New York Times Feels The Sting of Candace Owens When They Try To Take Her Down
New York Times, thinking they finally had Candace Owen, sent her a letter asking her to define her stance against the US helping Ukraine; they did not count on her ability to quickly destroy them with their own words.
The outrage started when she questioned why we were helping, considering that “Ukraine being a corrupt country.”
A New York Times reporter sent an email to Candace demanding to know why this was her stance concerning Ukraine.
Thinking they had her trapped, she was siding with Russia in this issue, Candice quickly turned the tables.
“Received an email from The NYTimes asking for comment regarding me “advancing ideas that Ukraine is a corrupt country”—similar to Russian state TV,” Owens tweeted on Monday.
“I replied informing them that I actually got my ideas from the New York Times, and provided the links to their past articles,” she added.
This was in response to this letter from the New York Times that tried to accuse her of supporting Russian propaganda.
“We note that you advanced the idea that Ukraine was a corrupt country, which matched comments we’ve seen from Russian state media. I’m wondering if you have any context or further comment to add about this comparison?” the email from NYT said.
She then went for an epic takedown, which we have become accustomed to in the past.
I am very confused by this e-mail. I learned about “the idea that Ukraine was a corrupt country” from the New York Times. You guys have covered the corruption of Ukraine extensively, for years. As just one example, here is a piece from the NYT Editorial Board entitled, “Ukraine’s Unyielding Corruption”: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/01/opinion/ukraines-unyielding-corruption.html
I educated myself about both the neo-nazi problem in Ukraine and the unyielding corruption by reading your newspaper, not Russian state media. Is there something specific I said that was different from what you guys have written in the past?
She then sent them another email, further using their articles against them:
For more good measure – here are some more past articles written from reputable sources over the past few years about the corruption and neo-nazi problem in Ukraine, For clarity, are you now suggesting that what the western media covered extensively over the last few years is now just Russian propaganda? Are you suggesting all of these articles were sponsored by Russia state media? Again, I would love to provide you with a quote for your article, just want to be clear regarding what you mean when you say that I am advancing ideas that Ukraine was a corrupt country when in fact I got my ideas from your publication.
In what was not a surprising move NY Times published their article but refused to include Owen’s rebuttal.
This is hardly a new move for the NY Times; they have done this consistently over the last couple of years when the facts are not convenient to their narrative.
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.