The New York Times wants to make it official: President Donald Trump is a racist.
On Friday, the editorial board of America’s most influential paper asserted there was no doubt of that.
The editorial was in response to Trump reportedly asking why America takes in so many immigrants from “shithole” countries instead of places like Norway. “Where to begin?” the Times’ editorial board collectively sighed when reflecting on Trump’s statement. “How about with a simple observation: The president of the United States is a racist.”
The New York Times has a responsibility to exercise greater discretion, rather than publish racially charged clickbait like an article arguing white supremacists have an Asian woman fetish.
We used to think of interracial marriage as a sign of social progress. Now, thanks to TheNew York Times, we know it’s just another sinister tool of white supremacy.
Over the past few years, it seems like every week our media-academia complex discovers a new addition to the list of “things that seem completely innocuous but are actually white supremacist.” In recent months, for example, we’ve learned that math, logic, and even square dancing are “weapon[s] of white supremacy.”
Supporters of Israel and of freedom in Iran, along with some prominent journalists, are sharply criticizing The New York Times for the newspaper’s tilted coverage of protests in the Islamic Republic.
The director of the Human Security Centre in London, Julie Lenarz, who is a senior fellow at The Israel Project, tweeted a reaction to a New York Times headline that said, “Iranian authorities have clamped down on Tehran after demonstrators across the country ignored calls for calm.”
The New York Times reported Saturday that the Russia investigation began in 2016 after George Papadopoulos, a junior foreign policy aide in Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, told an Australian diplomat in May 2016 that Russia had “political dirt” on Hillary Clinton.
The Australians, the Times reported, informed the U.S. about Papadopoulos’s claim two months later, after hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee were released — i.e. in July 2016.
The Times concludes that the FBI’s investigation could not, therefore, have been based on the Russia “dossier,” full of uncorroborated and discredited allegations against Trump, that was funded by Hillary Clinton and the DNC…
You thought 2017 was going to end without a bang — other than the fireworks?
After the New York Times on Saturday published a story headlined “Republican Attacks on Mueller and F.B.I. Open New Rift in G.O.P.,” WikiLeaks couldn’t stand it anymore. In a late-night post on Twitter, WikiLeaks revealed that a Times reporter used to feed State Department email updates of the stories the paper would be publishing DAYS before the stories appeared.
Hope she went easy on the garlic.
President Donald Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem hasn’t lead to the violence predicted by many in the media, according to a Saturday report in The New York Times.
While editorial boards and cable news talking heads blasted the supposed reckless decision (even a Times editorial published right before the president’s announcement said the move would raise “new tension in the region” and could incite “violence”), instead a “mood of hopeless resignation” overshadows the Palestinians.
The New York Times is considered one of the most prestigious papers in the world, but getting an article of yours posted on their web-rag requires some affinity toward failed socio-economic policies and ideologies that have killed millions and millions of innocent people.
There is no better example of failed systems than Communism, and the greatest example you’re going to find of communism today is the hermit totalitarian state of North Korea.
Sean Hannity is the second most wanted man on the takedown list of the anti-Trump Resistance. We know this because the New York Times – in earlier times the “newspaper of record” and still the most influential and Deep State agenda-setting newspaper in the U.S. – yesterday posted an 8,000 word cover story by Matthew Shaer that will be published in its next Sunday magazine, along with a striking cover photo of the subject. The subject? Sean Hannity. The cover title? “How Far Will Sean Hannity Go?” (in his defense of President Trump). The photo is a comical pose struck by Hannity taken during a half hour photo shoot during which, Hannity said, hundreds of pictures were snapped. The one that was selected by the Times editors, according to Hannity, is the worst one, showing him looking angry and scary, if not demonic. The Drudge Report described its link to it on Tuesday as “NYT goes for anger.”
Most readers, understandably, were shocked at what they saw as a strangely sympathetic profile of a Nazi, dwelling on the banal aspects of his life. And they were right to be appalled at what they were reading, but they were wrong about what the The New York Times’ agenda really was.
The Times’ agenda wasn’t to generate sympathy for the Nazi, it was to inject into the public discourse the notion that the average American was, and could actually be, a literal Nazi. Without you knowing. It was a story meant to change, in the most horrific of ways, how Americans think about their neighbors. It was meant to sow paranoia and division.
A New York Times columnist thought it would be a good idea to examine the “brutality of the male libido,” and this is what happened.
This kid should should be taken to safety and away from his parents.
More at Twitchy
Haj Amin al-Husseini was one of the seminal figures of the 20th century. He was a founding father of Palestinian nationalism and a Nazi collaborator, whose support for terror and rejection of social and political equality for Jews in their ancestral homeland are imprinted on today’s Middle East.
Despite — or perhaps because of — his crimes, al-Husseini was often celebrated in life and whitewashed in death. And an obituary from The New York Times offers some clues as to why.
From the outset to the conclusion, the author does very little to successfully explain why any of the articles, examples, or pro-life news sites that she identifies actually qualify as fake news.
Recently, The New York Times published a column claiming that Facebook is ignoring fake news masquerading as pro-life articles and viewpoints. In it, Rossalyn Warren laments that the massive social media platform has not done more to weed out what she refers to as misinformation from pro-life news sites.
The major flaw in Warren’s column is obvious from the beginning.
The NY Times published an opinion piece yesterday titled “The Climate Crisis? It’s Capitalism, Stupid” which argues that capitalism is the real threat to the environment, a threat which must be eradicated if we are to survive. There’s nothing subtle about this piece. The author, who is a professor at Arizona State University, says capitalism is the problem and environmentalism is the movement that can supersede it.
A New York Times opinion article recycles the old argument that capitalism is the root cause of global warming, and that turning to socialism would give humanity a better chance of survival.
Capitalism is often invoked as a global warming boogeyman that will inevitably lead to another mass extinction if more restrictive policies aren’t put in place. However, this NYT column goes on to claim that a “democratic socialist society” is the answer.