The usually reserved Fox News Senior political analyst, Brit Hume, mocked the New York Times, who took to Twitter to congratulate themselves and the Washington Post for sharing a Pulitzer in National Reporting for unearthing “possible ties between Russia and President Trump’s inner circle”. How many journalists have won Pulitzer awards for almost uncovering “possible ties” between a sitting President and a foreign country with absolutely no evidence?
Well, apparently, facts don’t matter to the Pulitzer award committee or to the shameless New York Times, who actually had the audacity to brag in a tweet about being honored with what used to be considered a prestigious award in journalism.
The New York Times shares the Pulitzer in National Reporting with The @WashingtonPost for coverage that unearthed possible ties between Russia and President Trump’s inner circle https://t.co/l4rodIjHy3
— The New York Times (@nytimes) April 16, 2018
LOL! The New York Times had this to say about their award: Pulitzer Prizes were awarded on Monday to the news organizations that drove two of the biggest stories of the year: the high-stakes investigation into President Trump’s relationship with Russia and the consequential reckoning about the treatment of women by powerful men.
The prize for public service, considered the most prestigious of the Pulitzers, went to The New York Times and the New Yorker magazine for their revelations of sexual harassment and abuse that had gone on, unheeded and unpunished, in the spheres of Hollywood, politics, the media and Silicon Valley.
The national reporting prize went to The Times and The Washington Post for their coverage of Mr. Trump’s possible ties to Russia — a recognition of two journalism stalwarts that exposed the hidden activities of the Trump White House while withstanding much presidential ire.
Brit Hume slammed the tweet by the New York Times, asking: “Remember when they only gave out prizes for stories after they panned out? Good times.”
Remember when they only gave out prizes for stories after they panned out? Good times. https://t.co/RhD54qRHnh
— Brit Hume (@brithume) April 17, 2018
Possible is not a fact, your stories are just innuendo. What happened to real news, real reporters, you’re just political hacks!
— #DemExitDeplorable⭐️⭐️⭐️ #IndependentAmerican (@MiddleClazzMom) April 17, 2018
Many Twitter users compared the New York Times Pulitzer award to the super-droner, Barack Obama’s unearned Pulitzer Peace Prize.
Kinda like Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize being in office barely a year. I guess the award was given based on "hope."
— Bath Rugby (@BathRugby3) April 16, 2018
“Troy Kuhn” asked if the Pulitzer Prize can now be earned for reporting #FakeNews, comparing the NYT’s winning a Pulitzer to feeling like he’s in the Twilight Zone:
— Troy Kuhn (@Tachyon362) April 16, 2018
Twitter users continued to savage the New York Times, comparing their Pulitzer to Obama’s “total joke” of a Pulitzer after he “literally set the MIddle East ablaze with interventionist wars”
So basically we are now learning yet another award is fake & meaningless. Just like Obama, who literally set the Middle East ablaze with interventionist wars, won the Nobel Peace Prize. Total joke.
— Melissa A. (@TheRightMelissa) April 17, 2018
How many Lefty awards are there? More meaningless patting on the back. pic.twitter.com/PYvMdqbbrb
— Deb the Nationalist ???????????? (@DebraMMason1) April 16, 2018
So basically you got a participation trophy
— ????Amazed Hispanic???? (@patriotusa77b) April 17, 2018
— Dude, My Dog Ate It! (@daalad) April 16, 2018
The New York Times article continues…
Mr. Trump’s lacing attacks on the press — the president has impugned reporters by name, railed against outlets whose coverage he dislikes and mused about making it easier for journalists to be sued — were an uneasy backdrop to the awards, presented annually by Columbia University to recognize excellence in journalism and letters.
“Winners uphold the highest purpose of a free and independent press — even in the most trying of times,” Dana Canedy, the awards’ administrator, said at the start of Monday’s announcement.
But in its choices for the public service prize, the Pulitzer board also recognized the cultural shock waves caused by the #MeToo movement, which has reshaped the modern conversation around gender, harassment and fairness.
Notice how the New York Times uses the former top-rated Fox News host Bill O’Reilly as their first example of a man accused of sexual harassment in the workplace. Next, they cover the disgusting accused rapist, and Hollywood mogul, almost as an afterthought, as the New York Times, attempts to rewrite history, by making it appear to their readers as though O’Reilly started the #MeToo movement, and not their favorite Hollywood kingpin, Harvey Weinstein.
The board cited revelations in The Times about the Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, whose history of settlements over harassment allegations had done little to affect his career as the king of cable news. After articles by The Times’s Emily Steel and Michael S. Schmidt, Mr. O’Reilly was ousted by Fox News last year. (Mr. Schmidt, who was also part of the Times team that won the national reporting prize, was honored twice in one year, a rare Pulitzer feat.)
The prize also recognized investigations into the film mogul Harvey Weinstein, whose predations of women — and extensive efforts to cover up his behavior — were exposed in The Times by Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, and in The New Yorker by Ronan Farrow.
The coverage of Mr. Weinstein, who has since lost his movie empire, set off a cascade of testimonials from women about abuse in the workplace, whether at a Beverly Hills hotel or a Ford Motor plant in the Midwest. Famed personalities, including the comedian Louis C.K. and the chef Mario Batali, saw their careers derailed after women came forward with allegations of misconduct.
The New York Times continued to pat themselves on the back for their success in reporting on one of the shadiest stories of the year, the story of Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore, whose accuser was caught using a forged yearbook to trap him in what appeared to be a well-orchestrated fabrication by the left. Democrats worked with the media to publicize flimsy decades-old stories by women who were discredited by their own mother and stepson, as a way to defeat a popular conservative candidate in a red state. Well done New York Times, you’ve proven yourselves to be good and faithful servants of the Democrat Party…
The Post won the award for investigative reporting for its exposé of Roy S. Moore, the Republican Senate candidate in Alabama, whose bid for higher office was upended after The Post uncovered that he had groped and harassed multiple women, one as young as 14. Besides unearthing the allegations against Mr. Moore, The Post’s reporters foiled an attempt by the right-wing activist James O’Keefe to undermine their reporting by planting false information in the paper.