Female reporter caught mischievously smirking during Lindsay Clancy trial has smile wiped off her face



Lindsay Clancy of Massachusetts is being tried on three counts of first-degree murder in the January 2023 strangulation deaths of her children — 8-month-old Callan, 3-year-old Dawson, and 5-year-old Cora.

During the trial, hundreds of women have rallied outside the courthouse in support of the mother who allegedly admitted to killing her kids, while other women managed to find a seat inside the courtroom.

'Nothing to apologize for.'

Among those inside the courtroom on Monday was New York City-based gossip freelancer Brittany Romano.

Footage soon went viral showing Romano — who has previously contributed to Glamour and Teen Vogue, according to her website — grinning excitedly, winking, and leering flirtatiously at a camera during Clancy's trial.

Following the inappropriate display, Romano explained in a livestream that she "grew up with Lindsay" and had laughed in the courtroom because Clancy had looked at her, reported Newsweek.

Romano — who described the family home of the accused murderer as a "safe" space from her youth and posted a selfie with Clancy's defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, last week — was swiftly met online with ridicule over her conduct in the courtroom.

Mike Davis, the founder and president of the Article III Project, stated, "The same leftist women who celebrate killing unborn babies up until the moment of birth now support mothers murdering their kids. Say it with me: Evil C**ts. They’ve earned that."

RELATED: Hundreds of women rally outside courthouse to show support for woman accused of murdering her 3 children

L-R: Jonathan Wiggs/The Boston Globe/Getty Images; Barry Chin/The Boston Globe/Getty Images

The eponymous host of "The Britt Mayer Show" tweeted, "Many of my sex have gone insane. Ironically, not the one who killed her kids, but the ones applauding her and smiling like a giddy school girl at her trial."

Amid backlash over what was widely regarded as, at the very least, inappropriate behavior on the part of Romano, Vanity Fair announced that it was cutting ties with the writer.

"We were interested in the prospect of a personal essay by Brittany Romano about her experience growing up with Lindsay Clancy," a spokesperson for Vanity Fair told the Boston Globe. "Yesterday, after clear conflicts with our editorial standards and processes, we informed Romano that we were not moving forward with her essay and informed the court that she is no longer credentialed by Vanity Fair."

Romano confirmed that after the video went viral, a member of the Vanity Fair team told her to "take the story elsewhere."

The gossip writer said in a lengthy statement on Instagram that "a smile is not a crime"; that she smiles when she's uncomfortable; and that she has "nothing to apologize for."

"For two years I have fought to cover the Lindsay Clancy case honestly, because at its center is a mother accused of killing her three children during postpartum psychosis, and because the conversation around her has spent that whole time swinging between calling her a monster and asking what actually broke insider her," continued Romano. "Women's mental health coverage was never a side note in that coverage, it was the whole point."

According to the gossip writer, her role in the courtroom was effectively to amplify Clancy's preferred narrative.

Romano noted that after Vanity Fair gave Patrick Clancy, the father of the slain children, "a platform to tell his version when this case first broke," she asked the publication "to rebalance the scales."

She did not immediately respond to Blaze News' request for comment.

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

'SNL' cast member admits to ‘pantsing’ 6-year-old boy in viral Vanity Fair video — clip immediately edited



“Saturday Night Live” cast member Chloe Fineman is facing intense backlash after she admitted in a Vanity Fair game show video that she was fired as a teenage camp counselor for "pantsing" a 6-year-old boy as a prank.

“I was fired as a camp counselor. I pantsed a boy, and he wasn’t wearing underpants, and then a giant school bus drove by,” she recounted, noting that the boy was “6” when this incident happened.

When her fellow cast members reacted in shock, Fineman continued, “No, it was a different time! Like he would be like, ‘Hey, can I have a hug?’ and I'd go to hug him and then he’d like lift my shirt like a d**k. And then I was like, ‘I'm going to get back at you,’ and so we were on a hike, and I was like, ‘Hey, Ollie, go look over there, it's a hawk,’ and then I yanked his pants down. He wasn't wearing underwear. His little ding-a-ling was out.”

Although Vanity Fair has since edited out some of Fineman’s most controversial statements — specifically her admission that the boy was 6 and her use of the term “ding-a-ling” — Sara Gonzales has the fully intact clip. On a recent episode of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered,” she played the unedited video and reacted to it.

“Chloe [Fineman] thought that she was being funny when she admitted to sexually assaulting a child,” says Sara, lamenting the devolution of "SNL" from genuinely good comedy into woke, preachy politics.

“It wasn’t a ‘different time’ then. There was not a time where adult camp counselors could pants 6-year-olds,” she continues.

Sara notes that there’s been unsurprising silence from the left on Fineman’s disturbing comments.

“Not a peep. The same people who were like, ‘The Epstein files, we hate child predators, release the files’ — but nothing to say about this woman admitting that she sexually assaulted a 6-year-old. This is crazy,” she condemns.

“Is she going to be removed from 'SNL'? Are the cast members going to continue to work with a sexual predator?” she asks. “Probably, because the left has no morals and no values. They only wish to use those morals and values against you.

To watch the original, unedited Vanity Fair clip and hear more of Sara’s commentary, watch the video above.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Never trust the MSM: Vanity Fair Trump admin hit piece only confirms its malice



Vanity Fair’s bombshell profile of White House chief of staff Susie Wiles and other key figures within the Trump administration turned out to be a disingenuously framed hit piece.

"Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story," Wiles wrote on X. "I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team."

“If I were President Trump, I would fire whoever let Vanity Fair do this because you could call this an unforced error,” BlazeTV host Liz Wheeler comments on “The Liz Wheeler Show,” pointing out that the photography used was also edited to be incredibly unflattering.

“Look at that picture of Susie Wiles. No one claims she’s a runway model. Like obviously she’s not 20 years old. No one cares about that. But that is obviously a photograph that is deliberately intended to make her look psycho,” Wheeler says.


Vanity Fair also included an extremely close-up photo of Marco Rubio, where according to Wheeler, they “make him look like he’s dying of the plague.”

“That was intentional. It wasn’t an accident. ... They did this on purpose. It was malicious because they’re trying to undermine these people, especially the people who they think might have political careers after President Trump,” she explains.

But it wasn’t just Wiles and Rubio targeted by the magazine. They also included a close-up, heavily edited photo of Karoline Leavitt, who Wheeler says “obviously is a nice-looking person.”

“They are deliberately trying to make her look ugly ... they’re trying to drive a wedge between President Trump and his staff,” she says.

“And I know the president is not naive. He’s not going to let that happen. And honestly, like I said, I know this is going viral on X, but really people should not be that upset about it,” Wheeler says, pointing out that the tactic is “tired.”

“Again, my bigger question is, ‘Who OK'd this interview?’ Like really? Are you an idiot? To give the mainstream media this opportunity to try to attack you, whoever approved it should be fired,” she adds.

Want more from Liz Wheeler?

To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Vanity Fair's Trump hit piece is a ‘nothingburger’ — except for one part



Conservatives are riled up after Vanity Fair released a hit piece on the Trump administration on Tuesday morning. Published in two parts, the article combines months of candid interviews with Trump's chief of staff Susie Wiles, who is quoted saying many brow-raising things about President Trump and fellow Cabinet members.

One particular section of the article is going viral on X. It quotes Wiles claiming Trump has “an alcoholic’s personality,” JD Vance has “been a conspiracy theorist for a decade,” Elon Musk is an “avowed ketamine user,” Russell Vought is a “right-wing absolute zealot,” and Pam Bondi “completely whiffed” in her handling of the Epstein files.

In response to Vanity Fair’s hit piece, Wiles posted the following response.

— (@)

BlazeTV host Liz Wheeler confesses she’s not sure why everyone is freaking out about this article.

“This article does not bump my adrenaline or my cortisol up even a notch. ... In a sense, this article is a nothingburger because it just doesn’t matter ... because the mainstream media are liars,” she says.

And that includes Vanity Fair. In this very article, author Chris Whipple called January 6 a “bloody ... assault on the Capitol” that left “nine people” dead.

“What an absolute lie this is,” says Liz.

“One person died on January 6, and that was Ashli Babbitt, who was shot by a Capitol police officer. The others died of natural causes, drug overdoses, suicides in the days and weeks following,” she corrects.

“January 6 protesters killed no one, and yet Vanity Fair would have you believe that this was a bloody, murderous mob. ... That’s just factually wrong, and Vanity Fair knows this.”

The fact that Vanity Fair pushes such propaganda should be enough cause for us to dismiss this article. Further, even if Wiles engaged in office gossip, it doesn’t change the Trump administration’s “operational capacity or success.”

However, there is one section of the article Liz says is interesting and perhaps worth paying attention to, and that is the part where Wiles addresses Attorney General Pam Bondi.

In part two of the article, Whipple notes Wiles’ reaction to the Epstein files, specifically regarding Bondi’s spectacle of passing out “secret” Epstein info binders to certain right-wing political commentators, including Liz — binders that contained nothing of import or interest.

The article quotes Wiles saying, “I think [Pam Bondi] completely whiffed on appreciating that that was a very targeted group that cared about this. First she gave them binders full of nothingness. And then she said that the witness list, or the client list, was on her desk. There is no client list, and it sure as hell wasn’t on her desk.”

Later in the article, Whipple quotes Wiles again: “Whether [Epstein] was an American CIA asset, a Mossad asset, whether all these rich, important men went to that nasty island and did unforgivable things to young girls — I mean, I kind of knew it, but it’s never anything I paid a bit of attention to.”

Liz has long speculated about President Trump’s dismissive attitude about Bondi’s infuriating binders and the Epstein files in general. It seems he’s “underestimated” how much his base cared about the Epstein issue and perhaps Wiles is why.

“Behind the scenes, I know there was some discussion about why President Trump misread his base and particularly who might have been misinforming him about how the base thought about the Epstein files, and at the time, I had some people telling me behind the scenes that is was Susie Wiles,” says Liz, noting that she “never made a big deal about it” because she didn’t have confirmation.

“Well now, this [article] seems to somewhat confirm it — not because of necessarily any malicious motive. But if, in fact, Susie Wiles told Vanity Fair that she underestimated the potency of the Epstein scandal, and it was not something she ever paid attention to, then that somewhat explains President Trump’s dismissal of the entire Epstein scandal,” she adds.

“It sounds to me like Susie Wiles was in his ear telling him that, you know, ‘This will just pass; just let it go.”’

To hear more of Liz’s commentary and analysis, watch the full episode above.

Want more from Liz Wheeler?

To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Susie Wiles Should Go Back To Not Talking In Public

For years, President Trump’s 2024 campaign manager and now White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles had said next to nothing in public, and now we know why. There was apparently always a high risk she would make a complete fool out of herself, her boss, and, most offensively, all of his supporters. On Tuesday […]

'I am a conspiracy theorist': JD Vance slams explosive Vanity Fair profile claiming Trump-world infighting



Vice President JD Vance silenced the mainstream media for supposedly exaggerating the infighting within President Donald Trump's administration.

A new Vanity Fair article published Tuesday portrayed Trump's White House as chaotic and tense based on several interviews with chief of staff Susie Wiles, who has since called out the "disingenuously framed hit piece." In the piece, Wiles appears to be criticizing several members of Trump's Cabinet, even calling Vance a "conspiracy theorist."

'A conspiracy theory is just something that was true six months before the media admitted it.'

"Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story," Wiles said in a post on X. "I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team."

Vance echoed Wiles' claims that the piece omitted key context — and even embraced the label "conspiracy theorist."

RELATED: 'The voices in her head are not real': Senator Kennedy issues a hilarious rebuke of Jasmine Crockett

Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

"Sometimes I am a conspiracy theorist, but I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true," Vance said during a speech on affordability in Pennsylvania Tuesday.

Vance also clarified that Wiles' comments were likely made in a lighthearted manner, like many other interactions they've shared. Even still, Vance embraced the accusation and pointed to several political moments in recent years that were branded as conspiracy theories before later being accepted as reality.

"By the way, Susie and I have joked in private and in public about that for a long time," Vance said. "For example, I believed in the crazy conspiracy theory back in 2020 that it was stupid to mask 3-year-olds at the height of the COVID pandemic, that we should actually let them develop some language skills. I believed in this crazy conspiracy theory that the media and the government were covering up the fact that Joe Biden was clearly unable to do the job. And I believed in the conspiracy theory that Joe Biden was trying to throw his political opponents in jail rather than win an argument against his political opponents."

RELATED: 'Complete lizard person': Chuck Schumer gives stunningly tone-deaf remarks following Australia attack

Tom Brenner-Pool/Getty Images

"At least on some of these conspiracy theories, it turns out that a conspiracy theory is just something that was true six months before the media admitted it."

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

RFK's alleged sexting partner splits with another publication amid scandal-ridden book release



Olivia Nuzzi's fall from grace continues as she parts ways with another magazine.

Once a rising star in the journalism world, Nuzzi was first fired from the New Yorker in 2024 after news broke of her alleged sexting with then-presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., breaking the most basic forms of journalistic ethics and collapsing her engagement to then-Politico reporter Ryan Lizza. Nuzzi was later picked up by Vanity Fair to be West Coast editor.

The overlapping narratives inevitably caused a media firestorm.

Nearly a year later, the scandal has resurfaced after Nuzzi announced the release of her book "American Canto," which apparently details her alleged behavior with Kennedy but refers to him only as "the politician."

In the aftermath of the renewed interest in and attention to the scandal, Nuzzi and Vanity Fair "have agreed to part ways," according to the Wall Street Journal.

RELATED: Trump calls New York Magazine's Olivia Nuzzi an 'unattractive wack job'

Photo by Paul Morigi/Getty Images for HBO

Nuzzi's attempt at a comeback tour was met with a series of bombshell exposés written by her former fiancé, who began his career as an independent journalist following the scandal.

Lizza detailed in his Substack series how he found out about Nuzzi's alleged sexting not just with Kennedy in 2024, but also with former presidential candidate Mark Sanford in 2020. Lizza went on to detail a toxic dynamic between Nuzzi and Kennedy, including graphic details about their sexual proclivities and the intense betrayal, while she insisted that the relationship was merely a "digital" one.

Despite the overwhelming evidence and multiple accounts of the behavior, Kennedy has denied the allegations.

RELATED: What the mainstream media’s outrage over RFK Jr.’s 'affair' is REALLY about

Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

The overlapping narratives inevitably caused a media firestorm, but it may not have translated into monetary success for Nuzzi's new book.

Since its release on December 2, "American Canto" sat at No. 5,546 on Amazon's best-seller list and at No. 3,059 in the Kindle store. Despite the onslaught of media attention, the supposedly "mesmerizing firsthand account of the warping of American reality over the past decade" is currently sitting at a brutal 1.69-star rating on Goodreads.

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