Media firefighters can’t scramble fast enough to put out the fire started by Elizabeth Warren when she apparently lied about getting fired from a teaching job for being pregnant. Other women have totally been fired for being pregnant! Asking questions about Warren’s dubious victimhood narrative is sexist!

And then there’s this approach from Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan, who’s insisting that the Washington Free Beacon presented their findings “without sufficient context” and that “conservatives and pro-Trumpers gobbled up” what Sullivan has deemed the “pregnancy smear”:

in today's bad-faith media sphere, 'revelations' presented without sufficient context can do unfair damage.They will be weaponized, falsely regurgitated and twisted beyond recognition. … My new column https://t.co/a4lmEAeuGC — Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) October 9, 2019

Shockingly, nowhere on these dug-up documents is it stamped: “The all-male board fired this young woman because she was pregnant and because of its deep-seated misogyny.” — Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) October 9, 2019

And shockingly, Sullivan completely ignores the concrete evidence strongly suggesting that Warren indeed lied about this. According to Sullivan, there’s plenty of “crucial context” proving that Warren has been telling the truth. That “crucial context” is CBS News’ interview with another teacher at the school where Warren worked, as well as, of course, Elizabeth Warren’s own words, which, as we all know, are worth everything.

Sullivan concludes:

It all seems to track: There is no big controversy here. No apparent lie and no “character issue” that should unduly concern the voting public.

If there is a scandal here, it’s how — in the bad-faith media world — narrowly presented facts without sufficient context can do unfair harm.

They can and will be weaponized, falsely regurgitated and twisted beyond recognition.

Count Stephen Miller, aka @redsteeze, among those extremely impressed by Sullivan’s journalistic diligence:

And the cake topper. https://t.co/XiviCjhjob — Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) October 9, 2019

She’s on video in 2007. Independent journalists found that video while you were writing your 1,000th “It’s a shame journalism is dying in flyover country” piece https://t.co/sO97wJytQP — Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) October 9, 2019

Did you not catch this, Margaret?

Here’s how the story went in 2007:pic.twitter.com/DQryebkPdK — Eddie Zipperer (@EddieZipperer) October 9, 2019

Weird, right?

Yet, she did lie. — ReporterMcCabe (@NeilWMcCabe2) October 9, 2019

What was the lie? — Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) October 9, 2019

Give Margaret credit: She’s found her narrative and she’s stickin’ to it, come hell or high water.

You actually haven’t read a single thing about this or seen video have you? This is breathtaking. https://t.co/wFh5cE42kS — Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) October 9, 2019

Tweeter Charles Martel brought one of Sullivan’s past hits to Miller’s attention:

The claim against Kavanaugh is not a suspicious 11th-hour bombshell. Because we’re not in the 11th hour. My new column https://t.co/qjMZwm3Tpb — Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) September 17, 2018

The evidence against Warren is a lot more compelling and solid than the evidence against Brett Kavanaugh. But Sullivan’s not the kind of journalist who gets hung up on the details (the details that don’t support her narrative, that is).

Yes let’s talk about unfair smears, https://t.co/XfdG6MDA7C — Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) October 9, 2019

She’ll have to get back to you about that. Or not.