Tucker Carlson delivers the 'perfect response' to NYT journo plotting a hit piece against conservative media



Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro, and Mike Davis of the Article III Project revealed Monday that a New York Times reporter reached out to them for comment regarding an upcoming hit piece about so-called "misinformation" — the likely objective of which is to get conservative commentators demonetized or possibly removed from YouTube.

Shapiro pre-emptively attacked the paper and its apparent collaborators at the leftist outfit Media Matters, while Carlson shared screenshots of his fiery textual exchange with Times reporter Nico Grant.

"Would I like to participate in your attempt to censor me?" Carlson wrote to Grant. "No thanks. But I do hope you'll quote what I wrote above and also note that I told you to f*** off, which I am now doing. Thanks."

Grant apparently opened with an introduction and the following note to Carlson on Monday: "I wanted to give you an opportunity to comment for an upcoming article that takes a look at how political commentators have discussed the upcoming election on YouTube. We rely on an analysis conducted by researchers at Media Matters for America."

Media Matters for America is a leftist organization founded by Democratic operative David Brock. It claims to document "conservative misinformation throughout the media" and to notify "activists, journalists, pundits, and the general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending media institutions."

Media Matters, now led by Angelo Carusone — the former Democratic National Committee employee who fought to get Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck ousted from Fox News and was responsible for the "#DumpTrump" campaign in 2012 — now serves as an attack dog for the Democratic Party, characterizing dissenting views as "misinformation."

'So the New York Times is working with a left wing hate group to silence critics of the Democratic Party?'

Media Matters is presently in hot water, as Elon Musk's social platform X sued the leftist organization last year for alleged defamation. Judge Reed O'Connor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas denied Media Matters' request to have that lawsuit dismissed in August.

Grant asked Carlson to comment on the following points, which will apparently be including in the planned Times piece:

  • "Media Matters identified 286 YouTube videos between May and August that contained election misinformation, including narratives that have been debunked or are not supported with credible evidence."
  • "Researchers identified videos posted by you in those four months that contain election misinformation."
  • "We feature a clip of you saying: '...All the sadness we've seen after the clearly stolen election. All these bad things happen, but people I know love each other more.'"

Shapiro and Davis appear to have been asked to comment on the same points but on different quotes.

'These outlets are beneath contempt.'

Grant gave away the plot with three follow-up questions, in all three cases, about the conservatives' membership in the YouTube Partner Program, their track records of demonetization, and history of notes from YouTube regarding "misinformation."

Carlson, wise to Grant's apparent scheme, responded, "So the New York Times is working with a left wing hate group to silence critics of the Democratic Party? Please ask yourself why you're participating in it. This is why you got into journalism? It's shameful."

"I hope you're filled with guilt and self-loathing for sending me a text like this," continued Carlson. "Please quote me."

BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales said of Carlson's reply to Grant, "Epic."

Elon Musk tweeted, "Perfect response."

Mike Needham's forward-looking conservative think tank America 2100 tweeted, "These outlets are beneath contempt. 1) Powerful activist groups (Media Matters) put out enemy hit lists. 2) The press (New York Times) publishes the names to send a signal to Big Tech. 3) Big Tech dutifully censors the enemies. They're the enforcement arm of the Left."

Conservative filmmaker Robby Starbuck wrote, "YouTube needs to be very careful how they respond to this story or risk a massive exodus from their site. Treating right wing content creators differently is going to become increasingly an offense that loses you a lot of business. People have alternatives now."

Chris Pavlovski, the CEO of the video platform Rumble, noted, "The corporate media is on their campaign to deplatform as many conservative voices as possible. This type of activist garbage is not possible on Rumble. @TuckerCarlson, we have your back."

Blaze News reached out to Grant and Media Matters for comment as well as for their definitions of "misinformation" but did not receive responses by deadline.

Grant has set his X page to private, so that his past tweets are now protected.

Shapiro referred to the anticipated Times-Media Matters hit piece as an "October surprise."

"What, precisely, is NYT doing?" wrote Shapiro. "It's perfectly obvious: using research from Media Matters, a radical Left-wing organization whose sole purpose is destroying conservative media ... in order to pressure YouTube to demonetize and penalize any and all conservatives ONE WEEK FROM THE ELECTION."

While noting that he supported the view that Biden won the 2020 election, Shapiro emphasized that the Constitution guarantees the right of Americans to suggest otherwise.

"This is totally scandalous. In 2020, the legacy media shut down dissemination of the Hunter Biden laptop story and laundered the claim that it was all Russian disinformation, all to get Joe Biden elected," continued Shapiro. "In 2024, they're even more brazen: they're openly trying to intimidate YouTube, one of the most dominant news platforms in America, into shutting down anyone who isn't pro-Kamala."

Shapiro worked his way up to echoing Carlson's sentiment, concluding, "The New York Times wants comment? Here's my comment: kindly, go f*** yourself."

U.S. Sen. Eric Schmitt responded by echoing the defiant, nearly assassinated Republican president, "Fight, fight, fight!"

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'He outright LIED': The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg is back with another 'dishonest' Trump smear — but it's quickly debunked



The Atlantic's editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, is at it again, smearing former President Donald Trump with anonymous sources and providing ammunition for Democrat political attacks ahead of Election Day. Unfortunately for Goldberg and his anti-Trump narrative, people who were actually in the room at the time the remarks were supposedly made have indicated that nothing of the sort happened — that it's more fake news.

Army Private Vanessa Guillén — posthumously promoted to the rank of specialist — was murdered inside the armory at Fort Hood in April 2020 by a fellow soldier.

Goldberg claimed that Trump volunteered to help financially with Guillén's funeral but then raged upon learning the total cost. According to the hit piece, Trump said, "It doesn't cost 60,000 bucks to bury a f***ing Mexican!" and ordered his then-chief of staff, Mark Meadows, not to pay.

Meadows, a leading character in Goldberg's narrative, noted Tuesday, "I was in the discussions featured in the Atlantic's latest hit piece against President Trump. Let me say this. Any suggestion that President Trump disparaged Ms. Guillen or refused to pay for her funeral expenses is absolutely false."

'President Donald Trump absolutely did not say that.'

"He was nothing but kind, gracious, and wanted to make sure that the military and the U.S. government did right by Vanessa Guillen and her family," added Meadows.

Ben Williamson, a former senior communications adviser for the Trump White House and spokesman for Meadows, provided insight into the extent of Goldberg's dishonesty, highlighting the substantial disparity between Meadows' statement, as provided to the Atlantic, and what was ultimately printed in the final piece.

Williamson indicated that he shared the following statement from Meadows with the Atlantic via text:

President Donald Trump absolutely did not say that. He was nothing but kind, gracious, and wanting to make sure that the military and the U.S. government did right by Gloria Guillen and her daughter Vanessa Guillen. As for the allegation that he told me to refuse payment: That is not true.

Williamson noted that the "Atlantic translated that comment to 'didn't hear Trump say it.' Treat this dishonest piece accordingly."

'He used and exploited my clients, and Vanessa Guillen's murder ... for cheap political gain.'

Trump spokesman Alex Pfeiffer similarly relayed a narrative-killing statement to the Atlantic from then-acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller's chief of staff, Kash Patel, but it appears to have made it into the article unscathed:

As someone who was present in the room with President Trump, he strongly urged that Spc. Vanessa Guillen's grieving family should not have to bear the cost of any funeral arrangements, even offering to personally pay himself in order to honor her life and sacrifice. In addition, President Trump was able to have the Department of Defense designate her death as occurring "in the line of duty," which gave her full military honors and provided her family access to benefits, services, and complete financial assistance.

Natalie Khawam, the attorney for the Guillén family quoted in the Atlantic hit piece, characterized Goldberg as a liar.

"After having dealt with hundreds of reporters in my legal career, this is unfortunately the first time I have to go on record and call out Jeffrey Goldberg," wrote Khawam. "Not only did he misrepresent our conversation but he outright LIED in HIS sensational story. More importantly, he used and exploited my clients, and Vanessa Guillen's murder ... for cheap political gain."

Extra to noting the curious timing of the hit piece, Khawam tweeted, "Not only did Trump support our military, he also invited my clients to the Oval Office and supported the I Am Vanessa Guillen bill too."

Goldberg's smear was so unbelievable that even Guillén's sister, Mayra, put her foot down Tuesday, calling out the Atlantic for its dishonesty and ghoulish attempt to exploit the service member's death for political purposes.

"Wow. I don't appreciate how you are exploiting my sister's death for politics," wrote Mayra Guillén. "Hurtful & disrespectful to the important changes she made for service members. President Donald Trump did nothing but show respect to my family & Vanessa. In fact, I voted for President Trump today."

Even though Goldberg's report has significant credibility issues, the Democratic National Committee circulated it widely as though it were true — just as it circulated Goldberg's last election-time hit piece.

Weeks ahead of the 2020 election, Goldberg claimed that during a trip to Paris in 2018, Trump called fallen soldiers "suckers" and "losers."

Despite its liberal skew, even Snopes acknowledged there was "no evidence of an audio or video recording of the remarks in question, nor was there any documentation, such as transcripts or presidential notes, to independently confirm or deny the alleged quotes' authenticity."

Blaze News senior editor for politics Christopher Bedford noted shortly after Goldberg's 2020 hit piece debuted that Goldberg had centered his piece on "secondary-source rumor-mongering" even though it was contradicted by substantial primary sources, including both people and documents.

"That should have earned a swift no-publish call, but instead their qualms went completely unmentioned," wrote Bedford. "An unskeptical belief the president is a bad man who must be defeated has led to discarding an ever-growing number of essential journalistic practices. It's the reason more and more Americans don't trust their media — and it's a good one."

None of those problems stopped Democrats from running with a story they'd already known was coming. The 2020 hit piece was published on a Thursday night, but by Friday morning, MSNBC's "Morning Joe" had "the exclusive" on a polished Democrat attack ad featuring veterans attacking Trump over specific allegations in the article.

Laurene Powell Jobs — the president of Emerson Collective, which owns the Atlantic — just happens to be one of Kamala Harris' biggest financial backers and has been shoveling cash her way since 2003. Goldberg's article ostensibly serves as a different kind of campaign support.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Leftist false-flagger tries to take down Christopher Rufo — but there's a major problem with her narrative



Lauren Windsor of Robert Creamer's Democrat-aligned Democracy Partners has repeatedly attempted to kneecap prominent conservatives and Republicans, including U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), and Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin.

Windsor recently tried to take down Christopher Rufo, a senior Manhattan Institute fellow and New College of Florida board member whose success in combating critical race theory, DEI, and academic dishonesty has made him a popular bogeyman on the left.

Despite fellow travelers' apparent desperation to believe in Windsor's latest narrative, it has quickly unraveled.

In August 2015, hackers targeted a website for would-be adulterers, Ashley Madison, and released over 25 gigabytes of data. On Thursday, Politico reported that an email address belonging to North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson (R) was among those registered on the website.

A spokesman for Robinson claimed that the Republican had not made an account on the site, which virtually anyone apparently could have done in his name.

In response to the hit piece, Windsor tweeted, "Are there other prominent conservatives on Ashley Madison? I may know of one."

The Democratic activist followed up with a message stating, "Email address belonging to conservative Chris Rufo found in Ashley Madison data dump."

'Leave my wife and children out of it, you disgusting hack.'

Windsor tried to make something of this supposed discovery, advancing the suggestion that "Rufo appears to have no qualms about attempting to fool around on the mother of his children."

She did, however, admit in subsequent messages that it is "possible that someone else registered his email to the site" and that at the time of the leaks, Rufo was unmarried.

When Windsor pressed Rufo for comment, the conservative apparently responded, "No, but I heard these guys did," along with a picture of the fake white supremacist rally Windsor helped stage with the Lincoln Project in 2021 to smear then-candidate Glenn Youngkin ahead of the Virginia gubernatorial election.

Extra to staging at least one false-flag event, Windsor — who serves as the executive director of the Democratic-aligned dark-money group American Family Voices — has spent time in recent years attempting to dox Project Veritas operatives and to take down others holding up Democrats' agenda.

For instance, in June, she tried in vain to provide Democrats with ammunition to take down Justice Alito, having posed as a conservative at an event in hopes of getting Justice Alito and his wife on tape saying something damning.

Rufo publicly called out Windsor, writing, "This is complete bull****, as you admit later in the threat. I have never used 'Ashley Madison.' If you want to attack me or my politics that's fine, but leave my wife and children out of it, you disgusting hack."

The Manhattan Institute fellow added in a subsequent message that Windsor's accusation was "verifiably false," stating:

This is verifiably false. I have never used this website and Lauren Windsor has provided zero evidence to the contrary. Moreover, her specific accusations are easily debunked. I was single in 2014, so the insinuation that I signed up for 'a website designed for married people seeking affairs' — or, even more grotesquely, that my son, whom I first met and then adopted years after this date, signed up for it using my credit card — is a total fabrication and a disgraceful slander against a child. Lauren Windsor has previously admitted to perpetrating the Youngkin Nazi hoax and this is an equally fake and partisan smear. A truly repulsive human being.

Rufo revealed Friday that his legal representatives at Dhillon Law Group contacted Windsor with a cease and desist letter, advising her to preserve evidence.

Krista Baughman, who runs Dhillon's First Amendment and defamation practice, noted, "It defies credulity that Mr. Rufo would register for a dating website marketed to people who are married in June 2014, when Mr. Rufo was an unmarried man," adding that Rufo met his wife in 2015, married her the following year, then legally adopted his son.

Rufo made clear he was contemplating suing Windsor.

Although Windsor has deleted one of her messages, specifically a quote tweet claiming that Rufo blamed his son, she has since amplified the suggestion by Steven Monacelli of the leftist blog Texas Observer that location data possibly supports her theory.

Harmeet K. Dhillon wrote, "Do NOT mess with our clients."

Dr. Jordan Peterson responded to the smear effort, writing, "Imagine that / Leftists tried to cancel @realchrisrufo / With lies / And stupid ill-thought through lies / Adding the sin of voluntary incompetence / To the sin of evil intent."

Seth Dillon, CEO of the Babylon Bee, noted that "it's a common tactic for leftists to sign conservatives up for porn sites and LGBTQ newsletters and other garbage like that as a way of trolling us."

"It isn't just annoying, though; it also gives them something to point to when data breaches happen later on. 'Oh look, we found your email on the gay dating site we signed you up for 2 years ago. Explain that!'" added Dillon.

It appears that some of Windsor's more trollish detractors have evidenced the ease with which a personal email can be used by strangers to sign up for websites, creating an OnlyFans page with her name and email.

When asked by Monacelli if the OnlyFans account belonged to her, Windsor replied, "There are plenty of people posting about signing my email up for sites."

Blaze News reached out to Rufo for comment but did not receive a response by deadline.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Trump Gamble: Unpacking NYT's Trump Coverage | Stu Does America Ep 830

The Trump Gamble: Unpacking NYT's Trump Coverage | Stu Does America Ep 830

Exposing the Real Reason Legacy Media Fears Me | Robert F. Kennedy Jr. | POLITICS | Rubin Report

Exposing the Real Reason Legacy Media Fears Me | Robert F. Kennedy Jr. | POLITICS | Rubin Report

Hit piece in Mother Jones likens Moms for Liberty to segregationists, hysterical anti-Semites



The American leftist magazine Mother Jones published an article on August 22 entitled "The Most Powerful Moms in America Are the New Face of the Republican Party." In the piece, senior editor Kiera Butler compared parental rights group Moms for Liberty's tactics and concern for children's well-being to those allegedly used and expressed both by segregationists during the civil rights movement and conspiratorial anti-Semites in premodern Europe.

Butler criticizes Moms for Liberty's allegedly selective support for parental rights. Butler suggested the group is unconcerned "with a parent's right to ensure that their gender nonconforming child is safe at school, for instance, or that their immunocompromised child is protected from Covid." Instead, she argued the group is keen on countering critical race theory, "LGBTQ-friendly books," accommodations for transsexuals, and mask mandates. Butler also intimated that the group is fixated on Second Amendment rights "that have allowed school shooters to obtain weapons."

Although Butler is convinced that Moms for Liberty is fueled by an ancient "moral panic" and "hysteria," keen also to arm school shooters, she does not discount the group's power as a political phenomenon. In fact, she admits its efficacy in "their leveraging of local school boards to flex political power."

Jeffrey Henig, a professor of political science and education at Columbia University's Teachers College, told Butler: "A lot of people felt like local school politics were kind of backwaters, and the real action was in state capitals, and in Washington, D.C. ... Folks on the right had a little bit of an awakening," realizing that it's a "three-dimensional game — it's local, state, and national, and those aren't separate games anymore. They're interrelated."

Moms for Liberty, though only created in 2021, now boasts over 100,000 members across over 195 chapters in 38 states. Butler suggested it would be "a mistake to underestimate their power or the possibility they could be a deciding factor in the midterm elections." After all, so called "mama bears" played a role in helping Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin win in 2021 on a platform of parental rights.

Gubernatorial and midterm elections are only part of the aforementioned three-dimensional game, however. Butler argued that the group and the conservative "heavy hitters" and Republican strategists who support them have one primary goal: Take over school boards.

Earlier this year at CPAC, Republican Florida Rep. Byron Donalds claimed, "The battle for our future, the battle for our country, the battle for our economy is in every public school, every private school, every charter school, and every homeschool across America."

At the same conference, Republican Illinois Rep. Mary Miller, a member of the House Education and Labor Committee, said "They're openly hostile to our American values and it's time to fight back."

It is not just rhetoric. Texas Republicans have started to increase their involvement in school board elections, as have Republicans in California and elsewhere.

This week in Florida, there were school board elections in which 30 candidates had been endorsed by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis; 21 won. DeSantis stated ahead of the elections: "If I could have a conservative majority on every school board in the country, we would be in such good shape."

"We neglected our duty to stay involved on what school districts are passing and doing," said Moms for Liberty co-founder Tina Descovich in July. "And I think when parents are awake, they'll never go back to sleep again."

Butler intimated that the real reason Moms for Liberty and similar groups want to take over school boards is not just to counter CRT, "indoctrination," mask mandates, the sexualization of children "through lessons on gender fluidity," and pornography, but rather out of a desire to get rid of public schools altogether.

Despite the group identifying the "woke left," "government bureaucrats," and "socialists" as their foes, Butler suggested that in the meantime, Moms for Liberty will continue to target "people who have been marginalized."

Nicole Neily, president of another parental rights group named Parents Defending Education, suggested that parental activism of the kind Moms for Liberty engages in is actually an antidote to marginalization and discrimination. "From coast to coast, disenchanted parents have found each other and coalesced around a few simple, discrete ideas: Parents should be involved in their children's education. ... Children should not face discrimination on the basis of immutable characteristics like race or sex. Students should be taught how to think, not what to think."

Daily Beast publishes attack piece on small-town police chief for wearing a 'Let's Go Brandon' sweater to a Christmas party



According to left-leaning news outlet the Daily Beast, a police chief from a small town in New Jersey is "under fire" for wearing a "Let's Go Brandon" sweater to a Christmas Party — except it appears only a handful of residents and an unrelated former cop are actually upset about it.

What are the details?

Township of Hamilton Police Chief Gregory Ciambrone was reportedly photographed last year wearing a sweater bearing the controversial catchphrase on it, which has become a tongue-in-cheek way of saying, "F*** Joe Biden." Alongside the slogan was an illustration of former President Donald Trump sporting a Santa Hat and smirking.

The photo, which was taken at "what appears to have been a small holiday gathering," according to the outlet, was reportedly uploaded to Facebook on Dec. 5 by another police department employee. In the post, the gathering was described as an "ugly sweater party."

In the photo, Ciambrone was allegedly seen posing with five other men who wore sweaters as well, though none with inflammatory phrases displayed.

The incident appeared to go for weeks without receiving any noticeable attention. Not so much as a local news report was published outlining any subsequent backlash to Ciambrone's sweater choice.

Yet after recently being tipped off about the Facebook post, the Daily Beast decided to spend precious time and resources writing up an 800-word exposé on the ordeal, putting the police chief on blast.

What did the Beast say?

In the article, the Daily Beast claimed that "experts" and "multiple residents" were "enraged at the embrace of a far-right catchphrase." But only one resident and one unrelated former New Jersey police officer are quoted in the article offering substantive criticism.

"Can’t believe he wore that in public to a party," the area resident, who wished to remain anonymous, said.

"Experts on criminal justice were aghast at the chief’s choice of apparel," the article stated, going on to quote Richard Rivera, a former New Jersey police officer who reportedly served as an expert witness in misconduct cases.

"There are a million ugly Christmas sweaters the police chief could have worn," Rivera, who is now a police director in Penns Grove, told the outlet, noting that Ciambrone’s sweater choice did not violate any rules or regulations but sent a troubling message.

"Police executives should refrain from making comments that violate their agency rules of conduct or portray police in a poor light where it would question their ability to fairly and impartially enforce the law," he suggested.

What else?

The Daily Beast reportedly harassed Ciambrone by sending multiple messages to his personal phone and email seeking comment on the incident. The outlet also reached out to the Township of Hamilton Police Department. Neither Ciambrone nor the department responded.

In apparent hopes of instigating an investigation, the outlet tried to contact the Township Committee and the mayor’s office, both of which reportedly declined to comment on the story.

The outlet's intentions were clear. It described the catchphrase as "conservative code" that has "sometimes been touted by advocates of bogus conspiracy theories about fraud in the 2020 election."

Elsewhere in the article, the outlet claimed that Ciambrone's behavior is particularly hurtful at a time when the country is "still facing a national reckoning over police brutality and grappling with a sustained lack of public trust in law enforcement."

Anything else?

Ciambrone is reportedly a highly respected police veteran who has received several awards for his service. According to a department Facebook post, the Township of Hamilton promoted him to chief of police in July 2019.

"During his career, Chief Ciambrone has received multiple awards, including the Gallantry Star and the Law Enforcement Officer of the Year in 2010," the post said. "He also continued to further his education and received a Masters of Administrative Science from Farleigh Dickinson University in 2012. He has received numerous certificates for Professional Training in multiple areas."

DeSantis Punches Back At AP’s Political ‘Smear Piece’ Peddling COVID ‘Conspiracy Theory’

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis punched back at the Associated Press for spreading a 'conspiracy theory' about him and his COVID-19 response.
SIDE BY SIDE: 60 Minutes EXPOSED! | Louder With Crowder

SIDE BY SIDE: 60 Minutes EXPOSED! | Louder With Crowder

NYT interviewed Josh Hawley's middle school principal, high school prom date for recent hit piece



Republican Sen. Josh Hawley (Mo.) has been the subject of seething progressive ire ever since he led the charge to object to the Electoral College certification of the 2020 presidential election. Critics on the left have harassed his family, called for his removal from Congress, canceled the publication of his forthcoming book, and even reportedly planned a secretive ethics investigation against him.

Yet perhaps the most eye-opening attack launched against the senator came in the form of Sunday's hit piece published by the New York Times, which traced its probe of the 41-year-old senator back to his preteen days. In the article, the Times — attempting to uncover the longstanding psychological factors that drove Hawley's fateful decision — went as far back as middle school to gather comments from his peers in order to answer the question, "How did he get here?"

"The senator's objection to the election results surprised some supporters," the Times wrote. "But interviews with dozens of people close to him show his growing comfort with doing what it takes to hold on to power."

Those "close" to the senator evidently included his middle school principal and his high school prom date:

In recent weeks, some of Mr. Hawley's old classmates and teachers have been aghast at his role in undermining confidence in America's elections.

"I've been very disappointed to see who he has become," said Kristen Ruehter-Thompson, a close friend growing up who was once Mr. Hawley's prom date.

Even his middle school principal, Barbara Weibling, has weighed in. "I'm not surprised he's a politician and that he's shooting for the presidency," said Ms. Weibling, a vocal supporter of Democrats. "The only thing is, I think he had a strict moral upbringing, and I was really disappointed he would suck the country into the lies that Trump told about the election. I just think that's wrong."

It didn't stop there, however. Apparently, it wasn't enough to take a comment from Hawley's middle school principal. Rather, the Times felt it would be productive to also gather reflections from other figures associated with his middle school experience, including a former teacher and a classmate. The classmate, Andrea Randle, even recalled an incident where Hawley pulled her hair:

Ms. Randle, a Black classmate, was frustrated that Mr. Hawley didn't do enough to respond to the police killing of George Floyd last May. After initially expressing sympathy, he later accused an alliance of Democrats and the "woke mob" of dividing the country.

"We played around after school, and I remember him pulling my hair after history class, that's what I remember, so it's so bizarre," she said. "Me and my friends have talked about it, even over Christmas. Was he always like this and we didn't know?"

In the article, the Times also threw some shade on Hawley's upbringing in what it characterized as a "traditional, patriarchal and churchgoing household," and precariously noted that Hawley's "first principles were guided by his Christianity."

In a scathing review of the article, The Federalist's Mollie Hemingway called "the entire construct of the article ... a joke," adding that "people may want to ask [Times' writers Elaina Plott and Danny Hakim's] prom dates or playdate partners about how they feel about their old acquaintances working for a publication that goes after people in this manner."

"Nice try, New York Times, but let's cease with the junior-high-school hit pieces," she added.