Month: June 2026

POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE: 29-Year-Old Democratic Socialist OUSTS 15-Term Incumbent Democrat Rep. Diana DeGette in Colorado’s 1st District

Posted on by patriotsheart

Two women smiling in a split image, one outdoors with natural lighting and the other in a studio setting against a blue background.

The Socialists aren’t just taking over New York. This happened in Colorado.

A 29-year-old Democratic Socialist ousted a longtime Democrat incumbent in Colorado’s 1st District in Tuesday night’s House primary.

Far-left candidate Melat Kiros defeated 15-time incumbent Democrat Rep. Diana DeGette on Tuesday night.

Kiros, who was born in Ethiopia, was backed by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Kiros recently claimed that 9/11 was America’s fault.

Crazy Bernie Sanders also endorsed Kiros.

The 29-year-old lawyer argued that the US has Socialism already because the government maintains roads and highways.

“We have socialism already. It’s in the roads we drive on, the schools we send our kids to, the fire stations we call upon. I’m just asking that we extend that security to our healthcare, to our housing, to our nutritional food, to our higher education so that we’re actually meeting the basic needs of everyday working families in this country,” Kiros said this week in a media interview.

WATCH:

Kiros unseated DeGette during Tuesday night’s Democrat primary.

Decision Desk called the race.

The post POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE: 29-Year-Old Democratic Socialist OUSTS 15-Term Incumbent Democrat Rep. Diana DeGette in Colorado’s 1st District appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

FIGHT THE OLIGARCHY? Rep. Ro Khanna Reportedly Lives in a Luxury Home With a Four-Story Elevator, Owns Three Private Golf Courses

Posted on by patriotsheart

Man in a blue suit speaking during a television interview, focused on political topics and current events.

Man in a blue suit speaking during a television interview, focused on political topics and current events.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) appears on “Meet the Press” to discuss his thoughts on the future Democratic Senate leadership. Credit: NBC News screenshot

Rep. Ro Khanna of California is part of the leftist coalition that is supposedly all about fighting the oligarchy. He’s just doing it from the comfort of a luxury home with a multi-floor elevator, while driving an SUV that cost about $200,000.

This is no different than Bernie Sanders flying private jets all over the country as he demands that we ‘tax the rich’ more than we already are. Of AOC driving a Tesla, as she complains about Elon Musk.

They all love to complain about the evils of wealth. Except their own, naturally.

Check out this eye-popping report from the Washington Free Beacon:

‘Ro’ Me the Money! How Progressive Class Warrior Ro Khanna Lives Like the Oligarchs He ‘Fights,’ With In-Home Elevator, $190K Range Rover, and Family-Owned Golf Courses.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Calif.) has emerged as a potential contender for the Democratic presidential nomination while denouncing the ultra-rich who “hoard wealth and engage in financial speculation.” But the progressive, Silicon Valley congressman and his family live a life of staggering luxury, fueled by dynastic wealth they did not earn and protected by the same thicket of trusts, anonymous corporations, and foundations that Khanna condemns.

Khanna lives in a $6 million, 8,000-square-foot luxury home with a four-story elevator and so much premium marble that even the two laundry rooms have marble counters. The Northwest Washington, D.C., home is now for sale, as the Khanna family prepares to move to an even larger, more expensive house a few miles away in the Northern Virginia suburbs.

Khanna’s two children, who are minors, have large ownership shares in three private golf clubs, a significant stake in a $65 billion wealth management firm, and investments in hedge funds that focus on distressed debt, of which Khanna has been critical. Khanna’s wife drives a $190,000 Range Rover she was so displeased with that she sued the dealer.

A Washington Free Beacon investigation into Khanna’s finances finds that the progressive truthteller’s lifestyle is funded by his wife, Ritu Ahuja Khanna, an heiress to her father’s Cleveland auto parts fortune.

Anyone surprised?

Khanna is going to run for president in 2028. The radical left will pretend to object to his wealth at first, but they might come around, just like they did for liberal billionaire Tom Steyer in the race for governor of California.

The post FIGHT THE OLIGARCHY? Rep. Ro Khanna Reportedly Lives in a Luxury Home With a Four-Story Elevator, Owns Three Private Golf Courses appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Clinton Judge Blocks Hegseth from Enforcing Escort Requirement For Reporters

Posted on by patriotsheart

A federal judge on Tuesday issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Pentagon’s policy requiring escorts for reporters.

US District Judge Paul Friedman, a Clinton appointee, sided with the New York Times and blocked the Pentagon from enforcing its policy requiring the reporters to be accompanied by an official escort.

The judge’s injunction only applies to reporters with the New York Times.

Politico reported:

A federal district court judge on Tuesday blocked the Defense Department from requiring journalists to be accompanied by an official escort in the Pentagon, siding with The New York Times in its latest legal fight with the administration over press access.

The Times sued the Pentagon to halt its escort mandate in May, arguing that the policy contravened “reporters’ ability to report on the Department and the U.S. military quickly, accurately, and comprehensively.”

Judge Paul Friedman, a Clinton appointee, issued a preliminary injunction against the policy on Tuesday, writing that by “singling out journalists, the escort policy ‘undercut[s] the basic assumption of our political system that the press will often serve as an important restraint on government.’” Friedman’s order applies to those affiliated with The Times and not the broader Pentagon press corps.

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The ruling marks the latest legal setback in the Defense Department’s yearlong effort to crack down on press freedom on the Pentagon’s campus.

Last year, Pentagon reporters turned in their badges after they refused to sign Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s new security rule.

“Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth demanded that reporters agree by 5 p.m. Tuesday to a new policy, under which they would need to pledge to not obtain or use any unauthorized material, even if the information is unclassified — or hand over their press badges in the next 24 hours,” The Hill previously reported.

Later that day, Pentagon reporters turned in their badges.

The reporters turned in their badges and left the building.

The New York Times sued the Pentagon and successfully pushed back on Hegseth’s new policies with the help of far-left judges.

The post Clinton Judge Blocks Hegseth from Enforcing Escort Requirement For Reporters appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Stephen Miller GOES OFF on Supreme Court Justices in Epic Rant Following Birthright Citizenship Ruling (VIDEO)

Posted on by patriotsheart

Stephen Miller discusses the implications of a recent SCOTUS ruling on Fox News, alongside a backdrop of Supreme Court justices in formal attire.

Stephen Miller discusses the implications of a recent SCOTUS ruling on Fox News, alongside a backdrop of Supreme Court justices in formal attire.

White House advisor Stephen Miller blasted the Supreme Court justices after the high court struck down President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship for babies born to illegal aliens on US soil.

The US Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down President Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship in a 5-4 decision.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion.

“Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause,” Roberts wrote.

Roberts was joined by Amy Coney Barrett, Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson.

Conservative Supreme Court Justices Alito and Clarence Thomas fumed over the birthright citizenship ruling in blistering dissents.

“Blacks were entitled to citizenship because they were Americans. They had no other homeland, owed no allegiance to any foreign power, and were subject to no other authority. They “fought and bled in the same battles,” “gained and gloried in the same victories,” and were “liable to be called upon to defend [America] in time of war” alongside every other citizen,” Justice Thomas wrote.

Justice Thomas rightfully said that the reconstruction amendments after the Civil War – specifically the 14th Amendment — were to ensure that the children of black slaves would be given citizenship.

“In doing so, the Court adds to the sad history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks but has instead been repurposed for political projects that the Reconstruction Congress did not support,” Thomas added.

Stephen Miller went off on the Supreme Court on Tuesday evening.

“We have people from all over the world, from third world nations, nations that on their own would have never invented the wheel, let alone modern technology, let alone medicine, let alone air travel. And they can just come into the country, have a baby at a hospital paid for it by you and me and then that baby is automatically a citizen?!” Stephen Miller said to Fox News anchor Jesse Watters.

“And then that baby is automatically a citizen that baby can sit on a jury when he turns 18 and sit in judgment of you and sit in judgment of me and sit in judgment of our loved ones can decide who our mayors are, our governors are, our presidents are,” Miller said.

“Citizenship means nothing if it is open to everyone!” he added.

“The idea that you can have a cruise ship filled with foreigners and they just dock at a port for an hour and someone has a baby – Jesse, the baby is an American citizen!” Miller said.

“They can vote in every election for the rest of their lives. They can be living in a foreign country and cashing welfare checks from American citizens,” he said.

“Some of the justices think they’re so intelligent! There is no possible reading of the 14th Amendment that applies to foreigners with foreign loyalties, foreign citizenship, foreign obligations, foreign everything!”

“Here’s a pretty good clue your constitutional interpretation is wrong. If your ruling requires you to suicide your civilization, your reading of the Constitution is wrong!” Miller added.

WATCH:

The post Stephen Miller GOES OFF on Supreme Court Justices in Epic Rant Following Birthright Citizenship Ruling (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Tennessee Taxpayers to Pay $1.9 Million Settlement to Fired Professor Who Celebrated Charlie Kirk’s Assassination

Posted on by patriotsheart

Portrait of a smiling woman with dark hair and red lipstick, wearing a black blazer against a gray background.

Portrait of a smiling woman with dark hair and red lipstick, wearing a black blazer against a gray background.
Tamar Shirnian during an interview with Knox News back in February.

The University of Tennessee has agreed to pay former assistant professor Tamar Shirinian $1.9 million to settle a lawsuit after she was fired over a social media post celebrating the death of Turning Point CEO and conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Under the settlement, approved by the University of Tennessee System Board of Trustees, Shirinian will not return to her teaching position.

The agreement still requires approval from Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and Gov. Bill Lee.

“My client is pleased that the parties reached a resolution,” Shirinian’s attorney, Robb Bigelow, said.

“We believe the resolution reflects the seriousness of the issues while allowing everyone to move forward.”

Because the University of Tennessee is a publicly funded institution, any settlement it pays ultimately comes from public funds, meaning Tennessee taxpayers will bear the cost.

The dispute began in September 2025, days after Kirk was assassinated during an event at Utah Valley University.

“The world is better off without him in it,” she wrote in a Facebook post.

“Even those who are claiming to be sad for his wife and kids… [they] are better off living without a disgusting psychopath like him.”

“His wife, well she’s a sick fuck for marrying him so I don’t [sic] care about his feelings.”

Screenshots of the post quickly spread online. After a formal investigation, she was terminated from her position.

Shirinian sued the university in federal court in October 2025, alleging her dismissal violated her rights. Plowman finalized her termination in February 2026.

A federal court filing states that both sides are finalizing the settlement agreement.

The post Tennessee Taxpayers to Pay $1.9 Million Settlement to Fired Professor Who Celebrated Charlie Kirk’s Assassination appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

TRIGGER WARNING: NBC News Grovels to Viewers for Using Terms ‘Biological Male’ and ‘Biological Female’ in Report About SCOTUS Ruling on Trans Athletes (VIDEO)

Posted on by patriotsheart

Screencap of Twitter/X video.

When NBC News reported on the Supreme Court decision on transgender athletes in sports today, journalist Craig Melvin fell all over himself top explain that he was using the terms ‘biological male’ and ‘biological female’ because that is the language the court used in the ruling.

He did not come right out and tell viewers that he was giving them a trigger warning but this is exactly what a trigger warning looks like. It was like he was apologizing to viewers for using these words.

This is how far we have gone down this ridiculously stupid road. Journalists on TV are afraid of offending the audience with completely normal and non-offensive words.

NewsBusters reports:

NBC News debased itself Tuesday with its Special Report on the Supreme Court decision allowing state bans of transgenderism in sports to remain in place, delivering a trigger warning about the use of “biological male” and “biological female” as well as scoffing at President Trump for “boil[ing] it down into bumper sticker language” when it’s unclear men have advantages over women and more care should be shown to a “deeply personal issue” that involves a “small” number of people…

Today co-host Craig Melvin also embarrassed himself with Orwellian verbiage, posing what seemed to be a trigger warning for any trans person watching: “Just a quick note here. The terms that we’re using here during our reporting, biological male, biological female, the high court put those terms in quotations in their decision and their dissent. But just so you know, we’re using those terms from the decision itself, biological male, biological female.”

Melvin should consult both Genesis 1 and 5 as well as Matthew 19 to name a few chapters in the Bible laying out male and female.

Jarrett thankfully returned and dispensed with analysis of the ruling without the ludicrous rhetorical throat-clearing.

Watch the video below:

This may seem like an insignificant detail, but it’s one of the ways that the media advances the left’s point of view.

They bend over backwards to use language that appeases the radical left as if it’s completely normal.

The post TRIGGER WARNING: NBC News Grovels to Viewers for Using Terms ‘Biological Male’ and ‘Biological Female’ in Report About SCOTUS Ruling on Trans Athletes (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

HOW CURIOUS: Jill Biden’s New Book Suddenly Vanishes From NY Times Bestseller List, Raising Questions About Actual Sales Numbers

Posted on by patriotsheart

Woman with long blonde hair wearing a blue sweater, sitting indoors with a thoughtful expression, surrounded by natural light and soft decor.

Woman with long blonde hair wearing a blue sweater, sitting indoors with a thoughtful expression, surrounded by natural light and soft decor.
Jill Biden CBS Sunday Mornings

Jill Biden’s new book was on the New York Times bestseller list until it suddenly vanished this week. Isn’t that strange?

Usually, when a book is a bestseller, it stays on the list for a while. In this case, it fell from 1st place to 3rd and then suddenly just wasn’t there anymore.

This raises serious questions about the actual sales numbers for the book. It reinforces the idea that books like this one get boosted by bulk sales from political groups.

The New York Post reported:

Jill Biden memoir’s disappearance from NYT bestseller list after debuting at top raises questions about sales numbers: ‘Very rare’

Former First Lady Jill Biden’s memoir had a brief run atop the New York Times bestseller list before tumbling out of the rankings just weeks later — fueling online speculation that its lofty debut owed more to bulk book orders than to sustained reader demand.

“View from the East Wing,” which was published by Simon & Schuster’s imprint Gallery Books, debuted at No. 1 on the New York Times Hardcover Nonfiction list on June 21 with a dagger (†) symbol indicating that retailers reported some bulk purchases.

By the following week, it had slipped to No. 3, and it has since fallen off the list altogether.

The sharp drop has sparked claims on social media that the 299-page book reached the top through orchestrated buying campaigns instead of real consumer demand.

Former FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver was among the most prominent critics, writing on X that the memoir “debuted at #1 on the NYT due to astroturfed bulk orders” before noting that it was “completely” off the list two weeks later and calling such a rapid decline “very rare.”

Publishing experts caution that the reality is more nuanced.

Conservative talk host Jesse Kelly offered this response to the news.

Even liberal poll analyst Nate Silver is talking about this.

We all know what happened here, don’t we?

This is how Democrats make a quick buck when they’re out of power. Read Jesse Kelly’s tweet again. He pretty much nailed it.

The post HOW CURIOUS: Jill Biden’s New Book Suddenly Vanishes From NY Times Bestseller List, Raising Questions About Actual Sales Numbers appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Warren Buffett PAUSES Donation to Gates Foundation as Probe Over Epstein Leaks Continues

Posted on by patriotsheart

Business leaders discussing economic strategies, featuring two prominent figures in formal attire during a meeting.

Business leaders discussing economic strategies, featuring two prominent figures in formal attire during a meeting.
Warren Buffet (left) distances himself from Bill Gates (right) – Wiki Commons

The Epstein curse continues to plague Gates.

We have been reporting here on TGP on how Bill Gates’ ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein are causing him problems that go beyond the mere reputational damage and family breakdown.

Today, it arises that billionaire investor Warren Buffett will not make his usual mid-year donation to the Gates Foundation for the first time in 20 years.

Buffet reportedly awaits more details about the charity’s links to Epstein.

Forbes reported:

“Citing unnamed sources with knowledge of Buffett’s plans, the Wall Street Journal reported that the billionaire investor is delaying his donation plans until later this year and may wait until his annual Thanksgiving letter.

Last June, Buffet made a record donation of $6 billion in Berkshire Hathaway shares to five charities—his biggest ever—with the lion’s share going to the Gates Foundation.”

Since 2006, Buffet has donated no less than $48 billion to Gates’ philantropic organization.

“Buffett and his aides have been in contact with the foundation’s leadership in a bid to learn more about its links to Epstein, the Journal’s report added.

In March, Buffett told CNBC that he hasn’t spoken with Gates since the release of the Epstein files, which highlighted the Microsoft founder’s relationship with the convicted sex offender (Gates has not been accused of any wrongdoing).”

Read more:

Under Pressure by Congress, Bill Gates Names the 3 Women He Had Affairs With, and Jeffrey Epstein Tried To Blackmail Him Over – Plus: the Nobel Prize and the Norwegian Connection

The post Warren Buffett PAUSES Donation to Gates Foundation as Probe Over Epstein Leaks Continues appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Despite Media Claims, USAID Cuts DID NOT Kill 14 Million People

Posted on by patriotsheart

Portrait of a man in a suit beside the USAID logo, representing international development and assistance initiatives.

Portrait of a man in a suit beside the USAID logo, representing international development and assistance initiatives.
Claims that Elon Musk is responsible for USAID cuts that killed 14 million people are not grounded in reality. Musk was not empowered to cut programs. His role was to audit government spending and make recommendations. The 14 million figure is a projection over several years. It has not been supported by any documented increase in all-cause mortality in recipient countries.

Critics of the U.S., along with mainstream media and Democratic lawmakers, have claimed that Elon Musk’s cuts to USAID have killed 14 million people. This claim fails on multiple levels. Musk did not cut USAID. As head of DOGE, he held no formal legal authority to cancel contracts or eliminate programs, and the formal cancellations were executed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The death toll figures circulating in the press are not confirmed counts but forward projections spanning up to five years, derived from economic models that assume no alternative funding was found, no internal reallocation of funds occurred, and no recipient government, third-country government, or global aid organization stepped in to fill gaps, assumptions the evidence does not support. An examination of the countries most dependent on USAID funding finds no verified excess mortality data for 2025 or 2026 attributable to the cuts; what exists are modeled estimates, not death registries.

The White House stated in court that Musk was a senior presidential adviser with no formal decision-making authority. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that DOGE played a role in the dismantling of USAID. However, the court found that the cuts were approved by government officials. It also ruled that Musk’s social media statement claiming he had “fed USAID into the wood chipper” did not legally constitute evidence that he made those decisions.

Legal scholars noted that so long as a confirmed government official pressed the cancel button, Musk held no actionable authority. Rubio executed the cancellations, eliminating 83% of USAID’s contracts and transferring the agency to the State Department.

The Trump administration cut USAID as part of the America First foreign policy agenda. The agency had become a vehicle for ideological priorities, waste, fraud, and abuse rather than advancing U.S. national interests. The administration argued that much of USAID’s funding went to left-wing NGOs, diversity initiatives, and global governance projects instead of life-saving programs or activities with strategic value to the United States.

Decades of USAID dependency had failed to produce self-sufficient economies. Rubio framed the restructuring as a realignment of foreign aid toward programs that directly advance U.S. diplomatic and security objectives.

The reasons for dismantling USAID are well documented, while all of the death figures in circulation are based on questionable models. The figures are generated by taking historical effectiveness rates, estimating how many lives each dollar of USAID spending saved, and then applying that ratio to the size of the funding cuts to project excess deaths. Widely divergent figures are circulating in international media because the projections differ enormously depending on methodology.

A Lancet microsimulation estimated approximately 1.77 million excess deaths in 2025 under an 83% cuts scenario, with a 95% uncertainty interval of 967,604 to 2,496,308. The Center for Global Development placed its 2025 midrange estimate at 500,000 to 1,000,000.

The headline “14 million deaths” figure is a cumulative projection through 2030, not a present death count. All of these models share a common flaw. They assume that funding disappears entirely, recipient governments do nothing, no internal reallocation from non-essential to life-saving programs occurs, and no substitute funding becomes available. The Lancet authors themselves acknowledged that future outcomes would vary depending on how governments and institutions respond.

The record shows that in some cases they already have. The most concrete example is PEPFAR, the United States President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the largest U.S. global health program and the primary vehicle through which USAID delivered HIV treatment across more than 50 countries.

In 2025, overall PEPFAR spending was cut by 30%. The U.S. preserved frontline HIV treatment while eliminating non-essential programs. Antiretroviral therapy, the daily medication that keeps HIV patients alive, continued reaching 20.6 million people, matching the FY2024 total.

The gap left by reduced U.S. funding was partially filled by recipient governments assuming direct responsibility for their own citizens. By the end of FY2025, HIV treatment coverage had broadly returned to FY2024 levels, with three million people now receiving treatment funded by their national governments rather than the U.S., more than two million of whom completed that transition between July and September 2025 alone.

The projection methodology carries a further structural problem. It treats USAID as the only possible input into a fixed, non-adaptive system and uses historical USAID effectiveness data to project deaths. It does not account for the counterfactual that long-term USAID dependency may have suppressed domestic investment in healthcare. Nigeria’s emergency supplemental provides a direct illustration. The fiscal capacity existed but went unexercised while USAID funding was available.

Yemen, the DRC, South Sudan, and Somalia each saw spending cuts exceeding 40% and obligation cuts above 60%. Despite these dramatic reductions, no verified country-level excess mortality figures for 2025 or 2026 have been attributed specifically to USAID cuts.

The models producing death projections acknowledge that outcomes depend on how governments and institutions respond. Governments remain free to feed their own people. Likewise, the United Nations, the European Union, China, and any other government or institution criticizing the U.S. funding cuts are free to provide replacement funding.

The post Despite Media Claims, USAID Cuts DID NOT Kill 14 Million People appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

NPR’s Nina Totenberg Reveals Why She Posted a Story Claiming Alito Was Retiring – Then Quickly Retracted

Posted on by patriotsheart

Man in a suit speaking thoughtfully, with a blurred background, conveying a serious discussion or interview setting.

Man in a suit speaking thoughtfully, with a blurred background, conveying a serious discussion or interview setting.

Does NPR’s Nina Totenberg have advanced knowledge that Justice Samuel Alito is about to retire?

NPR reporter Nina Totenberg on Tuesday published an article claiming Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito was retiring.

Totenberg claimed that the Supreme Court made the announcement that Alito was retiring.

Nina Totenberg wrote: “Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the Supreme Court’s opinion reversing Roe v. Wade is retiring, the court announced on Tuesday.”

However, 10 minutes later, the NPR article was scrubbed and left with an editor’s note.

The original article is archived here.

“This story has been taken down. It was published in error,” the note read.

NPR staff published a separate article claiming the Alito article was “erroneously published.”

NPR said that Totenberg already had a draft article on Alito’s retirement ready in advance of the announcement.

The outlet claimed that Totenberg assumed that Alito was retiring after she heard a bystander say that Chief Justice Roberts made a retirement announcement.

“Totenberg was reporting on the final day of the Supreme Court session on Tuesday. As she was leaving the court, Chief Justice John Roberts was announcing upcoming retirements. Totenberg wondered why everyone else wasn’t leaving and asked someone outside the court. According to her interview that same day on All Things Considered, Totenberg asked a bystander what was going on, and the person replied “retirement announcements.” But Totenberg heard the reply in the singular, “announcement, ” and assumed it was the notice that Alito was retiring,’ NPR reported.

Nina Totenberg revealed on “All Things Considered” that she made a “rookie mistake.”

“I scared everybody half to death for about five minutes,” Totenberg said on the show. “It’s entirely on me. It’s not anybody else’s fault.”

Totenberg read the text of her apology to Alito on Tuesday’s show:

“Dear Justice Alito, there are no words to adequately apologize for today’s error in reporting your retirement. It was entirely my fault. I rushed out of the courtroom after the opinion announcements, and when I realized that the usual rush of folks after a few minutes had not happened, I asked somebody was going on inside, to which the answer was, ‘retirement announcements.’ I didn’t hear the ‘s’ on ‘announcements,’ and I assumed something no reporter should ever do, that you were retiring. It was the worst professional mistake of my more than 50 years in journalism. I could go on, but I don’t know what else to say, except that I am so so sorry.”

NPR claimed that Nina Totenberg’s status as one of the most experienced reporters covering the Supreme Court contributed to the error.

“Totenberg is one of the most experienced reporters covering the Supreme Court. She’s done so for NPR since 1975. Her status contributed to the error,” NPR said.

“She’s the preeminent Supreme Court reporter in the courtroom,” NPR Executive Editor Krishnadev Calamur said. “So I’m assuming that’s what she heard. … She’s in the room. It’s like when we report opinions. I’m not waiting to see what the Times is reporting. It’s when Nina says, here’s what happened, and we do it. That’s the trust you build up.”

The post NPR’s Nina Totenberg Reveals Why She Posted a Story Claiming Alito Was Retiring – Then Quickly Retracted appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.