Stealth Edits Were Made to Stacey Abrams Piece on MLB Boycott, the USA Today Needs to Explain Why

(Doug Strickland/Chattanooga Times Free Press via AP)

Ever since Major League Baseball decided earlier this month to pull the All-Star game from Georgia and along with it some projected $100 million in revenue over the state’s new voting law, the MSM, so-called “fact-checkers” and Twitter have all been trying to rescue Stacey Abrams from criticism that her efforts led to MLB’s decision.

For example, here’s what trended on Twitter Friday and Saturday:

Here’s the Politifact write-up where they cast Abrams as a staunch opponent of boycotts over the law she repeatedly called “Jim Crow 2.0”:

Not surprisingly, CNN’s resident “fact-checker” (and noted Democrat apologist) Daniel Dale also tried to ride to Abrams’ rescue, taking issue with a video tweet from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) where he blasted Abrams during a Senate hearing last week over her false statements about the law:

The big problem with all the various “defenses” of Abrams’ stance on boycotts is that part of the “evidence” used by them was a USA Today op/ed published just a couple of days before MLB made the announcement, an op/ed that former NRSC advisor Matt Whitlock discovered over the weekend had been stealth-edited after MLB issued their statement. The stealth edits, you will not be surprised to learn, soften Abrams’ original language to make it appear like she was even more opposed to boycotts of her state than her original piece let on.

Whitlock brought the receipts after Dale ran interference for Abrams:

He then took Politifact to task as well for using the revised op/ed as part of their defense of Abrams:

Twitter sleuth Jeryl Bier also did some digging and confirmed the edits were done earlier in the month without the paper noting they’d been done (until just a few days ago):

Why were these changes made that watered-down Abrams’ original piece without letting readers know they were? The USA Today owes their readers an explanation because if this is how they normally operate, the history of someone’s words can literally be erased and most people would not know otherwise:

As to the overall “defenses” of Abrams from the usual corners, I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: From prior experience with calls for boycotts in Georgia, Abrams knew the moment she started referring to the law as “Jim Crow 2.0” how the outrage mobs on the left would respond, and yet she continued for weeks to lie about it.

She and her knights in shining armor in the media can play word games all they want to on this issue, but the actual facts about how she and other Democrats including President Biden himself and Sen. Raphael Warnock laid the groundwork for the boycotts to proceed and MLB to pull the game speak for themselves.

Related: Watch This CNN Anchor Openly Push Lyft President to Cause More Economic Pain for Georgia on Live TV