Former New York Times editor Adam Rubenstein has a lengthy essay at The Atlantic that pulls back the curtain on the newspaper and its alleged bias in its coverage. The essay follows similar pieces from former editors and writers that range from Bari Weiss to Rubenstein’s former colleague James Bennet. The essay describes a similar work environment where even his passing reference to liking Chik-Fil-A sandwiches led to a condemnation of shocked colleagues.
An opinion-section editor, Rubenstein was involved in the controversy over publishing Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R., Ark.) op-ed where he argued for the possible use of national guard to quell violent riots around the White House.
It was one of the lowest points in the history of modern American journalism. Cotton was calling for the use of the troops to restore order in Washington after days of rioting around the White House. While Congress would “call in the troops” six months later to quell the rioting at the Capitol on January 6th, New York Times reporters and columnists called the column historically inaccurate and politically inciteful. Reporters insisted that Cotton was even endangering them by suggesting the use of troops and insisted that the newspaper cannot feature people who advocate political violence. One year later, the New York Times published a column by an academic who had previously declared that there is nothing wrong with murdering conservatives and Republicans.
Rubenstein noted:
On January 6, 2021, few people at The New York Times remarked on the fact that liberals were cheering on the deployment of National Guardsmen to stop rioting at the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., the very thing Tom Cotton had advocated.
Instead, he describes an environment in which the staff routinely rejected conservative viewpoints, subjected conservatives to added demands and editing, and faced staff opposition to working on such pieces. He noted:
Being a conservative—or at least being considered one—at the Times was a strange experience. I often found myself asking questions like “Doesn’t all of this talk of ‘voter suppression’ on the left sound similar to charges of ‘voter fraud’ on the right?” only to realize how unwelcome such questions were. By asking, I’d revealed that I wasn’t on the same team as my colleagues, that I didn’t accept as an article of faith the liberal premise that voter suppression was a grave threat to liberal democracy while voter fraud was entirely fake news.
Or take the Hunter Biden laptop story: Was it truly “unsubstantiated,” as the paper kept saying? At the time, it had been substantiated, however unusually, by Rudy Giuliani. Many of my colleagues were clearly worried that lending credence to the laptop story could hurt the electoral prospects of Joe Biden and the Democrats. But starting from a place of party politics and assessing how a particular story could affect an election isn’t journalism. Nor is a vague unease with difficult subjects. “The state of Israel makes me very uncomfortable,” a colleague once told me. This was something I was used to hearing from young progressives on college campuses, but not at work.
What emerges from the interview is all-too-familiar to many of us on this blog.I have long been a critic of what I called “advocacy journalism” as it began to emerge in journalism schools. These schools encourage students to use their “lived expertise” and to “leave[] neutrality behind.” Instead, of neutrality, they are pushing “solidarity [as] ‘a commitment to social justice that translates into action.’”
For example, we previously discussed the release of the results of interviews with over 75 media leaders by former executive editor for The Washington Post Leonard Downie Jr. and former CBS News President Andrew Heyward. They concluded that objectivity is now considered reactionary and even harmful. Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Chronicle said it plainly: “Objectivity has got to go.”
Saying that “Objectivity has got to go” is, of course, liberating. You can dispense with the necessities of neutrality and balance. You can cater to your “base” like columnists and opinion writers. Sharing the opposing view is now dismissed as “bothsidesism.” Done. No need to give credence to opposing views. It is a familiar reality for those of us in higher education, which has been increasingly intolerant of opposing or dissenting views.
Downie recounted how news leaders today
“believe that pursuing objectivity can lead to false balance or misleading “bothsidesism” in covering stories about race, the treatment of women, LGBTQ+ rights, income inequality, climate change and many other subjects. And, in today’s diversifying newsrooms, they feel it negates many of their own identities, life experiences and cultural contexts, keeping them from pursuing truth in their work.”
There was a time when all journalists shared a common “identity” as professionals who were able to separate their own bias and values from the reporting of the news.
Now, objectivity is virtually synonymous with prejudice. Kathleen Carroll, former executive editor at the Associated Press declared “It’s objective by whose standard? … That standard seems to be White, educated, and fairly wealthy.”
In an interview with The Stanford Daily, Stanford journalism professor, Ted Glasser, insisted that journalism needed to “free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice.” He rejected the notion that journalism is based on objectivity and said that he views “journalists as activists because journalism at its best — and indeed history at its best — is all about morality.” Thus, “Journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.”
Lauren Wolfe, the fired freelance editor for the New York Times, has not only gone public to defend her pro-Biden tweet but published a piece titled “I’m a Biased Journalist and I’m Okay With That.”
Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones is a leading voice for advocacy journalism.
Indeed, Hannah-Jones has declared “all journalism is activism.”
It is easy to see how this was a “strange experience” for Rubenstein. He objects that “our goal was supposed to be journalistic, rather than activist,” but he found reporters actively working to advance the political interests of the Democrats and Joe Biden.
It was a strange, not a unique, experience. It is another account of the orthodoxy of American media, which increasingly functions like a de facto state media.
In his description of the sandwich controversy, Rubenstein describes how he was introduced to the culture of the New York Times at his orientation meeting. When asked about his favorite sandwich in the group meeting, he committed the offense of naming Chick-fil-A’s spicy chicken sandwich.
That led to a shocked hush before the rep leading the orientation said: “We don’t do that here. They hate gay people.” That statement was met with the snapping of fingers from the staff in agreement in a communal condemnation.
It is clear from the account that, at the Times and other major outlets, there is much of traditional journalism that they “don’t do . . . here.”
The whole “Despair at Newspaper Office” tone reminded me of Nathaniel West’s “Miss Lonely Hearts”. It is a short book, and I will re-read it today! Here is an online copy should anyone be interested:
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.124888/page/n21/mode/2up?view=theater
and this! A BBC radio production:
Glad to see that someone else listens to BBC radio plays on YouTube.
The NYT is a vector of cancer. It is not a newspaper; it is nothing more than a vehicle for leftist, anti-American, anti-Zionist, and more frequently anti-Semitic propaganda. I subscribed to that newspaper for many years and it was always way to the left of my politics but at least it demonstrated a modicum of fairness in reporting and had excellent serious coverage of the arts. When Rosenthal departed that was the end. Soon afterward the NYT exposed the “SWIFT” program which was designed to track transactions for the financing of terrorism. Even Pelosi requested that the NYT not publish the article as it would only serve to assist terrorists evading detection. They went ahead and did it anyway. Because that it what they are all about now. They are a paper that will publish an opinion piece by a mayor of Gaza City appointed by Hamas but fire the managing editor who published a piece by a sitting American Senator. I curse them to the end of time.
Maybe Turley has forgotten the NYT printing the “but her e-mails” line day after day in 2016. The NYT did almost nothing about the Bush 43 losing 22 million e-mails. The NYT did next to nothing about Trumps tearing up and losing documents in official White House paper work. The NYT also of late has bent over backwards to point out any kind of slip-up President Biden does or says and almost ignores the insane comments Trump says on a daily basis. Like most MSM media, they can’t tell the truth about anything, because to point out truth, it would be unfair to the liars.
The NYT did next to nothing about Trumps tearing up and losing documents in official White House paper work.
It was reported, or no one would have known to complain about it.
As President, Trump can destroy any document he wishes. Claiming the President cant, is just another phony narrative.
There are federal laws that protect official WH communications and paper work from being destroyed or altered. Look it up, but I got the feeling your mind is already made up.
Any such laws would not be applied against Democrats.
FishWang showed up to defend the NYT with his latest ‘BBUUUTTTT… MUH TRUMP!” moment: “The NYT did next to nothing about Trumps tearing up and losing documents in official White House paper work. The NYT also of late has bent over backwards to point out any kind of slip-up President Biden does or says and almost ignores the insane comments Trump says on a daily basis.
Yes, as we can all clearly see over the last almost eighteen years, the NYT has given Biden EXACTLY the same level of scrutiny as Trump during his eight years in politics, both in what they publicly said and where there are political allegations of criminal conduct. Not only in what they published – but what they chose NOT to publish.
FishWang with every post leads me to ask: Is it a deliberate, studied insult to the majority of Jonathan Turley’s readers that the Soviet Democrats hold us in such contempt that they assign their most sophomoric and inept liars and novice spinmeisters here to be their party apparatchiks posting in defense of Soviet Democrats and Bribery Biden?
You said, “Is it a deliberate, studied insult to the majority of Jonathan Turley’s readers that the Soviet Democrats hold us in such contempt that they assign their most sophomoric and inept liars and novice spinmeisters here”
I am not getting a Soviet, or even a Chinese feel, to any of this, because they are professionals, and unless the shills here are their “shock troops”, and their destruction means little, somebody or some other entity is behind it. Goebbels would fire these clowns in a second. I am getting older, but I seem to remember something I read 10 or 12 years ago, about a group of nutty liberal leftist types organizing to trash Republican/Conservative forums, just to screw up the discussions. I do not recall the name of the group. Don’t even remember where I read it. But ineptness would certainty be a trait of the Leftist Democrats.
But hey, what could be better than having a stupidly bad lawyer representing the “other side”? 🙂
“solidarity [as] ‘a commitment to social justice that translates into action.’”
One of the most frightening mantras of the 21st century.
(–as in, –the united front of media, academia, industrial, institutional, and governmental entities, to promote a singular political ideology, under the “honorable” auspices of “social justice,” but really to suppress/destroy/contain opposing thought or ideology)
Why would anyone waste even a penny on the NYT?
Agreed. Also Chik-fil-A doesn’t hate gays. They just disagree with their views on sex. That is why liberals are so intellectually lazy because they can’t distinguish between a disagreement and hatred.
But to them, disagreement IS hatred. Disagreement equates to you calling them wrong, or even stupid – and they can not stomach the idea that they are not just the brightest, smartest people in the Whole Dang Universe! I think it might have been Greg Gutfeld, who did a piece on Jon Stewart, where he said Stewart’s whole schtick consisted of smirking, in front of a choir of people, who were in on the whole thing – that they were good and smart, and everybody else is bad and stupid.
The crossword puzzle? I just signed up for a $4 per month subscription, which last six months. I will not renew it at $25/month. Plus, I am tired of being paywalled out of stories when I am trying to find something. I am holding my nose. Years ago, I would look forward to going to the bookstore on Sunday often, ordering up some coffee, and reading the NYT. It was either that, or staying at home, listening to my second wife doing her perpetual Mein Kampf routine.
Floyd said: “I am tired of being paywalled out of stories”
Is their paywall competently designed? My largest regional paper tries to do the same thing, but turning off JavaScript in my browser allows me to read complete articles. I can’t see photos other than the lead example when I do that, but that is no great loss.
You’ve got a bird and it’s a cost effective cage liner?
Do these former editors and others actually think that the prog/left gives a rat’s *ss about integrity, honor and truth? They are just preaching to their own choir and if you are an educated adult you already know that and if you are one of their well indoctrinated, you don’t care. The media ceased to be the fourth estate and became a partisan way back and a good indication of that is how they shut down Joe McCarthy. This isn’t new – it’s just more blatant.
It just occurred to me that there is a flip side to Identity Politics. They don’t just identify the allegedly oppressed and marginalized group (blacks good, gays good, women good, trans good, illegal aliens good, Palestinians good) but they also do a similar thing with those people whom they fear, or who block the Shining Path. You can see it here, today, in full display, from several shills:
FOXNews bad, Orange Man bad, Christians bad, Jews bad, people with guns bad, cops bad, Guiliani bad.
I swear, but if the Time Machine scenario ever develops, where the Morlocks eat the Eloi, they aren’t even going to have to sound the siren to bring our Eloi to the dinner table. Our Eloi will run to it! Of their own free will.
I found myself at the Holocaust Museum website yesterday, where I saw the excerpt below. I think most of that, in the United States, has been of the “bottom up” variety, from Leftist Democrat activists. I saw this really taking off in the 1970s. For example, Saturday Night Live, supposedly a comedy show, self-enforcing the “We laugh at Republicans, but we do not laugh at Democrats” Rule.
“Gleichschaltung is the German term applied to the Nazification of German society following the Nazi seizure of power in 1933. Once Hitler became chancellor, he and the Nazi Party sought to “coordinate” all political, social, and cultural institutions with the Nazi state. This “coordination” was done in the name of national unity. However, it allowed the Nazi Party to extend its power by creating a single party state. Everything was subject to coordination: local government, professional organizations, social clubs, leisure activities—even those for children.
The state enforced coordination from the top-down. At the same time, many Germans responded with a bottom-up coordination of their own. This was known as Selbstgleichschaltung. Even Hitler was surprised with the speed and ease of remaking Germany. He noted “everything is going much faster than we ever dared to hope.”1
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/gleichschaltung-coordinating-the-nazi-state?series=152
Thanks for this because we are–and have been for some time–living in the 1930s. Just taking a wee bit longer than it took Hitler.
Imagine if Goebbels had had social media and AI instead of his genius of using an airplane for campaign stops. Look at any timeline of the Holocaust–one that isn’t revisionist–and one can see just how fast the Germany fell into the abyss.
Just a few key dates:
January 30, 1933–Hitler named chancellor (Papen and Hindenburg thought they could control Hitler and the Nazis better if he was chancellor).
February 28, 1933–Reichstag Fire and the pretext needed for the Enabling Act
March 22, 1933–Enabling Act suspending civil rights and due process
March 22, 1933–opening of Dachau concentration camp for political dissidents and noncompliant journalists.
May 10, 1933–Book burnings.
July 14, 1933–banning of all political parties other than the Nazi party.
The rest, as they say, is history. Lots of other evil acts in those first five months in power, but those are the key ones. Most important in Hitler’s meteoric rise to totalitarian power was eliminating voices of dissent.
They say that if you do not study history you are bound to repeat it. We have all the info about tyranny, communism and the holocaust yet still – look at all the people with their heads stuck in, what is literally and encyclopedia at their fingertips and all they know is taylor swift’s latest kiss etc. How we enervate the masses to their plight is beyond me. Actually, I think we have passed the point of no return unless something cataclysmic occurs to shake up the populace.
I agree. Until the SJW supporting class is sleeping in their car, or scrounging food from a dumpster, they will not learn. They used to say that a Conservative was a liberal who got mugged. I don’t think that is true today. I think the liberal would take his beating, and believe that he had it coming because of 1619. Columbus. Robert E. Lee.
I think you are correct about a certain group of prog/leftist who would take the beating… Hopefully there may be enough currently identifying with the dems who are becoming disgusted by all the collaterals damage being done that is starting to effect their own space that they may jump to the other side rather than follow the extreme left down their rabbit hole of self-destruction.
This queen is a happy camper / princess working for Chick Fil A.
Gurlfriend you on the wrong team!
Advocacy journalism is like Covid for the brain.
“That standard seems to be White, educated, and fairly wealthy.”
should read:
That standard seems to be White, educated, fairly wealthy, Democrat, and unquestioningly Liberal.
Trolls are working overtime to drag comments away from the topic.
Past editors at the NYT are laying out the facts of how the NYT makes their decision. This is not an analysis by someone looking in. It is coming from inside the house.
The necessity of the publishing and broadcasting advocacy content, and smoothering all other, is because the leftist ideology is nothing but failure.
Antis semitism is being nurtured in the most elite universities in the Nation.
Afirmative action has led to leadership being woefully ignorant of the world out side their cloistered offices, and protected by the Praetorian Guard, from Ideas that scare them witless.
Education is just one area, fully controlled by the left. Education that can no longer figure out a way to teach humans how to read. But the education elite will invest millions explaining trans to 8 year olds.
You said, “Trolls are working overtime to drag comments away from the topic.”
Amen! Already several, “Oh look, a Flying Fox!” (Squirrels are so last year!)
Iowan2,
The good professor is pointing out by insights of Adam Rubenstein time at the NYT, and how it is not journalism.
“. . . the snapping of fingers from the staff in agreement in a communal condemnation.” just proved how moronic these people are.
Gee, if the Times reacts that way to a Chick-Fil-A then they would positively have a stroke if I mentioned my favorite vegetable was a bowl of blackeyed peas poured over some cornbread.
We hear a lot about low information voters out there in the hinterlands of America but I think some of the worst live in places like the New York Times, Washington Post and the metropolitan areas surrounding them.
These people seem to think that just because there are folks who don’t have a degree behind their name, that, somehow they’re stupid. Well, since I live in the hinterlands and have treated people there for over 40 years, I can tell you they are not stupid. In fact they are as bright and much more driven than many of the pampered whiners that inhabit these areas and their accompanying universities. It’s all about opportunity and whether you have a chance at opportunity or not.
Some of the brightest are farmers. They work on multimillion dollar pieces of equipment, know electronics and mechanics, animal husbandry, feed rations for various types of stock, near veterinarians in daily work, construction, soil erosion and retention, meteorology, economics, commodity markets and it’s every day.
I worked on farms with uncles and cousins and it was hard, challenging, frustrating, but a tremendous sense of accomplishment. Going to college and medical school was easy compared to farming,
Or be a CAT worker and build engines for the earth movers that are the size of houses and smaller. They are too big for conveyor belts. Huge lifts bring them in and set them down and 2 men start to build them, one man on each side. Usually high school graduates, and they’re not stupid either.
These are immensely practical people and live their lives with their eyes wide open.
Sometimes I really have to wonder about the Times and the Post and their ilk, since they seem to live with the eyes closed and their ears plugged and are totally ignorant of history.
When someone hears only one side of an issue, they are living in an Information Desert. That is pretty much the Democrat Left. They are the ones trying to shut down Free Speech. The Nazis would imprison or kill Germans who listened to BBC broadcasts. Here, much less force is needed, “Hey we were going to invite you to our cocktail party, but you have not put your hand over your heart, and said Orange Man Bad! That is enough for these losers.
Floyd,
That is one interesting thing about our leftist friends here on the good professor’s blog, they point out how much they have in common with the Nazis or Mao’s Red Guard.
Agreed. They’ve never been taught why the Nazi’s, Mao’s, and Stalin’s of the 20th century are the worst kinds of people to want to mimic; hence they lack any self awareness they are now those people, themselves.
JAFO,
Well said.
And, their antisemitism is well known.
True, and about self-awareness – I wonder, a little bit, if they are not paid shills, then who is it that they are really trying to distract? The other people here, or themselves? Distraction can be a form of defense mechanism – you know – keep yourself so busy fighting, that you do not have to deal with the discomfort of cognitive dissonance (CD). Here, a story about how the NYT is biased and activist, and not just some neutral reporter of the news – is distressing to them. Just like the stories about Biden’s crookedness or mental functioning. So rather than say to themselves, “Gee! That looks bad! Maybe I need to rethink some stuff.” – it becomes Trump sucks, Prof. Turley is biased, Trump is a racist, republican are stupid and crooked too!
Maybe it fits here?:
“Action defenses reflect the perception of the individual that the immediate source of stress or conflict is external and that the experience is intolerable. The individual’s perception overlooks the internal sources of the distress, such as personal unacceptability of or limitations in awareness of one’s own wishes, fears, and inhibitions. Unable to contain attendant distress, these defenses operate to engage, manipulate, or counterattack the apparent external source. These defenses lead the individual to impulsive action on the environment or oneself, thereby releasing tension, gratifying wishes, and/or avoiding fears. However, this is done without anticipating negative consequences.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8555762/
Whatever, it is evident to me, if folks like DMcintyre, FishWings, Gigi, Anonymous and others are not being paid to make their comments, and assuming that they are not the same person or a couple of persons, then there are some severe mental illness issues going on. A lot more obsession, childishness, anger and energy being poured into something not at all requiring that kind of response.
Floyd,
Well said.
When faced with the truth, the double down on their own cognitive dissonance.
The one I am noting in today’s comments,
“Fox started it!”
Perhaps Fox did. I do not know. I was not there and I dont watch Fox.
But, what they willingly ignore, is that MSM like CNN, MSNBC, NYT, NPR, WaPo perfected it.
Oh, we do read and see their childishness, anger everyday when we read their comments.
They are so devoid of life, humor, I have to hope they are getting paid which would make sense why they only make everything into attacks on the good professor, or about Trump when the good professor’s column does not even mention Trump once.
They are like monkeys flinging poo at a zoo. It makes the monkeys happy, and the audience gets a good laugh out of it, too. But why would any human being play the monkey, day after day??? Either for money, or for mental illness reasons.
GEB posted: “These people seem to think that just because there are folks who don’t have a degree behind their name, that, somehow they’re stupid.
Pretty good observation. That kind of sophomoric assumption can be found in more than one camp, not just the Soviet Democrats and their self-designated elite.
I know the farm/ranch angle, coming from a very small place that didn’t have much in the way of machinery and a lot of physical labor instead. Then during my time as a police officer in the late 70’s/early 80’s, I did a criminology degree – which was dumb because the smarter cops also getting degrees chose business administration or management instead as their career move. But despite the image of cops being high school graduates short on brains and therefore having to choose police work because they couldn’t get a better job, I worked with a LOT of cops who had post secondary degrees. Not a few who left other occupations which paid better and which were far less dangerous to become police officers. That’s not to mention their problem solving skills – police work is the only 24/7 social service agency out there serving members of the population having a bad day, at any time of the day.
Ditto when I left police work for a career jumping out of airplanes in the military. Despite a commonly held belief that infantry are dummies who are in the military because they aren’t smart enough to have a career anywhere else, you will find more than a few in the infantry who had a college or university degree BEFORE choosing to join the military. In this case, the REAL ignorance is that of those with the belief that the infantry are morons.
You don’t give a NODLR costing eight million dollars to a moron who can’t understand the electromagnetic spectrum and how that ties in with effectively using the kit. You don’t put a moron who cannot understand precession and how it affects trajectory behind the sight of a mortar. Or have a moron as the mortar fire controller who calculates the azimuth and elevation plus charge for rounds fired from point A to land within 30′ of the intended target at point B. Particularly when their fellow troops are danger close. Or train a soldier on today’s modern long range sniping rifles who cannot understand and do mil math calculations in the middle of a firefight or Coriolis affect when it can change point of impact about 10″ at 2,000 meters.
Ultimately, I ended up with both a degree in criminology and later another in geomatics. The demands to be a quick learner and flexible problem solver in both police work and the military were FAR greater than anything I encountered completing either of my two university degrees – they were relatively easy in comparison. More than a few people I graduated from university with could never have made the cut in either police work or the infantry.
And then of course, there’s the ages old “Kids these days” – leveled at my peers and myself by the returned veterans of WWII in the late 60’s/early 70’s. And now leveled today at the generation that just finished repeatedly doing tours over in the sandbox over the last 20 years, provides the workforce in the oil patch, etc. Amusingly (or sadly), some of those who heard that directed at them in the 60’s and 70’s are now directing the same thing at the youth of today fighting our wars and working in the patch.
They can’t even recognize even in a theorhetical sense, that life really can and does happen without selfies, avacados, kale, EVs, Taylor Swift concerts, earlobe gauges, head-to-tie piercings, and PBMSNBCNN. It’s nothing but a glaring shame on our central-planning, public education system.
Fascist never admit they are FASCISTS!
guyventner posted: “Fascists never admit they are FASCISTS!
More accurately, as the communist mentor of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Saul Alinsky, wrote in his book “Rules For Radicals”: Accuse those standing in the way of communism replacing freedom of doing exactly what it is that you are doing.
In this case, the Soviet Democrats’ police state fascists accusing their intended victims of being fascists.
“We don’t do that here.” “. . . the snapping of fingers . . .”
So basically, it’s a high school clique (read spoiled children) who decide: “All the News That’s Fit to Print.”
Sam said: “So basically, it’s a high school clique (read spoiled children) who decide: “All the News That’s Fit to Print.””
Motto should probably changed to “All the New That’s SHIT to Print”…
As in so many things, the free market will take care of false and fake “journalism.” Most newspapers, including the Gray Lady and the Washington Post are in deep financial trouble and are quickly becoming obsolete because of the Internet and other news sources like cable news and talk radio. Unlike the print media that can subject its audience to its biases, the other media relies more consistently and reliably on the size of their audiences. It is the audiences of cable news and talk radio that determines not just the topics being discussed but what is being said about them. And when the station or channel’s bias is too obvious, the audience turns away, advertising revenue shrinks, and unpopular hosts are put out to pasture. If that happened in print media (as in the old days), things might be different but the owners brings with them the kind of biases that Rubenstein and others describe. And what do old journalists do when put out to pasture? They wind up teaching at schools of journalism and passing on their biases and sour grapes to a new generation. Good-bye Gray Lady and WaPo and good riddance.
If the press/msm were fair and balanced the likelihood of an individual running under the cover of “Democrat” being elected would be 100 to 1.
Likes like the troll masters have ordered their minion to start earlier in the day
Rudy Guiliani is a source that Rubenstein thinks should have been relied on by the NYTimes for the veracity of a laptop? Has Rubenstein followed Guiliani’s disbarment, $155 million defamation judgment and criminal indictment – all for blatant lying? Guiliani should never be considered a reliable source on any topic.
Giuliani was right about the laptop being authentic and not “Russian Disinformation.” Perhaps your news forgot to mention.
should have been relied on by the NYTimes for the veracity of a laptop?
The better question. Where did the NYT get the idea the laptop was not real?
If the NYT truly doubted the genuineness of the laptop (which they didn’t), they could started by making a call to MacIssac. Aren’t they famed for their investigarive powers?
you still hawking the Russian Hoax?
Heck, they’re hawking the FOXNews Bad Hoax, after years of the Legacy Press lying to them about RussiaGate.
Polly Sci tried this Soviet Democrat police state fascist version of ‘Nobody is above our laws’:
“Has Rubenstein followed Guiliani’s disbarment, $155 million defamation judgment and criminal indictment – all for blatant lying?”
Polly Sci actually believes the assurances of his Soviet Democrat police state fascist masters who sent him here, that New York going after Guiliani will be seen by readers here as impartial Nobody Is Above The Law legal actions?
While the lawyers who lied for Clinton, wrote off the money to illegally pay a Russian to write the “Russia Dossier” as money for legal services, who falsified a legal document to make Carter Page out to be a traitor never saw the inside of a courtroom. Polly Sci hopes normal Americans don’t know Marc Elias was never indicted for submitting false information on tax returns for the money he paid to Russians that wasn’t “legal expenses”? Won’t notice that Marc Elias wasn’t indicted for FEC felonies for hiring a foreign nationals from both Russia and England to work on the Clinton campaign. Won’t notice that Marc Elias wasn’t even fined for those violations. And of course, hopes nobody notices that the bar association so eager to go after Guiliani did not go after Marc Elias for either his criminal conduct or his professional misconduct?
Polly Sci want to explain why the FBI lawyer who falsified a record exonerating Carter Page to say instead that he was a traitor was never disbarred for that felony? Why Carter Page’s defamation lawsuit against that FBI lawyer was tossed out of court?
Yes, Polly Sci… do your best to assure us that, whatever Rudy Guiliani did or didn’t do, how the justice system went after him was exactly the same as how it went after Clinton and other Soviet Democrats’ lawyers, how the defamation cases brought against him were handled exactly the same way as defamation cases against CNN, convicted FBI lawyers, how the New York Bar went after Marc Elias and others exactly as they did after Guiliani.
This should be fun! It’s kind of insulting that the Soviet Democrats can’t come up with at least more amusing apparatchiks they send here to do their work.
I do not think I have ever been in a group of people (who just met) who snapped their fingers in condemnation of anything. So that is one reason I doubt this anecdote.
Another reason I doubt the anecdote is that Rubensteon said that the chick fil a sandwich was not actually his favorite sandwich – a more expensive elitist-sounding sandwich was. So he basically lied to the group because he wanted to tell them what he thought they wanted to hear. Like FoxNews does every night.
I do not think I have ever been in a group of people (who just met) who snapped their fingers
You can’t be Pauline Kael, so you must be channeling her spirit.
Ezra’s little brain won’t allow him to believe that the staff at the Times is so juvenile as to be snapping their fingers in AFFIRMATION (not condemnation, learn to read) of Rubenstein being taken to task for enjoying the hated chic-filet franchise.
Hey Ezra, sorry to burst your brain bubble but this is who is running the Times. The same people that said a Senator’s op-ed was putting them in danger (?) and who got the editor fired for allowing it to run. Wake up child.
@Ezra
Yes, the finger snapping is a real thing. It’s something millennials started doing because clapping is too noisy. Really. I will wager a guess that you perhaps haven’t spent much quality time with the younger and woke, though I may be mistaken. If that is the case you would positively faint if you spent some time on a modern college campus. And those are the people that have been installed, often through nepotism, at these companies and institutions.
Actually, Fox News reports pretty much the same stories as the other outlets. Some people confuse the “reporting” with the “analysis.”
Ezra, CNN gullible acolyte and Soviet Democrat, attempted this diversion: “So he basically lied to the group because he wanted to tell them what he thought they wanted to hear. Like FoxNews does every night.”
Strange how Fox could come to a Soviet Democrat’s mind as supposedly doing that.
Not CNN et al, who for FOUR years assured Ezra and the rest of their Soviet Democrat viewers that the Clinton/Obama/Biden/DNC’s “Russia Dossier” was actually verified intelligence agency evidence.
Not CNN, who told the same viewers a Catholic school kid in a MAGA hat was an anti-Semitic racist.
Not CNN who assured Ezra and other Soviet Democrat Useful Idiots that the Biden laptop was “just Russian election disinformation”.
Not CNN who assured Ezra that the servers in Trump Tower were connected to Russia’s Alpha Bank.
Ezra… CNN or any of the other Soviet Democrat mainstream media propagandists EVER apologize to you for lying their asses off to you every single night to demonize Trump while in almost the same breath first excusing Obama before Trump and now Obama and Biden both since Trump?
No. Didn’t think so. Which is why you go to CNN and the rest of the Soviet Democrats for the lines that you then regurgitate here.
Ezra is exactly what the communist Saul Alinsky taught his worshippers, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, to find for acolyte groupies: people who will claim those who stand in the way of communism replacing the republic are the ones guilty of doing what they themselves are doing.