Is This Why Biden Failed?
James Carville: Cavalry Isn't Coming to Stop Trump
Trump Once Again Deserves the Nobel Peace Prize
Trump Puts the Squeeze on Iran
Can We Shake Welfare Dependency in Time to Avoid Fiscal Collapse?
Skip 'Captain America: Brave New World,' Rewatch 'Clear and Present Danger'
The FTC Must Return to Supporting Startups and Small Business by Challenging Harmful...
The Future of Clean Energy Looks Increasingly Nuclear
Freedom Should Prevail in Sports Betting
DOGE Is Doing What the American People Want
DOGE Could Unleash Our Economy and Restore Constitutional Guardrails
Iranian Democratic Activism Is on the Rise but Can Benefit From the West...
Planned Parenthood Is Sidestepping Democracy and Science to Further an All-Trimester Abort...
Donald Trump's Steadfast Loyaty
Donald Trump's Steadfast Loyalty
Tipsheet

NYT Issues Correction for Revisiting Gabby Giffords Conspiracy

Social media users were incensed when The New York Times editors published an editorial Wednesday night in which they surmised what led to the shooting that morning at a congressional baseball practice. The gunman, 66-year-old James T. Hodgkinson, fired about 50 shots, sending five people to the hospital, including Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), who remains in critical condition. In their analysis, the Times editors suggest that political incitement had something to do with the attack, considering the assailant was a known Bernie Sanders supporter and a loud GOP critic.

Advertisement

In one passage, the editors revisit a debunked conspiracy theory regarding the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) in 2011, suggesting that the shooting was inspired by a map published by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. 

It wasn’t. An FBI investigation, whose findings were revealed last year, found that Jared Lee Loughner was a disturbed young man who may very well have been obsessed with Giffords. His social media postings suggested he was undergoing a "mental breakdown," The Arizona Republic reported.

In conclusion, he was the sole author of the carnage.

The Times, finally recognizing their error, issued the following correction Thursday.

Happy to see the correction, but why was it there in the first place.

Advertisement

Nothing to say – except what Guy said.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement