and OJ died looking for the real murderer of Nicole and Ron Goldman. I read he found them just before he died, he came face to face with him, it was while he was shaving.
Not sure that receiving a Pulitzer is anything to brag about:
Yellow journalism associated with newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer & William Randolph Hearst, was characterized by exaggerated headlines, unverified claims, & a focus on scandalous stories to increase circulation, raising concerns about the erosion of journalistic standards & the spread of misinformation.
Professor Turley’s odd fascination with Hanna-Jones and her writing, which is certainly controversial and award-winning, seems to have a little bit of jealousy sprinkled in. She did win a Pulitzer Prize. Turley is still stuck writing about a subject that countless authors have done to death before him.
He seemed bothered that the New York Times didn’t write what HE wanted them to write, kind of like how HE writes on subjects, leaving out important facts and context…like Hanna-Jones. Darn, there goes that pesky hypocrisy again.
One historical inaccuracy does not negate the full context and idea behind her Pulitzer-winning writing. Turley has made bigger flubs than Hanna-Jones. Perhaps that is what is keeping the Pulitzer committee from considering Turley as a contender.
Of course, the professor wants to focus on Shakur’s worst behavior and crimes without recognizing that the point of her rebellious nature was about the attitudes and perceptions of black people during her time. Ironically, Turley does the same thing he accuses the Times of doing. He conveniently leaves out the rampant racism and treatment of black people in the 60, the constant scapegoating of societal ills and crime on black people, things that are still done by those on the right today.
Turley seems upset about Shakur “getting away” with her crimes and not facing justice. Yeah, it’s unfortunate. So did the Jan. 6 criminals who got pardoned by Trump. Sometimes life is…unfair. Right? Who knows why Shakur was the way she was? Maybe it was because she was a product of the white prejudice, bigotry, and racism of her time. Trump, the president, is a convicted felon. Shouldn’t we also make it a habit of pointing out that the current president is a convicted criminal? Of course, MAGA loves to gloss over it like it’s nothing of consequence. But god forbid a black rebellious individual who made history most controversially, depending on whose side you’re on, should only be remembered by how Turley dictates. If Hanna-Jones wishes to write about Shakur in a positive light, it’s entirely her right. She’s offering a totally different perspective that doesn’t make her as bad as Turley and others want her to be. To Hanna-Jones, Shakur is her version of Mangione, the man who killed the health insurance executive, who is deemed a hero to many and a criminal to others.
One thing is for sure: Hanna-Jones has a Pulitzer. Turley does not. Maybe it’s a jealousy thing.
X’s odd fascination with Turley and his books, his awards, his international recognition. Maybe it’s a jealousy thing eh X. It sure is with you X.
X’ pathological fascination, no less, manifests itself in pure unmitigated JEALOUSY. Write all you want about JT, you’ll never get the recognition he commands.
Danica M.
As you aptly point out, our leftist friends are consumed by their not only jealousy but envy. As we all know, he is a highly respected law professor, has been called on for his testimony before Congress more than a few times, he is invited to speak at various venues, his first book was so highly successful it was on it’s fourth printing. His blog is highly popular, and attracts views from all over the world.
Another problem leftists has with the good professor, is he is pointing out how the far left has highjacked the Democrat party into their anti-Constitution, socialistic policies and nihilistic ways.
Sane, normal, traditional Democrats need to take back their party and give the fascist leftists the boot.
LIAR george
out the rampant racism and treatment of black people in the 60, the constant scapegoating of societal ills and crime on black people, things that are still done by those on the right today.
________________________
The left/dems created the KKK and Jim Crow laws. Not the right.
WT F?
You’re right abou that. Unfortunately today’s Republicans are were yesterdays Democrats. Why do you think it was Republicans who fought so hard to keep conderedate monuments and Democrats demanded they be removed? Because today’s Republicans are the same Demcrats of that era. Wild isn’t it? You may be an old school Democrat in reality. Funny stuff.
Yeah right, George you are an idiot.
You’re so boring. Go away and get your own blog.
Why go away, jump in and criticize. You coward.
Coward? What a DF ANON!!
In your case, no “maybe” about it. It’s a stupid thing.
The Pulitzer Prize ceased to be an indicator of value when it was awarded to the NYT and the WaPo for their coverage of the Russian collusion delusion.
And why justify robbing banks and killing cops on the ground of being black? There were millions of peaceful African Americans back then
michaeldix2f64102fb2,
“The Pulitzer Prize ceased to be an indicator of value when it was awarded to the NYT and the WaPo for their coverage of the Russian collusion delusion.”
Well said!! It appears some are trying to associate the good professor’s article as some kind of obsession or envy that Hannan-Jones has a Pulitzer Prize and JT does not. Why would the good professor want a Pulitzer? Just as you point out, it no longer has any worth. Even less so when they gave one to Hannan-Jones. The prize out of a Cracker-Jack box (do they still make that?) has more worth. A happy meal toy has more worth.
“The Pulitzer Prize ceased to be an indicator of value when it was awarded to the NYT and the WaPo for their coverage of the Russian collusion delusion.”
Because you say so? Next thing you will dismiss is the Nobel Peace prize because Trump didn’t get it and somehow he dserves it. Never mind he’s killing people on boats and threatening war with Venezuela. Crazy stuff eh?
Great article, as usual. In the news business, especially at The New York Times, there are several distinct modes: traditional objective reporting, political reporting, opinion pages, narrative journalism, and, at times, fantasy. Together, these strands sustain the paper’s readership. Lately, however, the balance has tilted too far toward fantasy, giving the impression of an aging institution struggling with multiple, and often conflicting, personalities.
Fantasy? I guess when looking at a glass of water, it’s either half full or half empty. Don lives in a fantasy world, like X, thinking they’re the smart ones. Well, maybe in their own minds.
The New York Times long ago ceased to be a reliable reporter of verifiable facts and journalism.
Being ignored is probably the worst nightmare for Nikole Hannan-Jones. What do you say we give it a try?
I’ve never heard of her.
In a decent society she’d be asking people if they want fries with their burger. But she can’t be ignored because our so called “elites” admire her and confer on her unearned status. University administrators and hiring committees hire her to infect the minds of young people with her revisionist history and activism. The New York Times gives her space to reach its audience with an essay exalting a murderous cop killing villain and fugitive.
As horrible as she is, that our so called “elites” have elevated her to such high status and influential positions demonstrates how truly awful and grotesque our “elites” are.
Just waiting for the first s@@tlib to defend this story and call you a ‘nazi’ for objecting.
I do not want to understand, reconcile or live in the same country with these people.
antonio
Everyone is entitles to their 15 minutes right? Why not Jones?
Interesting, “I do not want to understand, reconcile or live in the same country with these people.” I’m guessing they feel the same way.
You guess wrong.
Pure genius.
The New York Times never made it to my reading list and is unlikely to. How is that Workers Paradise in the USSR working out? You know that series of articles in the 1930’s that extolled Stalin and his Paradise and also won a Pulitzer Prize. Of course it it is now Putin’s Paradise.
Is the New York Times now in the Fantasy and Science fiction section of the New York Public Library? If not I would suggest placing it down around DC and/or Marvel Comics.
How is that Workers Paradise in the USSR working out? I wonder how that American Dream thing is working out? Capitalism has failed Americans. It will go the route of socialism, into oblivion. And guess what system will supersede it?
My daughter just bought her second home. She is not even thirty yet.
A good friend of mine is well on her way to getting her RN degree.
I finished the year up 18% in the stock market.
Capitalism is doing just fine for those of us who work hard, save money, make good decisions.
Upstate lots of Only Fans content creators are getting second homes. I hear it’s a very lucrative business.
ANON is in his fantasy world! ANON #2 should be your screen name. You are full of ….
GEB
So true.
So how true is it? Explain please.
GEB,
DC/Marvel comics are more interesting and entertaining then the fiction the NYT publishes.
So you read comics? Just as I figured.
Long time ago, I used to collect.
Here is an example of one I have: The Complete Maus: A Survivor’s Tale https://www.amazon.com/Complete-Maus-Art-Spiegelman/dp/0679406417/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1GWRCU2DOPSYZ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.B2hdbgVn6Q-PfFIVoxnZgnWIyMipwTczppC2hUXNdJ6gmPvF_RbdfxiOdQ5DVtaJtLHN-1PiDNReuqso-_KT0DlVtrdVy5z9dyhHcbj21W1HYR68TBSZSGkPx7EllymbvitQXbIk4KxhqA7RJ-giSr791vI0eMpDAPZRFwfB0orfMgjsBvYqVm-ZS9rlTU0kbSoG_hazvYJB6eQb7riOU6UU5IzWEPE6-dTW63wzkmE.rwEyTfhWaSRy2rvi0WTqeWXWOeya1eWYDtzNhs0wjio&dib_tag=se&keywords=Mouse+comic+book&qid=1767110939&s=books&sprefix=mouse+comic+book%2Cstripbooks%2C153&sr=1-1
A lot of people read comics. Doonesbury, Bloom County, The Far Side to name a few. People with limited intellect, like you, automatically think of children’s superhero comics, although I would argue some of them are much more adult content then for children. Some of Dr. Seuss books, can be read by all ages and appreciate the story.
Decent people embrace the concept of values as crucial to living their lives successfully. The nihilist left wing rejects all facts which clash with their beliefs and all human values as such and therefore cannot be bothered to tell the truth or even make the attempt to do so. So N H-J’s lies flow naturally from her core left wing beliefs. The only way to combat such lies is to present the truth so thank you for the article.
Awesome Pawsome column. You left out the Tupac Shakur relationship.
Excellent article and lays it out in plain English that anyone with a modicum of commonsense can grasp.
Cue….the usual tripe from the usual suspects that shall attempt to deflect, deny, and conflate their warped notions to facts.
The larger issue is not the Cop killing Terrorist and her sordid contribution to society but rather the far greater evil which the Professor defines with stark accuracy.
As that old Pogo Cartoon expressed…”We have met the enemy and they are us!”.
We allow such conduct as the NYT, University Deans and Presidents, the media writ large, the Democrat Party, and people like Nikole Jones to succeed without suffering any liabilities for the harm they do.
We must allow free speech….but not criminal acts….or criminal actors as they must be held liable for their culpable acts.
Otherwise our great experiment is doomed.
Next thing you know, Hannan-Jones will be praising Hitler…, that guy who made the trains run on time. Yet additional proof that the highest and best use of the print version of the Gray Trollop is the lining of bird cages.
The National Socialists were a socially progressive, scientifically advanced, Diversity (e.g. racism, sexism) obsessed, transgender advocacy, secular culture engaged in ethnic Springs. Forward!
It was Mussolini who made the trains run on time, but otherwise, you’re right.
And he didn’t actually make them run on time, he just reprinted the schedule after the fact to reflect when the trains actually arrived.
Hitler did the same thing with his so-called “economic miracle” circa 1936. The German economy was in fact a disaster, but he controlled the statistics, so he had them published showing prosperity that didn’t exist.
And Castro did the same with his so-called “medical paradise”. He inherited the best medical system in Latin America, and all he did was run it down, all the while claiming the opposite.
Hitler was an artist and a veteran who tried in his way to be free.
Kunst Macht Frei
time to END Federal Aid to colleges… Cities, States and Non-profits
STOP rewarding Democrats for failure!
Capitalism ACTUALLY WORKS…if allowed to. Crony Capitalism and Socialism don’t work!
I think the biggest fans of capitalism in the USA, are the immigrant Somalis. Welcome America!
Capitalism is a democratic economic system where workers retain their earnings or capital. Socialism operates on a principle of redistributive change, when participation is involuntary or fraudulent then it is also known as slavery.
workers retain their earnings… What about taxes? Socialism has taxes too. Capitalism takes from the poor and gives to the rich. Right?
So why is it that a capitalistic government can take a person’s home when it so chooses?
So when does socialism become involuntary?
Its all so confusing.
No, capitalism does NOT take from the poor, nor does it give to the rich. It leaves everyone with as much of what is theirs as possible. High taxes are NOT consistent with capitalism; they’re a socialist intrusion.
And no, a capitalist government cannot take anyone’s property without paying full market price.