Hi @SenSchumer @senatemajldr one of your Republican colleagues is calling for the U.S. military to summarily execute American citizens in the street. Perhaps a joint statement condemning this is in order?
@SenSchumer @senatemajldr “No quarter” is a military phrase meaning people would be killed, not taken prisoner. Senator Tom Cotton, a former Captain in the United States Army, knows this, and is therefore calling for the military to execute Americans in the street.
He should be expelled from the Senate.
He should be expelled from the Senate.
Two days ago, Senator Tom Cotton urged the military to execute Americans in the street without trial.
The New York Times’ editorial board has had nothing to say about this — instead The Times has rewarded Cotton by running a grotesque and inflammatory op-ed from Cotton.
The New York Times’ editorial board has had nothing to say about this — instead The Times has rewarded Cotton by running a grotesque and inflammatory op-ed from Cotton.
Fuck the New York Times.
Tom Cotton should be expelled from the Senate for urging the military to execute Americans in the street.
Instead, not a single member of the Senate has criticized him, and The New York Times rewards him with a platform for his hate.
America’s elites are terrible people.
Instead, not a single member of the Senate has criticized him, and The New York Times rewards him with a platform for his hate.
America’s elites are terrible people.
Like Facebook employees, those of you who work for the New York Times have a responsibility to denounce your employer’s reckless and evil behavior.
Yes, I’m talking to *you.*
Yes, I’m talking to *you.*
Great. Any other NYT employees want to comment on the paper’s decision to reward Tom Cotton’s attempts to get the military to execute Americans in the street?
And do any of them want to criticize *the Times* for it, not just Cotton?
Silence = consent.
And do any of them want to criticize *the Times* for it, not just Cotton?
Silence = consent.
This, from a NYTimes employee, is a powerful and important repudiation of the Times’ indefensible decision to publish Tom Cotton.
White people who work at the NYT: Step up.
White people who work at the NYT: Step up.
Thank you for this clarification.
Any other New York Times employees want to criticize the Times’ decision to give Tom Cotton an op-ed to encourage violence against black people?
I know some y’all follow me. Looking especially at you, white people.
Any other New York Times employees want to criticize the Times’ decision to give Tom Cotton an op-ed to encourage violence against black people?
I know some y’all follow me. Looking especially at you, white people.
The New York Times employees some very high profile, very well-paid, very white journalists who will be *totally fine* no matter what happens. Imagine being one of them and sitting silently by while less secure black colleagues speak out.
“The New York Times owes it to our readers to publish a call to violence against them” is some Grade-A bullshit, from a bad person too cowardly to be honest about his own dangerous decisions.
I’ve now seen a bunch of white NYT employees join their black colleagues in denouncing the decision to reward Tom Cotton for inciting violence against Americans, particularly Americans.
Still waiting for some of the really famous ones to join them …
Still waiting for some of the really famous ones to join them …
If I was a Democratic Senator, I would damn sure have an op-ed titled “The Senate Must Expel Tom Cotton” in James Bennet’s inbox by 9 am.
This memo characterizes Tom Cotton’s op-Ed as an “accurate, good faith exploration of the issues of the day” and is thus a good reminder that the core problem with the New York Times is not Bennet or Baquet or Baker, but ownership, and always has been.
LEFT: New York Times publisher AG Sulzberger’s defense of running the Tom Cotton column, calling the column “accurate, good faith”
RIGHT: NYT news article notes Cotton’s op-ed contained “the biggest piece of protest misinforman tracked by Zignal Labs”
RIGHT: NYT news article notes Cotton’s op-ed contained “the biggest piece of protest misinforman tracked by Zignal Labs”
How is the New York Times this bad at this?
Took me ten seconds to identify this flaw in Sulzberger’s justification for running Cotton’s op-ed, which is a pretty good illustration of how bad the New York Times’ publisher is at his job.
Can not wait until someone sends @ashleyfeinberg a transcript of the staff town hall the New York Times has about this.
New York Times’ publisher could’ve just gone with the (immoral, nonsensical) “it’s important for people to see Cotton’s argument.” Instead, added an explicit endorsement of Cotton’s accuracy and honesty. “Unforced error,” as the savvy say.
Of course, Sulzberger didn’t personally fact-check Cotton’s peice before declaring it “accurate, good faith.” He relied on @JBennet’s assurances that it was, and his trust in Bennet made him look like a fool as the Times itself has debunked a central Cotton claim.
Seems like a good time to note that AG Sulzberger got his job as publisher of the New York Times, one of the most powerful jobs in the world, by being the son of the previous publisher, who got the job by being the son of the publisher before him, who got the job the same way.
A bold and brave stand that their white colleagues should join in. Also: Hi there, New York Times employees…
“Sir. Sir! How dare you. I am no Nazi. I am a PUBLISHER of Nazis.”
More bullshit from @jbennet. Nobody is saying the Times should have “ignored” Cotton’s views. I’ve been saying for days the Times should editorialized in favor of his expulsion from the Senate!
Instead, Bennet chose to promote Cotton.
…saging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/template/oakv2…
Instead, Bennet chose to promote Cotton.
…saging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/template/oakv2…
this is all 2-am-freshman-dorm-room calibre thinking, and it’s coming from the most powerful people in the world
