Just think of how pissed off AG Sulzberger must be about those covert changes to the 1619 Project to have (presumably) signed off on Bret Stephens' double-plus-length column eviscerating it, knowing full well how much it would antagonize the leftward portion of the staff.
-
-
His column on 1619 was 100% on the money. Who makes the argument doesn't change the validity of the argument.
-
Not on the money but pettyfogging and Bret Stephens literally has no ground to stand on in terms of criticizing post-facto editing.https://twitter.com/DavidKlion/status/1314958962979155969 …
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.