Image 01 Image 03

WaPo’s Taylor Lorenz Wants to ‘Expose’ the Woman Behind Libs of TikTok, Harasses Her Relatives

WaPo’s Taylor Lorenz Wants to ‘Expose’ the Woman Behind Libs of TikTok, Harasses Her Relatives

@LibsofTikTok confirmed to the Babylon Bee social media manager that Lorenz harassed her family members.

Don’t send WaPo’s Taylor Lorenz a mean tweet but man she will go after you and those close to you if you dare expose the progressive agenda.

Lorenz wants to reveal the woman behind the @LibsofTikTok Twitter account. She thought Ron DeSantis’s press secretary Christina Pushaw would help her.

Lorenz had to know that Pushaw would tweet out the email asking for comments.

It gets worse. Lorenz has a talent for twisting words. Look at the interaction between Lorenz and Pushaw, who sent this screenshot to NewsBusters:

Lorenz is the woman who literally cried on TV about the mean tweets sent to her. But it’s totally okay for her to doxx and harass friends and family of the woman who runs the @LibsofTikTok Twitter account.

The responses are golden.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Once again, lefties can sure dish it out, but as to taking it!!!

Maybe the National Archives can send a copy of that old HST sign to this cry baby,

Seems more to me like a sociopath using PTSD as a cover.

Pushaw shouldn’t have blanked out Lorenz phone number.

If Dims didn’t have double standards they’d have no standards at all.

Lorenz is still a girl I’m guessing? What must it take to turn her into a grown woman? It’s no wonder young ‘men’ are turning to online whatever to take the place of so many young ‘women’.

Harassment can be addressed civilly and criminally.
It might provide an avenue for redress that avoids the high bar of liable actions and it might have more teeth
Orders of protection and restraining orders are routinely issued in these types of cases, often with absurd restrictions and conditions attached

    LibraryGryffon in reply to rduke007. | April 19, 2022 at 3:48 pm

    Depends on where you live. In CT, as far as I know, you still can’t get a restraining order against anyone you aren’t related to (or weren’t in an “intimate relationship” with) unless you are both involved in a legal matter, e.g. you are a witness, and the defendant is going after you to get you to not testify.

    I went through this some years back with one of Brett Kimberlin’s toadies, and although the victim advocate, the prosecutor, and the judge agreed that what he was doing was awful, since it was only online harassment, CT law didn’t allow them to grant me the restraining order.

    SDN in reply to rduke007. | April 20, 2022 at 6:57 am

    And even if you don’t win, discovery is a fruitful source of intel for later action. These people are at war with us, and we need to proceed accordingly.

Police report citing harassment and stalking at a minimum. Civil suits as well for willfully and knowingly publishing non-public information with the intent to cause harm. The reporter and newspaper at least, but try to find out how she identified the woman behind an anonymous Twitter account and go after them, too. Get advice of counsel, but pull a Nick Sandman and go for the jugular, or at least the deep pockets.

    AnAdultInDiapers in reply to Idonttweet. | April 19, 2022 at 9:40 am

    Isn’t investigating and gather information for a story protected under press freedoms?

    It would be sinister indeed to prevent it.

    What would be a reasonable challenge is publicly naming the individual, absent substantial public good from doing so. But even there freedom of the press will clash with anti-doxxing law.

    So I can’t see a civil suit being terribly helpful.

      Depends… Are you wearing them? 🙂

      Press freedoms don’t permit breaking into private property and torching the safe to gather information, so while my example is likely inapplicable to the instant matter, if legal lines were crossed I would hope the transgressions could be addressed both civilly and criminally

      Whether justice is actually available to entities with wrong-think is another issue

      Idonttweet in reply to AnAdultInDiapers. | April 19, 2022 at 10:15 am

      Her own email says the story is to “expose” the woman running the account. She harassed and badgered the woman’s relatives for no reason. Her malicious goal is to harass and intimidate, not report.

      I refer you to the Society of Professional Journalism’s Code of Ethics.

        taurus the judge in reply to Idonttweet. | April 19, 2022 at 12:50 pm

        Unfortunately, “expose” may be “unethical” but its not illegal and it doesn’t meet the “legal threshold” of harassment and intimidation.

        I am all for the “freedom of the press” but with reasonable constraints and limits- the problem is that “reasonable” is subjective and the limits are so high, they may as well not be there and are abused every day.

        We need a new set of laws governing the press now. (don’t expect to live to see it happen)

          You’re reaching a decision that has yet to be litigated
          Surely there are dozens if not hundreds of decisions that contravene your assessment

          But I agree they need to be reined in. Perhaps guillotines are preferable to new regulation….

          taurus the judge in reply to taurus the judge. | April 19, 2022 at 1:18 pm


          No, my “decision” is based in what’s already been litigated regarding the threshold and i assure you the acts in question do not meet it.

      DaveGinOly in reply to AnAdultInDiapers. | April 19, 2022 at 12:20 pm

      There is no public interest in revealing the ID of someone who does not produce original content.

        Steven Brizel in reply to DaveGinOly. | April 20, 2022 at 10:47 am

        A good attorney should be applying on Federal court for a Temporary Restraining Order on such activities by Lorenz and all who aided and abetted her conduct with the request to preserve all electronic communications of all kinds relevant to the case and filing a complaint against all such entities and persons for invasion of privacy and suppressing her First Amendment rights

I love the chryon at the bottom of the screenshot of Lorenz:
1 in 3 women under 35 experience online harassment

My first thought was “Maybe because 1 in 3 women under 35 is a flaming a**hat on social media?” Because they’ve been raised to be emotionally stunted attention-seekers who never matured beyond “mean girl” from middle school and can’t take the heat of the often appropriate responses to such awful behavior?

This Lorenz twit is merely a typical Dumb-o-crat narcissist and bully. So callously smug and assured in her self-perceived and fallacious sense of alleged righteousness and moral superiority. These idiots are biological adults possessing the emotional maturity of toddlers; vile totalitarians and attention-needing narcissists, to the core.

2smartforlibs | April 19, 2022 at 9:33 am

It is tiem to stop saying we can’t stoop to their level. The only way this ends is when they suffer material losses.

The Gentle Grizzly | April 19, 2022 at 9:53 am

No doubt, a strong woman who needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle. But, the slightest pressure, she snivels and cries like a baby.

Feb 23 I got a tweet from a Wapo reporter… Abha Bhattarai… asking to chat about a story… Me.. SMH… I replied that I have a low opinion of wapo… and that was it.. My instincts were good.. hard pass…

She’s a POS, plain and simple.
What does that say that about Bezos and the management that she’s still employed at WaPo?

MisterSadFaceMcGee | April 19, 2022 at 12:50 pm

So glad I delete my Twitter account all those years ago.

Taylor Lorenz is a slightly worse example of the typical result of post feminism progressive ideology. These sorts of folks demand room and freedom in their lives to make mistakes but completely reject any consequences which flow their deliberate choices and actions as unfair. The level of narcissism displayed by these folks is astonishing.

These are the same sorts folks who went into huge debt to get a masters degree in a soft discipline that has zero practical value in the job market and demand we pay for their folly. The same sort of people who wake up one morning to find themselves in their mid thirties, unmarried and childless because they prioritized everything but a long-term relationship and blame others for their circumstances. The same ‘strong, fierce and independent’ karens constantly hectoring the world around them because the real world doesn’t revolve around them.

Trial by press. Social justice. 50 shades of treatment of the Mexican-American.. White… Hispanic of White et al.

I’m so old I remember the jihad CNN undertook against a teenager who created a meme in which Donald Trump body-slammed their logo — complete with a doxxing threat.

And the meme their target created wasn’t even the same one Trump had shared on Twitter.

This may seem totally off topic but I am going to sell my shares in Amazon and I am boycotting Amazon for at least 6 months (then i will consider extending the boycott).

I can’t boycott Wapoop since I don’t buy their publication or click on any of their articles.

I refuse to support Bezos right now. I wish there was a way to make it national of boycotting Amazon until Bezo gets rid of Taylor Lorenz at Wapoop. I have not shopped at Target since their CEO ranted and raved and spat on women and girls with his videos and I will never go back. The Amazon one will not be easy but in 6 months I am sure I can find other sources for the things I buy so that when i re-evaluate it will be an easier extension for 6 more months going toward forever.

Well, she ‘s named the person, but the name alone isn’t enough to identify her. I know that family well, and there are at least a dozen women in it with the same first name. So I don’t know which one she is, but I have a suspicion; if it’s correct, I don’t think I’ve ever met her, but I vaguely know her husband and knew her late father-in-law well. In any case, there was no justification for “exposing” her, or for the horrible names she’s being called. If she’s anything like the rest of her family she’s a very nice and decent person.

    Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | April 20, 2022 at 4:11 pm

    Turns out my suspicion was incorrect. I still don’t know which of the dozen or more women with that name is the one, but it isn’t the one I thought it might be. It doesn’t matter; all the members of that family whom I know are nice, so I assume the ones I don’t are nice too.

Steven Brizel | April 20, 2022 at 11:03 am

If legal action is commenced you have to not only seek a temporary restraining order and file a complaint against Lorenz and all who aided and abetted her so called research you have to seek the preservation of all electronic documentation and conversations of all kinds by those involved in the doxxing which is what is called the smoking gun in a case of this nature

Steven Brizel | April 20, 2022 at 11:11 am

This case is very similar to the case that Project Veritas commenced against the NYT which released data which was given to the NYT by the FBI as the result of a raid by the FBI which lacked any legal authority to enter and seize the data that was release to the NYT I hope that a competent and aggressive litigator takes her case