NY Times Reporters Stage ‘Open Revolt’ Over Tom Cotton Op-Ed Calling On Military To Help End Widescale Riots and Looting
“Running this puts Black @nytimes staff in danger,” tweeted several journalists, while others called for op-ed to be taken down.
Along with the protests in cities across America in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd has come rioting, looting, acts of arson, and violent assaults on random citizens and law enforcement alike.
The apocalyptic scenes look like something straight out of “The Purge,” so much so that there are growing calls from Republicans, including President Trump, for the National Guard to intervene.
One such Republican is Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), a U.S. Army veteran who served in the post-9/11 Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Cotton wrote an op-ed published in the New York Times Wednesday in which he argued that the only way to quell the violence in the cities currently on fire was by having Trump invoke the Insurrection Act:
The pace of looting and disorder may fluctuate from night to night, but it’s past time to support local law enforcement with federal authority. Some governors have mobilized the National Guard, yet others refuse, and in some cases the rioters still outnumber the police and Guard combined. In these circumstances, the Insurrection Act authorizes the president to employ the military “or any other means” in “cases of insurrection, or obstruction to the laws.”
[…]
For instance, during the 1950s and 1960s, Presidents Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson called out the military to disperse mobs that prevented school desegregation or threatened innocent lives and property. This happened in my own state. Gov. Orval Faubus, a racist Democrat, mobilized our National Guard in 1957 to obstruct desegregation at Little Rock Central High School. President Eisenhower federalized the Guard and called in the 101st Airborne in response. The failure to do so, he said, “would be tantamount to acquiescence in anarchy.”
More recently, President George H.W. Bush ordered the Army’s Seventh Infantry and 1,500 Marines to protect Los Angeles during race riots in 1992. He acknowledged his disgust at Rodney King’s treatment — “what I saw made me sick” — but he knew deadly rioting would only multiply the victims, of all races and from all walks of life.
A recent Morning Consult poll shows that a majority of Americans agree with using the military to assist police in restoring order:
Good time to remind people that a recent poll by @MorningConsult found 58 percent of voters support using the military to deal with protests and demonstrations across the country, alongside the police. Oftentimes reality is different than woke Twitter.
— Madison Morris (@madisonc_morris) June 4, 2020
Cotton’s position on the issue has stirred up a debate over whether or not these actions should take place, with even some fellow conservative war veterans disagreeing with his argument.
Vigorous debate over stances like Cotton’s is one of the many things that makes America so great. Unfortunately, not everyone feels such discussions are healthy, as we have learned over the last 24 hours from New York Times reporters who rushed to the Twitter machine to allege the op-ed puts their black colleagues “in danger:”
Multiple New York Times staff members are protesting an op-ed published in the Times by GOP Sen. Tom Cotton, writing on social media, “Running this puts Black @nytimes staff in danger” alongside a screenshot of the piece.
[…]
By Wednesday evening, dozens of Times staffers, journalists from other organizations and writers protested the piece by sharing the same message of “danger” for Black NYT staffers. Sewell Chan, a former NYT op-ed editor and now the editorial page editor of the Los Angeles Times, also criticized the Times for running the piece, saying it “falls short of sound journalistic practice.”
And late Wednesday, the paper’s union condemned the decision to publish Cotton’s article, calling it “a clear threat to the health and safety of journalists we represent.”
Here are some of the tweets:
NYT reporters in a rare open revolt over the opinion side running Tom Cotton’s op-Ed calling to deploy the military to “restore order.” pic.twitter.com/MgLuR8EunJ
— Alex Thompson (@AlexThomp) June 3, 2020
Isn’t it fascinating how journalists who say they don’t want to make themselves part of a story inevitably end up making themselves part of a story? But I digress.
There are also Times employees taking part in sick-outs in protest of Cotton’s op-ed:
Along with well over a dozen of my colleagues who work on publishing tools at the @nytimes, today I am calling out sick in protest of the Tom Cotton op-ed.
— Nozlee Samadzadeh (@nzle) June 4, 2020
The Times’ editorial page editor James Bennet wrote a lengthy Twitter thread explaining why the paper published Cotton’s opinion piece. He first pointed out how woke they allegedly were about the George Floyd protests and racial injustice in general and then pivoting to why it was essential to post pieces like Cotton’s since he was in a position as a U.S. Senator to set policy.
Look, reasonable people can disagree as to whether or not Cotton made a good argument. But what the “concerned” Times reporters are doing here is trying to shut down debate altogether by declaring an idea they disagree with as unsafe:
It's a way to use "safety concerns" to shut down discourse instead of debate the relevant facts, arguments, theories. And it's becoming increasingly popular unfortunately.
— Bo Winegard (@EPoe187) June 4, 2020
Keep in mind, too, that liberally biased reporters at news outlets like the New York Times are in general agreement with the protesters that the police are allegedly racist and can’t be trusted. So they don’t trust the police nor the National Guard to stop the riots.
So exactly who do they think should restore order to these cities? Or perhaps they believe these cities should be burned to the ground to save America? We don’t know exactly where they are on this, because they’re too busy virtue signaling about an op-ed.
I’d also like to point out that no one at the Times’ expressed even the barest hint of concern for the safety of their female colleagues after the paper investigated Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden – not to get to the bottom of the story, but to act as an apologist for Biden by downplaying Reade’s claims to drag him over the finish line.
So no, we don’t need any pearl-clutching on staff safety over an op-ed from any hypocritical reporter for the New York Times. What we do need to hear from them, however, is how America is supposed to debate the critical issues of the day when “journalists” at the supposed newspaper of record want to squelch those with which they disagree.
— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Remember when we said that this was going to happen, that all conservative opinions were going to be censored and even ATTEMPTING to argue a conservative position would result in exactly this?
Remember all the TrueConservatives whining that no, these places are private companies and they can censor whoever they wanted?
Pepperidge Farms remembers.
It’s a shock that they even printed the op-ed. It’s hardly a new concept that the LSM censors non-politically correct thought and all of the pearl clutching in the world won’t change the fact that they’re constitutionally free to do so.
I think that in the NYT – like the Democrat Party at large – there is a fight to the death between the rich, geriatric, largely white Soviet Central Committee and the younger Khmer Rouge wannabes. The former group is probably the faction that allowed the editorial to be published since riots and destruction get in the way of raking in all of the lovely hate cash their wealthy readership and advertisers dish out. The latter group just wants genocide, and they want it NOW.
I think this is great.
Direct message to New Yorkers who are all ready to give the Riots the Heave Ho, and here is their First Rag agruing that all New Yorkers should just die already.
DEMS will flip out over this also.
Candice Owens calls out the Fake MSM and Faking Rioters.
Candace Owens meticulously and articulately describes her perspective about George Floyd and protests.
https://mobile.twitter.com/PatriotsTribune/status/1268763229666209793
Printing it makes sense, if the purpose of printing it was to destroy it. Show everybody “this is what will happen to you if you speak out”.
A bunch of hacks yelling on twitter or even calling in sick doesn’t strike me as a dangerous act of censorship.
Of course, in another 5 minutes or so, the paper will fold, take down the op ed and beg forgiveness. Then it will be too late to complain about censorship.
Called it! https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/06/04/new-york-times-capitulates-to-mob-says-sen-cottons-oped-did-meet-our-standards-n2570091
Um, they are private companies, and they can censor whomever they like. In this case the NYT decided not to censor Sen. Cotton; one can say “bravely”, or one can say they had no idea how strong the opposition would be, but for now they’re sticking to that decision. But you can’t be seriously suggesting that they should have had to publish his column even if they didn’t want to!
Seriously, does anyone suggest that the NYT should be forced to publish articles that it doesn’t want to?!
That increasingly does seem to be what many soi-disant conservatives want.
We tell “private companies” what to say, sell, etc. all the time. Get back to me when “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” is the law of the land again.
We do not tell private people, whether they are companies or natural people, what to say. That’s what the first amendment is for. You apparently want to get rid of it. Disgusting.
Clearly a false claim, de facto.
https://inspiredelearning.com/hr-compliance/state-specific-compliance-training/sexual-harassment-training-requirements-by-state/
Kneel, Sulzberger, KNEEL!
No. NYC has 33000 cops. We don’t need to send in federal troops to hold their hats. They voted for it, let them deal with it. Either way, they’ll just vote for the same Democrat incompetents again in the fall – if the Dems don’t just suspend the elections.
They could end up voting for another Republican like Boomberg. Noo Yawkuhs like being told what to eat and how big their drinks can be.
Bloomberg was never a Republican. He briefly changed his voter registration to Republican, just so he could run in the R primary, but that didn’t make him a Republican. I recently switched my registration to Democrat, so that I can vote for a DINO running in the D primary for Congress in my district, but that doesn’t make me, G-d forbid, a Democrat!
The only reason Bloomberg chose to run as a Republican in 2001 was that the D primary already had four very strong and well-funded contenders who’d been running for well over a year, and the R primary had Herman Badillo, with a budget of about $200. So he decided to take the easy route, switched his registration, and filed as a Republican. He remained in all senses what he had always been, a liberal Democrat.
What just happened in Los Angeles is worse: they just voted to IMMEDIATELY gut the police deparmtent by 150 million dollars!
Its mayor, garcetti, saw to it that the city was overrun by an army of street junkies and lunatics. The city was never going to be the same. Now, with the gutting of the LAPD, the city descend into an everyday life that is dangerous chaos.
-No-go zones will emerge, like in islamic-occupied Europe; they will be ruled the likes of antifa and black lives matters psychos.
-911 calls will go unanswered.
-Street crime will skyrocket.
-Protection rackets by street gangs will emerge.
-Detectives will be too overloaded to investigate cases.
-Organize crime will explode.
-Street gang activity will explode.
and:
The obama “civilian security force” as large as the US has finally been funded:
https://yaliberty.org/news/obama-calls-for-civilian-force-as-large-as-the-military/
Di blasio merely burned New York City. But garcetti has literally ensured the city’s future is destroyed. Who the hell in their right mind would come to settle in Los Angeles or open a business there?
In my wildest imagination, I never imagined the level of insanity and self-destruction of di blasio and garcetti.
And I never imagined voters would be such fools to allow them to remain in power.
LA won’t need as many cops when the population relocates to Nevada and Arizona
You bring up an interesting aspect of all this. I think blue states are going to be partly depopulated by those who can leave for the benefit of the population of red states. A social and financial mess will be left behind in blue states. If we still have a functioning country in 2030, the census then will shift a lot of House seats to red states. The big question is whether they will then still be red.
As to the present, before this I thought the pandemic and economic collapse really damaged Trump’s re-election chances. Now, I think a lot of people are scared – a surge of gun sales in not coincidental. Much as Trump has a questionable personality, if people think a mentally challenged old man is a good idea, they
deserve what they will get.
Unfortunately leftists have an abiding belief in the soundness of their political ideology. They believe that if their politics didn’t work somewhere (e.g., California), they can leave and make it work elsewhere. The exodus from a failed project will be unlikely to changes the minds of many of those who flee. They will take their scourge with them and unleash it where they settle. And will again be astonished when it fails again. So far I don’t see large numbers of leftists having revelations about the errors of their ways. (Although check out Dr. Karlyn Borysenko’s YouTube channel for some interesting commentary by one who did have that revelation. For instance, her psychologist-to-psychologist discussion of TDS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmEkmfoQpyc)
In Arizona, we plan to address this by setting up the analog of California “Fruit Nazi Stations” on the major highways but on our side of the border. All California residents looking to immigrate will be offered an AR15 at a price slightly below wholesale. If they express any offense or revulsion, they will be branded and turned back.
If LA won’t let the cops do their jobs, why keep them?
Tom Cotton, one of the very few Republicans with gonads.
One of the very few Americans with balls
Lots of Americans with balls. Only a handful have run for office.
PDJT, this is your Churchill moment. Your Lincoln moment. Your Washington moment.
And they’re the Size of TEXAS. LOL
“The reporters are revolting, sire!”. (channeling Wizard of Id)
You can say that again.
Trump has backed off his proclamation unfortunately to send in the military. At this point who knows which side they would support
That is unclear. Depends on who you want to believe.
A pecent of the miliary would turn on us, that’s for sure. You have the Mattis swamp faction, then you have the black radical faction, then you have the islamic faction, then you have the dumb white faction who follow the latest fashion.
Remember: a communist recently graduating West Point celebrated by flashing his Che Gueverra shirt worn underneath.
These riots and the complicity of the democrat elected officials shows just how infested our society is with the obama disease.
Man, he was a busy bee for 8 years, wasn’t he. The Manchurian Candidate we always though he was.
Remember: obama trimmed the military of an entire class of field officers: thousands and thousands of them and elevated swamp rats like mattis.
It was part of the plan that is in play right now.
“… protests in cities across America in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd…”.
This is a false statement. Don’t feed the enemy.
In a week, ask a rioter who George Floyd is. They won’t have a clue.
Even MN AG Ellison is clueless.
Upon learning he was to handle the Floyd Case
Ellison exclaimed
“Floyd was always my favorite on Mayberry R.F.D.!”
Well, it is in the aftermath. Post hoc doesn’t mean propter hoc, but it does mean post hoc.
“So exactly who do they think should restore order to these cities?”
That’s easy. The Left wants Antifa and BLM to take over and start arresting and slaughtering “racists”.
Like their Communist and Nazi forefathers, modern Progressives were educated in tony, expensive universities and are now determined to exterminate anyone who gets in the way of their quest for power.
On them being “determined to exterminate anyone who gets in the way”, you may want to send this Michael Knowles tweet to your social circle:
https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles/status/1267921090451435520 , on how
“You can spend many years reading many books to try to understand liberal modernity, or you can just watch this 24-second video.”
It shows a guy getting occasion to exclaim “We’re on your side!
We’re on your side! Holy sh*t….”
This vid may well become immortal.
It isn’t so much that they agree — it’s that they’ve invested so much in pushing that narrative. Everything they are depends on black people believing it.
I now disagree with Cotton.
As far as I’m concerned, let the Dem mayors let their constituents loot and burn down their own cities.
The New York Times wishes assault and possible death, and a certain amount of property destruction and job loss, to make the point that black lives and their property matter – just not that of other people. if the rights were in their hometown, I bet their thoughts and actions would be different. Right now, they Likely encourage the setting up of riots, purposely avoiding their own homes and property. hometowns.
We’ve lost Los Angeles.
They corrupt fools running it paid a ransom demand to looters literally out of the police budget.
Look for “no-go” zones to emerge in Los Angeles hoods, like islamic “no-go” zones emerging in Europe.
It’s the beginning of the end, unless we take Los Angeles back.
I wonder how many of the aggrieved “journalists” were actually black? I would go out on a limb and opine that there are many non elite, NYC resident blacks that would welcome the extra protection provided by the military. This has all the appearance of a white apologist cadre using the race issue to deny free speech. Which they, as card carrying mainstream media abhor.
Just who did President Dwight D Eisenhower send to facilitate the entrance of 9 black students into Little Rock, Arkansas Central High School in 1957?
Was it the FBI, the US Marshalls Service? The Police?
No it was the 101st Airborne, the US Army unit that stood down the Wehrmacht in Bastogne 13 years before. The unit’s tenacity and courage were not lost on Eisenhower, nor was it lost on the rioting civilian population of Little Rock.
With fixed bayonets, no less.
From Wikipedia: By the same order, he federalized the entire 10,000-man Arkansas National Guard, in order to remove them from the control of Governor Faubus.
MSM is crying as if it’s never been done before, how could Orange Man Bad do this? Oh, the humanity! Half of our nation needs a bitch slap and a big helping of common sense with a side order of civics and U.S. history.
The Times loves to call Trump something like “putin’s puppet” yet they run putin’s oped with no second thought.
Should the POTUS deploy active US military units to cities under siege from domestic forces? IMHO, not at this time. It is a big deal when active military units are used to maintain order. Local authority has sufficient LE assets to handle the problem, if it is utilized properly. Governors have access the organized state militia, aka the National Guard. This force can be used to augment local and state civil law enforcement. And, there is no evidence that local and state LEAs, as well as state national Guard units, are not willing to enforce the law and maintain order. And, as the members of state National Guard units live in the state where they are deployed, they have a vested interest in maintaining order and protecting their family, friends and neighbors. But, the leaders ig the state MUST activate and deploy the Guard. And, forcing that to happen may require that the citizenry convince their leaders to do that.
When President Eisenhower deployed the 101st Airborne to Arkansas, that was done for two reasons. The first was because the Governor would not call out the Guard. And, it was done to avoid placing the members of the Arkansas Guard in a position of pushing a policy which was very unpopular in that state.
President Trump floated the idea, that he has the power to use active service US military troops to restore order in areas where it appears that the state and local authorities can not maintain order through their own resources and actions, in order to put pressure on those leaders to step up their actions to restore order.
The problem with that is deploying the military relieves, rather than increases, pressure on the mayors and governors to act. That’s probably why Trump backed down on doing it.
The President MAY well have to deploy active duty troops to some cities to protect the populace. If he does, he will be vilified by the anti-Trump forces. In order to protect himself, he will be forced to wait until the population of those cities is crying so loudly for federal intervention, that he has no reasonable choice but to act on their behalf. This also forces Blue politicians to play a very dangerous game. Can the Dems control their Black Shirts, or will the violent civil unrest continue? We’ll see.
Napalm cures TDS regardless of when administered….
What’s the Army version of Fat Leonard?
Trump is pushing the responsibility to the states/governors/mayors. That’s where it belongs. And it will be obvious to the voters.
Less NYT reporters working….oh no, that will show us!
Cotton also wrote a brilliant essay for Hillsdale College’s “Imprimus” a few months ago. Another “must read”. He is truly an exceptional thinker. The NYT doesn’t deserve the opportunity to print his brilliance. The NYT has become a intellectual gutter, a toxic Super Site.
If the NY Times is against it, it must be good for America and be supported! Simple really.
If local officials intend to kneel… NYT remembers Katrina, New Orleans, and hopes to repeat history and exploit local performance or incompetence for political progress and leverage.
I fully expect there to be a Snake Plissken sighting any time now.
He’s escaping from LA at this very moment.
How diverse and inclusive of them.
And they’re totally not a propaganda operation for a particular PoV. Pinky swear.
All the woke youngsters employed at the times HATE it when someone says something they don’t like. Now you must grovel at their feet and promised never to do it again or else they’ll call out sick for a whole week!!!
When your hiring criteria change from valuing professionalism and competence, to valuing cancel-culture political correctness, wokeness, and N-fer quotas… and the new hires suddenly monkeywrench your entire business because something you weren’t even paying attention to triggers them.
Ah, there isn’t enough popcorn in the world.