Tag: nyt

“I Can’t Believe The New York Times Thought It Would Get Away With This…”

The irony is thick enough to choke on…

The New York Times, that bastion of so-called journalistic integrity, churned out yet another hit piece on President Donald Trump, painting him as some vengeful tyrant hell-bent on crushing his political foes. 

According to the paper, Trump supposedly views his opponents as downright evil, promising a campaign of retribution that sends shivers down the spines of the elite media class. 

Last week, he denounced a reporter as a “very evil person” for asking a question he did not like. This week, he declared that Democrats are “an evil group of people.” 

“Evil” is a word getting a lot of airtime in the second Trump term. It is not enough anymore to dislike a journalistic inquiry or disagree with an opposing philosophy. Anyone viewed as critical of the president or insufficiently deferential is wicked. The Trump administration’s efforts to achieve its policy goals are not just an exercise in governance but a holy mission against forces of darkness.

The characterization seeds the ground to justify all sorts of actions that would normally be considered extreme or out of bounds. If Mr. Trump’s adversaries are not just rivals but villains, then he can rationalize going further than any president has in modern times. 

This isn’t journalism; it’s selective outrage at its finest. The Times acts like Trump’s tough talk is some unprecedented assault on democracy, conveniently forgetting or willfully ignoring the years of venomous rhetoric that the left spewed against Trump and conservatives everywhere. It has the gall to portray Trump as the villain while pretending that its side hasn’t been fanning the flames of division for nearly a decade. 

If the Times is so concerned about demonizing political enemies, maybe it should look in the mirror, or better yet, revisit one of the most egregious examples from its own camp: from Barack Obama’s spying on Trump to frame him for colluding with Russia to Joe Biden’s lawfare campaign that literally tried to put Trump in prison.

Actions may speak louder than words, but Joe Biden spoke rather loudly during his infamous speech at Independence Hall back in 2022, where he didn’t even hide the fact that he saw his political allies as evil.

Keep reading

‘The Guy’s Brain Is Mush’: Joe Biden’s Quotes in NYT Interview Deemed ‘Unintelligible’

Former President Joe Biden’s (D) ability to process and respond to information is once again being called into question after an interview with the New York Times (NYT).

Biden spoke with the newspaper over the phone on Thursday and was questioned about clemency actions he took as his time in the White House drew to a close, the Times reported on Sunday.

“Mr. Biden did not personally sign the official warrants recording those decisions; rather his White House staff used an autopen device to do so,” the article said.

The newspaper then shared excerpts from the interview.

Regarding allegations from President Trump and others that “Biden was incapacitated and his aides abused the autopen” the former president claimed:

They’re liars. They know it. They know, for certain. I mean, this is — look, what they, they’ve had a pretty good thing going here. They’ve done so badly. They’ve lied so consistently about almost everything they’re doing. The best thing they can do is try to change the focus and focus on something else. And this is a — I think that’s what this is about.

It’s — you know — it’s consistent with Trump’s game plan all along. I mean, if I — I don’t expect you to answer any questions — but if I told you three years ago, we’d have a president doing this, I think you’d look at me in the eye and say, “What, are you crazy?”

About the pre-emptive pardons he bestowed on his own family members, he said, “In terms of my fam — he — go after me through my family. I know how vindictive he is.”

Those quotes are from “excerpts” of the interview published by the Times.

Keep reading

New York Times Readers and Staffers Unable to Handle a Rare Brush with Objective Journalism

The New York Times is experiencing backlash among its staff and readers after it held New York City mayor candidate Zohran Mamdani to account on Thursday for apparently lying on his application to Columbia University by claiming he was black.

Law professor and legal commentator Jonathan Turley wrote about the incident on his website Sunday, detailing the drama unfolding at the paper of record.

“The paper was denounced by its own staff and liberal pundits called for the entire editorial staff to be canned,” Turley wrote. “Why? Because The New York Times actually reported news that was deemed harmful to the Democrats, specifically Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani.”

The Times’ assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust, Patrick Healy, wrote a long thread on the social media site X that stated: “When we hear anything of news value, we try to confirm it through direct sources. Mr. Mamdani confirmed this information in an interview with The Times.”

Healy seemed like a hostage. He rattled off 11 tweets as if he was waving his hands in the air, screaming his defense. Ultimately, he bowed to the mob.

The Times couldn’t have pulled the story. That would’ve been professional suicide. But this step-by-step explainer was the next best thing. This is not a good look for American journalism.

“For liberals, it was an utter nightmare,” Turley continued. “For a party still defined by identity politics, Mamdani’s false claim over his race left many uncertain about how to react. The left has always maintained a high degree of tolerance for false claims by its own leaders, from Sen. Elizabeth Warren claiming to be a native American to Sen. Richard Blumenthal claiming to have served in the Vietnam War.”

Turley also rightly pointed out that many people who patronize the Times are emotionally triggered. The legal scholar highlighted the “anger” felt by the far-left when this happens and compared it to how liberals on college campuses feel when opposing views are offered.

“The fact is that the Mamdani story was obvious news — and confirmed by the candidate himself,” Turley declared. “Mamdani identified as both Asian and African American on his 2009 Columbia University application, according to the New York Times.”

The Times piece stated: “Columbia, like many elite universities, used a race-conscious affirmative action admissions program at the time. Reporting that his race was Black or African American in addition to Asian could have given an advantage to Mr. Mamdani, who was born in Uganda and spent his earliest years there.”

“In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Mamdani, 33, said he did not consider himself either Black or African American, but rather ‘an American who was born in Africa,’” the story continued. “He said his answers on the college application were an attempt to represent his complex background given the limited choices before him, not to gain an upper hand in the admissions process.”

Mamdani cheated the system, and in the end, he didn’t even get accepted to Columbia. For someone who pushes “equality” at all costs, isn’t that significant? Doesn’t it prove he’s a liar, a fraud, and an opportunist?

Keep reading

The NYT’s Flip-Flop On Illegal Alien Gang Takeovers Proves They’re Just Propagandists For Dems

Less than two months before the presidential election, The New York Times’ (NYT) Jonathan Weisman tried to protect Vice President Kamala Harris’ open-border agenda by mocking then-candidate Donald Trump for pointing out that illegal alien gangs had taken over an apartment complex in Aurora, Colorado.

“How the False Story of a Gang ‘Takeover’ in Colorado Reached Trump,” Weisman wrote.

“Caught in the middle are a number of migrants, living in dilapidated apartments that Aurora officials now call squalor, amid ‘criminal elements,’ not widespread gang activity, and unable to find or afford better,” the story read.

If you only read Weisman’s report, you’d have believed the real problem was just an “out-of-state landlord” who didn’t feel like fixing up a few units. As Weisman put it, the landlord “offered a new argument for why it couldn’t repair the buildings: Venezuelan gangs had taken over, and the property managers had been forced to flee.”

Weisman begrudgingly acknowledged the viral video showing Tren de Aragua gang members parading around the complex with weapons drawn but only long enough to couch it by arguing “documentation was scarce.”

But don’t worry, nothing to see here! And what you were seeing from Trump was nearly “fear-mongering, exaggerations, and outright lies …” according to Weisman.

Fast forward ten months, and the NYT’s Ted Conover is spreading those same “outright lies.”

“Democrats Denied This City Had a Gang Problem,” Conover wrote. “The Truth Is Complicated.”

“The presence of young men with guns in the apartment complex, called the Edge at Lowry, was not a rarity,” Conover wrote, detailing gruesome details of the gang violence plaguing the complex. Conover reports what The Times pretended was “false” before: illegal aliens in gangs seen by residents carrying pistols and an assault rifle in the hallways.

Keep reading

NY Times Gets Attacked by the Left for Publishing Story About Zohran Mamdani Claiming He Was Black on Columbia University Application

As you may have noticed, the activist left gets very angry when the media goes after a Democrat that they like. The left simply isn’t used to it, because it almost never happens.

This week, the liberal New York Times dropped a bombshell on NYC communist and mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, exposing the fact that he described himself as black on his application to Columbia University.

This outraged a number of people on the left. How dare the New York Times perform an act of journalism that negatively affects their side?!

FOX News reports:

NY Times addresses backlash over report on NYC mayoral candidate Mamdani’s college application

The New York Times seems to be in damage control after the paper’s story about New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani identifying as Asian and African American on his college application upset some of its readers, leading to an editor from the outlet attempting to clear up the controversy on social media on Friday.

The article claimed that Mamdani, when asked his race on his 2009 college application to Columbia University, checked the boxes for “Asian” but also “Black or African American,” in their article published on Thursday.

The Times’ assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust, Patrick Healy, put out a lengthy statement on X the following day after receiving “reader feedback” on the article…

Mamdani’s application was made available to The Times after a cyberattack on Columbia University in late June led to some of the school’s sensitive information being exposed to the hackers.

Keep reading

NYT Gave Green Light to Trump’s Iran Attack by Treating It as a Question of When

In the wake of the US-supported Israeli attack on Iran, and days before the direct US bombing that followed, the New York Times editorial board (6/18/25) argued that “America Must Not Rush Into a War Against Iran.”

This language was as shifty as it was deliberate. Rather than oppose a policy of unprovoked aggression and mass murder, the Times editorialists suggested such a campaign was happening too hastily, and it should be preceded by more debate.

The opinion writers at the most important paper in the world were fully in favor of attacking Iran; they only worried that Trump would go about it the wrong way. In fact, the Times’ justification for war was identical to that of the Trump administration’s explanation after the fact.  It laid it out in the first paragraph:

A nuclear-armed Iran would make the world less safe. It would destabilize the already volatile Middle East. It could imperil Israel’s existence. It would encourage other nations to acquire their own nuclear weapons, with far-reaching geopolitical consequences.

The New York Times‘ echo of the standard Israeli and US propaganda line offers an opportunity to critically examine this most recent justification for aggressive war.

Keep reading

How NYT Magazine Threw Away Journalistic Ethics on Suicide

The New York Times Magazine recently published a cover story (6/1/25) that gave in-depth representation to the challenges faced by a chronically sick, disabled woman named Paula Ritchie, age 52. Ritchie dealt with underdiagnosed illnesses and pain, as well as challenges in supporting herself and managing her mental health.

The Times then told the story of Ritchie ending her own life out of despair over her situation. The journalist, Katie Engelhart, observed and documented her suicide, up until the last breath left her body. “I was with Ritchie until the very end,” she posted on X (6/1/25). Engelhart gave lengthy justifications for Ritchie’s choice to end her life, and described several people who supported her in that decision.

Articles like this aren’t common in the media. Suicide prevention is typically regarded as both a social good and an ethical responsibility. In the US and Canada (where the article takes place), suicidal people are involuntarily detained to prevent their deaths. It has long been illegal in Canada (and many US states) to assist or even “counsel” a person to commit suicide.

There are also ethical standards that guide media outlets in reporting on suicide, in order to minimize the risk of glamorizing or idealizing it. These guidelines are based on research showing that the media has an outsized influence when it comes to suicide. Graphic, detailed and sensationalized coverage has been shown to increase the “risk of contagion,” according to one guide. AP News specifically tries to avoid detailing the “methods used” in stories that reference suicide, based on this research.

The Times violated almost all of the published guidelines by personalizing, detailing, dramatizing, justifying and sentimentalizing Ritchie’s suicide, as well as by making it a cover story. The story featured close-up images of the method of Ritchie’s death and what appears to be her post-mortem body.

Keep reading

New York Times’ Hypocritical ‘Tale Of Two Flags’ Coverage Encapsulates Media’s Seething Bias

As riots raged in Los Angeles on Sunday, The New York Times rushed to reassure readers that Mexican flags being waved by protesters were symbols not of insurrection or lawlessness, but of “pride in their heritage.” The Times’ sympathetic view of anti-law-and-order rioters is hardly notable, but comparing its glowing review of the symbolism and meaning of the Mexican flag’s use in the L.A. upheaval to its screeching hysteria over the Alito flags a year ago is a sharp reminder of just how biased the paper is.

Unlike many of the rioters in Los Angeles, Samuel and Martha-Ann Alito didn’t foment social unrest, throw rocks at police cars, hurl incendiaries, burn cars, or generally embroil themselves in more or less serious dust-ups with law enforcement. (Maybe they would have drawn a more favorable review from the Times if they had.) But the Times used Martha-Ann’s flying of an upside-down American flag (an age-old distress signal) in Jan. 2021 and an “Appeal to Heaven” flag (a banner with roots in the Revolutionary War) in mid-2023 as the launching pad for manufactured controversy aimed at destroying Justice Alito’s credibility — and the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

Keep reading

NYT Reports FBI Closing FISA Office. FBI Denies It

FBI Director Kash Patel closed the agency’s surveillance watchdog unit, according to a Tuesday report by The New York Times (NYT).

The bureau’s Office of Internal Auditing ensured compliance with surveillance regulations, specifically concerning the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), officials familiar told NYT.

“The FBI’s Office of Internal Auditing is not being shut down; it is being moved to the Inspection Division which is responsible for internal reviews of FBI policies, programs, and investigations to ensure they fully comply with our authorities. Oversight is important to the FBI, and we will continue to work with DOJ’s National Security Division for FISA review. The FBI is committed to ensuring that we are fully compliant with querying standards,” the FBI told the Daily Caller in a statement.

The assistant director of that department, Cindy Hall, has retired, according to the outlet. While a former official was informed she was “forced out,” another source familiar told NYT the FBI described her exit to Congress as “voluntary.”

Prior to the reported closure, Hall was working to onboard workers to expand the office’s operations, according to NYT.

The watchdog’s closure is part of a broader restructuring, people familiar told the outlet. The office’s functions, along with The Office of Integrity and Compliance, “have been absorbed by the inspection division,” NYT reported.

Keep reading

How NYT Reports on Weaponized Famine So You Don’t Have to Give a Damn

More than two months ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced a complete blockade of aid—including food, water and medical supplies—from entering the besieged Gaza strip. It’s a severe escalation of Israel’s now 19-month genocide against Palestinians in Gaza—and what the World Health Organization (5/12/25) has described as “one of the world’s worst hunger crises, unfolding in real time.”

With no replenishing stock, aid groups have begun running out of supplies to distribute to families in need.

The UN Relief and Works Agency (5/16/25) reports that their “flour and food parcels have run out,” and that “one third of essential medical supplies are already out of stock.” More than a week ago, World Central Kitchen reported that they no longer have supplies to cook hot meals and bake bread for starving families—they’ve since repurposed their pots to distribute filtered water.

With Gaza’s entire population experiencing crisis-level food insecurity, and with three-quarters facing “emergency” or “catastrophic” levels of deprivation, the famine has been recognized by Human Rights Watch interim executive director Federico Borello as “a tool of extermination.”

At first glance, the April 29 New York Times offered what many would call an objective account with the headline: “UN Faults Israel Over Blockade of Aid for Gaza” (web version here: 4/28/25).

A closer look at the piece however, reveals the Times’ usual spinelessness in its Gaza coverage, unquestioningly accepting Israeli framing in its supposed right to carry out its ongoing genocide.

Keep reading