Category Archives: Grey Lady

Louis DeJoy, stand back and stand by, redux

While corporate media, and panicking Democrats, are obsessed over why a successful president refuses to step aside even though wealthy donors are threatening to withhold $90,000,000 in pledged campaign funds unless he does (NY Times headline today), I am wondering about a more direct threat in the 2024 election.

Consider the ease with which a MAGA “public servant” with the power to easily do so, can nullify millions of mail in ballots by simply delaying their delivery for a few weeks, after four years of practice with random, inexplicable nationwide month-long delays in mail delivery.

Do you trust a Postmaster appointed by the “transactional” Orange Quid Pro Quo, a man who donated $2,500,000 to Trump and the RNC in 2016, to deliver millions of mail-in ballots in time to be counted in 2024? Personally, I’d like to see a little oversight of this smug, smirking corporate fucker.

The media, we should note, is silent about the threat DeJoy’s nationwide mail slow-downs pose for an election expected to be unaccountably close. Google him, not much recently written about the arrogant dickhead, in spite of years of controversy, ethics probes, Congressional hearings. The watchdog groups I’ve contacted in the last few weeks are silent, my elected officials are silent, in spite of repeated contacts with them. I suppose there will be media silence, if Trump manages to engineer an Electoral College victory, when millions of undelivered votes are discovered right before the Dictator on Day One is sworn in for his revenge tour.

Which is more important for the outcome, for the future of democracy, endless criticism of the effective incumbent because he is old and walks like an old man, or stopping a massive voter suppression scheme conducted under color of law?

Here are the two most recent media pieces about Trump megadonor Postmaster Louis DeJoy. The first is a July 8 op ed by DeJoy himself, published in Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post. All I was able to read (not climbing that particular paywall) was this wonderful opening:

Louis DeJoy is the postmaster general. I am fascinated by the U.S. Postal Service and its opportunities to serve the American people. Each day, our 640,000 employees operate 32,000 retail and …

The only other recent update on the pugnacious, partisan Postmaster is this report about the Postal Regulatory Commission urging DeJoy to put off his experiments with more budget cuts and policy changes to slow mail delivery until after the 2024 election. Predictably, the arrogant dickhead is doing what the hardcore right wing always does, staying the course.

Meanwhile, corporate media, keep doing your job to advance the interests of corporate persons. Those judicially created psychopaths are people too, with feelings, just like real, God-created people!

And now, let’s repeat, with the Orange Polyp:

Louis DeJoy, stand back and stand by.

How to elect a Nazi, NY Times edition

Here are the top four New York Times headlines today. The paper’s wealthy (fourth generation wealth, the way it’s done by our greatest citizens) chairman and publisher, 43 year old “Dash” Sulzberger, is reportedly furious that Biden, after the NY Times ran dozens front page articles focusing on Biden’s disqualifying age, DEFIED their requests for a sit-down interview. The Journal of Record is now doing everything in its considerable power to create doubt about Biden’s competence and stoke a controversy that can only help Charles Koch, Leonard Leo, Sammy “My Wife has a right to do whatever she wants, libtards!” Alito and friends win the upcoming presidential election.

Note the even-handed placement of an article musing about why a would-be dictator would lie about a controversial, unpopular and largely insane public blueprint for his dictatorship.

I once called this newspaper the Grey Skank, which I realize now is an insult to skanks. My apologies, skanks.

Then, because the Journal of Record always tell the whole story with nuance, without bias or slant, this hard-hitting editorial warning against the danger of the candidate they are doing so much to help.

Here’s a bit of their moralizing, complete with quickly doubling back to questions about Biden’s unfitness and the urgent need for responsible, terrified Democratic big donors to replace him:

Mr. Trump has shown a character unworthy of the responsibilities of the presidency. He has demonstrated an utter lack of respect for the Constitution, the rule of law and the American people. Instead of a cogent vision for the country’s future, Mr. Trump is animated by a thirst for political power: to use the levers of government to advance his interests, satisfy his impulses and exact retribution against those who he thinks have wronged him.

He is, quite simply, unfit to lead.

The Democrats are rightly engaged in their own debate about whether President Biden is the right person to carry the party’s nomination into the election, given widespread concerns among voters about his age-related fitness. This debate is so intense because of legitimate concerns that Mr. Trump may present a danger to the country, its strength, security and national character — and that a compelling Democratic alternative is the only thing that would prevent his return to power.

Mr. Trump, as the NY Times puts it with it’s trademark restraint, MAY PRESENT A DANGER TO THE COUNTRY. If you say so, Grey Corporatist Coprophage [1].

Check the Grey Hag a few hours later and you will see these four top stories (Project 2025 query omitted in favor of another headline questioning Biden’s competency). Way to go, fuckheads.

[1] Any living, or judicially created, organism that feeds on feces or fecal matter.

Know your enemy

The billionaire reactionaries behind fearsome  MAGA figurehead Donald Trump have commissioned a 900 plus page manifesto which is only now beginning to get attention.   It is called Project 2025.  It is the blueprint for an America where the clock is turned back to around 1919 (before women could vote, the year of Red Summer  when violent reprisals by lynch mobs against returning Black WWI veterans skyrocketed).

Here is a short summary of some of its plans, put together by Robert Reich.

Naturally the Lying Orange Polyp has tried to distance himself from the plan.  He claims to know nothing about it. 

It turns out that 23 of the 37 authors of the reactionary wet dream were members of his administration.   Here is a short list of several of them.

Of course, it is no surprise that America’s Greatest Liar would lie about it.  He claimed not to know who his supporter David Duke was.  He claimed to know nothing about the violent militias he later called on for his Hail Mary attempt to violently stay in office on January 6th.   He claimed never to have had sex with a porn star he paid $130,000 to, in a complicated scheme to avoid detection, to remain silent about their brief, weird sexual liaison.  He claimed never to have had sex with the woman who, in his telling,  flirted with him in a department store who he then raped, and was found civilly liable for raping (untrue, merely sexually assaulting, as he will point out).   After losing two defamation cases she brought against him, he continues to call her a liar.   There are 30,000 plus more examples from his four years in office.

The sickening surprise is the corporate media’s exclusive focus on the supposedly disqualifying age of a candidate three years older than the Orange Polyp.  The New York Times today leads with several headlines calling Biden’s fitness to run into question:

Resilience Has Fueled Biden’s Career. But So Has Defiance. (He has repeatedly defied NY Times requests for an exclusive interview)

A Senate Democrat Says Biden Must “Do More” to Assuage Voter Concerns. (Joe Manchin still a Democrat? Kirsten Synema?)

Election updates:  President Biden spoke at a Philadelphia church, as calls continued for him to quit the race. (see, e.g., NY Times editorial calling for him to be forcibly removed as candidate)

As New York Times headlines continued to hammer home, Biden has always been defiant, a Democratic Senator says he’s still not convinced Biden can be president, calls continue for him to quit.

Any mention of Trump? Funny you should ask, it’s the very next headline.

The process of choosing a running mate for Donald Trump has created a new roster of rising Republicans.

Any word about Trump’s fitness to be MAGA’s retribution, carry out revenge on Rosie O’Donnell and others on his enemies list, bolstered by preemptive Supreme Court immunity for criminal acts he deems necessary for “bold and decisive [official] action”? A peep about Project 2025?

Nah!

NY Times posts one letter critical of their pro-Trump editorial

After noting that the Times editorial board’s “To Serve His Country, President Biden Should Leave the Race” is still on its homepage, you peruse the letters to the editor.    You have to read a few letters that agree with the NY Times position that the Democrats must create a process to make Biden step down before you get to this one, followed by several more agreeing Biden must step down (a sampling the Times no doubt considers a “preponderance of the evidence”).  The NY Times, at its best:

To the Editor:

So let me get this straight. A presidential candidate who is a convicted felon gives a debate performance that is often incoherent, consists primarily of obvious lies, and includes a refusal to unconditionally commit to accepting the results of the presidential election, and your editorial is filled with histrionic calls to remove the other guy who’s run the country ably and ethically for almost four years because he had an off night on the stage?

You really should have consulted with your theater critics, who can school you in the many ways the run of the show ultimately matters more than the blips in previews. Your failure to focus your outrage on Donald Trump’s truly bizarre and bewildering statements in favor of such an overwrought and shortsighted response to Mr. Biden lets the real danger to our democracy off the hook.

Judith Hamera
Pennington, N.J.

Nicely done, Judith.

And this nice, self-evident bit from one of our nation’s greatest winners, a billionaire:

Profile in trembling cowardice

I have many bones to pick with the New York Times.  It is often hard to tell, based on their moral suppleness in presenting propaganda and spin right next to plain, old-fashioned fact, how the Times editorial board differs from that of any Rupert Murdoch rag.   The Times ran dozens of articles, including, and especially, today, about questions over Biden’s age (81) and now, the predictable “we told you so” editorial.  

Here is their latest, about which, in spite of the Grey Lady’s vast influence and my vexation over its complicity in right-wing spin, I am also philosophical. The essential status quo embracing spinelessness of the journal of record just got demonstrated again. Here’s a sample:

As it stands, the president is engaged in a reckless gamble. There are Democratic leaders better equipped to present clear, compelling and energetic alternatives to a second Trump presidency. There is no reason for the party to risk the stability and security of the country by forcing voters to choose between Mr. Trump’s deficiencies and those of Mr. Biden. It’s too big a bet to simply hope Americans will overlook or discount Mr. Biden’s age and infirmity that they see with their own eyes.

Let’s parse a little bit of this bullshit.   

Reckless gamble?  More reckless to leave this helpless, doddering, ancient fossil on the ballot after his bad night in a TV debate format his handlers never should have signed on to (no fact checks, no moderator intervention, one minute to respond to Trump’s many lies) than to create a process to oust your candidate, make a last minute change, admitting your incumbent president/candidate is unqualified for reelection, in spite of his many accomplishments in the face of unified MAGA resistance? 

Democratic leaders better equipped (to acquit themselves better in a 90 minute televised campaign battle called a debate?) — which ones?   Does this ability qualify them to defeat Donald Trump and the reactionary billionaire backed MAGA movement?

No reason for the party to risk not changing their candidate in the weeks before their convention?   Just because there is no process for it and the very few times it was tried, this close to an election, the replacement candidate was trounced, just because it would show hysteria and cowardice, and confirm MAGA propaganda– while also guaranteeing Trump’s election, to do so now?

Another morsel:

Ending his candidacy would be against all of Mr. Biden’s personal and political instincts. He has picked himself up from tragedies and setbacks in the past and clearly believes he can do so again. Supporters of the president are already explaining away Thursday’s debate as one data point compared with three years of accomplishments. But the president’s performance cannot be written off as a bad night or blamed on a supposed cold, because it affirmed concerns that have been mounting for months or even years. Even when Mr. Biden tried to lay out his policy proposals, he stumbled. It cannot be outweighed by other public appearances because he has limited and carefully controlled his public appearances.

The president’s performance cannot be written off as a bad night?

It can’t be outweighed (not by his record, the respect of his fellow democratic leaders worldwide, the many good decisions he continues to make, his bearing on the world stage) by other public appearances because he has limited them in the past?

The Grey Lady finally spoke some plain, indisputable truth, buried toward the very end of a piece urging Democrats to create a process to force their candidate to voluntarily step down:

It is a tragedy that Republicans themselves are not engaged in deeper soul-searching after Thursday’s debate. Mr. Trump’s own performance ought to be regarded as disqualifying. He lied brazenly and repeatedly about his own actions, his record as president and his opponent. He described plans that would harm the American economy, undermine civil liberties and fray America’s relationships with other nations. He refused to promise that he would accept defeat, returning instead to the kind of rhetoric that incited the Jan. 6 attack on Congress.

Followed by:

Democrats who have deferred to Mr. Biden must now find the courage to speak plain truths to the party’s leader. . .The clearest path for Democrats to defeat a candidate defined by his lies is to deal truthfully with the American public: acknowledge that Mr. Biden can’t continue his race, and create a process to select someone more capable to stand in his place to defeat Mr. Trump in November.

The courage to cower, the clearest path, create a process, indeed… so simple when laid out with the authority of the NY Times editorial board. 

Conclusory, opinionated, cowardly, stupid, ill-reasoned, ahistorical, serving not democracy but Trumpism.  Aside from that, and making references to propaganda promoted in its own pages as proof (dozens of articles about Biden’s alleged decrepitude and semi-senility) this shameful editorial is a very fine piece.  Read it for yourself.

Grey Lady Editorial Board

How long before the New York Times is accused of anti-Semitism?

There are anti-Semites, plenty of them, millions of these creatures, everywhere. These hateful fucks have always been around and always will be around. There are also many critics of inhuman policies by the coalition of violent extremists and cynics currently running the Jewish State. Some of these critics are anti-Semites, no doubt. Some of these critics are humanitarians who are not anti-Semites.  Many of these critics are Jews, who, like me, hold our people to the moral standards we are all supposed to live by.

This headline is an uncharacteristically bold statement by the New York Times, we’ll have to keep track of the blowback on this one, eh?  I can hardly wait to see which White Christian nationalist American Nazi is the first to angrily accuse the Grey Lady of vicious anti-Semitism.  Hopefully they won’t give the Nazi salute as they do so, though it would be kind of funny if they did. Hitlerious, actually.

Gray Lady offering “context” to Hur’s report declining to prosecute Biden but emphasizing Biden’s supposedly feeble mental state

The Grey Lady, with one of her more mealy mouthed pieces of spotty reporting:

Mr. Hur, who has been under fire for including what some have described as disparaging comments about Mr. Biden’s memory, had an incentive to focus on how Mr. Biden’s mental state might come across to a jury as relevant and proper to discuss. . .

. . . Still, at several points, Democrats like Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington and Representative Mary Gay Scanlon of Pennsylvania induced Mr. Hur to agree that his report also included lines like, “In addition to this shortage of evidence, there are other innocent explanations for the documents that we cannot refute.”. . .

. . . The discussion offered an echo of an ambiguous and much-scrutinized line in the 2019 report by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel who investigated Russian interference in the 2016 campaign. Unlike Mr. Hur, Mr. Mueller made no decision on whether Mr. Trump should be charged with a crime, only writing, “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him” of obstruction of justice. . .

. . . Mr. Biden, who at 81 is already the oldest person elected president, has been dogged for months by concerns about his age among voters from both parties. He and his allies have rejected those concerns, but Mr. Hur’s report described memory problems during a five-hour interview.

No mention in the New York Times report of lines in the recently released transcript, spoken by Robert Hur, that directly contradict false assertions he made in the report. For example, at one point Hur noted Biden’s “photographic” recall of the layout of a house. Hur also claimed Biden didn’t even know the month or year of his son’s death. The transcript shows that Biden said “oh, God, May 30th…” and agreed when a staffer added it was 2015.  No mention in the New York Times of this rather glaring bit of partisan Bill Barr/John Durham-style lying. Making inaccurate or false statements is New York Times-speak for lying, but there is no note of even false or inaccurate statements by Hur in their article.

The Times also doesn’t report that one of these recorded sessions took place during the international negotiations immediately after the Hamas attack on Israel October 7th.

Nor does the Times include this fairly important fact for assessing Hur’s candor and his agenda, (or allude to anything like an immolation of former Trump DOJ partisan Robert Hur):

House Republicans asked Hur to testify before the Judiciary Committee, chaired by Trump loyalist Jim Jordan (R-OH). Hur prepared for his testimony with the help of Trumpworld figures, and he resigned from the Department of Justice effective yesterday, so he appeared before the committee today not as a DOJ employee bound by certain ethical guidelines, but as a private citizen. . .

. . . Conservative lawyer George Conway wrote on social media: “I think Biden’s State of the Union address last week and Hur’s immolation today will go down in political history as Reagan’s ‘I am not going to exploit…my opponent’s youth and inexperience’ moment…only on steroids.” Conway was referring to Reagan’s response in a 1984 presidential debate to a question about his own age; Reagan’s opponent, Walter Mondale, later said he knew Reagan’s answer was the moment he had lost not only the debate but probably the election.

Heather

This is another more intelligent assessment of what happened at the hearing, immolation or no.

No hint about any of this is given to readers of the New York Times report on the latest backfired attempt by MAGA diehards to magnify their wild claims that, unlike very stable genius Donald Trump, Biden is a feeble, stuttering old dotard who doesn’t know his ass from a hole in the ground, even when he is handing MAGA hecklers their asses on a platter in front of a live national audience.

Chuck Chuck BoBuck Grassley and the Grey Lady

It’s shocking to me that a newspaper like the New York Times can print a sentence like this with a straight face (see below). Either their editorial standards have slipped, they truly don’t give a shit about the facts, they are trying to please people on the extreme right, as well as their more distracted liberal readers, or they truly have a Nazi bent somehow.

Read this bit from a recent article about MAGA reliance on a now debunked informant statement in their rush to find a crime or misdemeanor to impeach Biden for and let me know what you think about the word choice “payback for Democrats’ treatment of … Trump” rather than something about partisan retribution for the impeachments brought to try to hold a rogue president, now doing his damnedest to dodge criminal trials for 91 felony counts in four jurisdictions, accountable.

By the way, former DOJ States Attorney Scott Brady, the Trump loyalist who brought the form 1023 to the attention of the public, a guy who resigned one month into the Biden administration, (as he had previously refused to serve under Obama), appears to have knowingly lied to Congress not long ago about the reliability of what turned out to be Putin’s propaganda fed through an informant now in prison and under indictment for lying to the FBI about millions in bribes supposedly paid to Hunter and Joe Biden by a Ukrainian oil company.

Wake up Merrick Garland, a six-year investigation into Hunter Biden’s dick, in the interest of appearing scrupulously fair, means that you have to at least investigate the complicity of fucking MAGA asshole Scott Brady. You already have the letter from Jerry Nadler of the House Judiciary Committee asking for the investigation. Just fucking do it.