There’s really no family-friendly way to talk about this so consider yourself warned. A reporter for the NY Times thinks the NRA, in the form of spokesperson Dana Loesch, wants to sexually assault the NY Times. Adam Goldman who according to his Twitter bio covers the FBI and national security for the NY Times tweeted this today (it has since been deleted so I’m using a screenshot):

NYTimes reporter is unaware of the verb "fisk." He attacks @DLoesch claiming she was threatening to "fist" @NYTimes. Kinky mind. pic.twitter.com/NcLE2v7Cfn

— John/TheCitySquare (@johncitysq) August 4, 2017

Apparently, this reporter has never heard the word “Fisk” which means to go through something, usually line by line, and rebut or do a take down on it. This is essentially a new media journalistic practice involving coherent and logical arguments which has nothing to do with anyone’s sexual practices. Here’s a definition from the Urban Dictionary:

The term refers to Robert Fisk, a journalist who wrote some rather foolish anti-war stuff, and who in particular wrote a story in which he (1) recounted how he was beaten by some anti-American Afghan refugees, and (2) thought they were morally right for doing so. Hence many pro-war blogs — most famously, InstaPundit — often use the term “Fisking” figuratively to mean a thorough and forceful verbal beating of an anti-war, possibly anti-American, commentator who has richly earned this figurative beating through his words. Good Fisking tends to be (or at least aim to be) quite logical, and often quotes the other article in detail, interspersing criticisms with the original article’s text.

People helpfully pointed out to Goldman that he had misheard the line in the video which led him to delete his original tweets:

I deleted my earlier RT of this @NRATV tweet. 1/2https://t.co/brvXLtZ2TP

— Adam Goldman (@adamgoldmanNYT) August 4, 2017

Dana Loesch claims she says "fisk" in the ad, not "fist," which is in their hashtag. 2/2

— Adam Goldman (@adamgoldmanNYT) August 4, 2017

It’s sad that he can’t admit this because it’s not really a close call. As Loesch pointed out, the closed captioning for the video says “Fisk.”

I did no such thing, you #fakenews peddling moron. I said “fisk.” I suggest you learn what words mean. https://t.co/LCd4vWMU5B

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 4, 2017

And because @adamgoldmanNYT decided to malicious lie about my remarks and sexualize me I’m receiving rape threats. That’s on you, Adam.

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 4, 2017

What’s more embarrassing: A hack reporter & acolytes who don’t know what “fisk” means or a hack who apparently thinks about “fisting?” Geez.

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 4, 2017

You don’t have to agree with me on 2A rights. You do not have to lie about words I didn’t say. Check yourselves. https://t.co/iwtOqtdGvz

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 4, 2017

Hi @adamgoldmanNYT , before you maliciously lied about my word choice, did you check captioning as well? pic.twitter.com/zG1QoY0fiH

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 4, 2017

Dave Weigel joins in:

Another hack reporter maliciously lies about a word I “literally” didn’t say. https://t.co/Q1Ms98HnIv https://t.co/1p7a8eLAZw

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 4, 2017

I’ll just point out that Dana has used this word before in context so there’s really no doubt what she said:

Here’s the shorter version of the video (longer version here).

.@DLoesch has a message for the @nytimes: “We're coming for you.” One
non-#fakenews story is not enough. #NRA #ClenchedFistofTruth pic.twitter.com/Hm1QkJi5Tp

— NRATV (@NRATV) August 3, 2017