The journalistas at the New York Times want to keep secret the fact they know nothing about guns.
They’ll go to any length to conceal their complete firearm ignorance from their readers.
Case in point, in a story published Friday, the latest installment in their ongoing assault on our Second Amendment rights, the paper published this gem:
“In an interview, Mr. Keane said he did not view Mr. Richardson’s attendance as an endorsement of his views. Instead, he said he saw it as a good-faith effort to coordinate enactment of the ghost gun regulation, a rule banning the use of high-capacity ‘bump stocks’ later in the year and a new electronic bookkeeping system.”
High-capacity bump stocks! What the hell is a high-capacity bump stock, we asked in a story we published that called out the Times for their ignorance.
A few stealth edits later, the Times changed the offending paragraph to this:
“In an interview, Mr. Keane said he did not view Mr. Richardson’s attendance as an endorsement of his views. Instead, he said he saw it as a good-faith effort to coordinate enactment of the ghost gun regulation and a new electronic bookkeeping system.”
The high-capacity bumpstocks were gone.
The story was titled “A.T.F., Agency Crucial to Biden’s Gun Plan, Struggles to Push for Reform.” It’s about what you’d expect from the Times, and was written by reporter Glenn Thrush.
Ethically, Thrush and/or his editor should have disclosed to their readers that they made a serious mistake. Anyone who writes for a living — including us at Armed American News — needs to be honest and transparent when they get something wrong. Stealth editing is a common symptom among of purveyors of fake news.
In our original story, we challenged Thrush to provide an example of a high-capacity bump stock.
We are still waiting …