
New York Times with a teasing headline



The New York Times continues:
The special counsel investigating Hunter Biden has charged a former F.B.I. informant with fabricating claims that President Biden and his son sought two $5 million bribes from a Ukrainian energy company, according to an indictment in a California federal court.
The former informant, Alexander Smirnov, 43, was accused of falsely telling the F.B.I. that Hunter Biden, then serving as a paid member on the board of Burisma, demanded the money to protect the company from an investigation by the country’s prosecutor general at the time.
The story Mr. Smirnov told investigators was part of a series of explosive and unsubstantiated claims by Republicans that the Bidens engaged in potentially criminal activity — allegations central to the party’s efforts to impeach the president.
The Special Counsel, another traitorous RINO appointed by the radical Merrick Garland to investigate a Biden, is a Donald Trump appointee, (like Robert Hur, who gratuitously, but effectively, slimed Joe Biden just the other day). Proof that even the infallible former/present/future party leader makes mistakes. Who among us has a crystal ball that can always accurately see the future?
Today the House voted 214-213, on party lines, to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, vindicating their humiliating recent failure to impeach him. It is the first time in history that a sitting American cabinet member has been impeached. The tiny GOP House majority was in an admittedly tight spot on the issue of immigration, the party having demanded legislation on border control by tying it to Ukraine, Gaza, Israel and Taiwan aid, getting it from the Senate after months of negotiation, and refusing to bring it to the floor for a vote, on orders of their boss, an impulsive man with a very busy court schedule.
Prior to the vote the NY Times ran a related article, using uncharacteristically direct language to describe the political party that is a big tent for every kind of American hater and bigot (along with the millions of very fine people who are neither haters nor bigots). The very un-Times like headline and lede reads: On Capitol Hill, Republicans Use Bigoted Attacks Against Political Foes; House and Senate Republicans have denigrated fellow lawmakers, Biden administration officials and witnesses in racist ways, both in casual comments and in official settings. The article offered a sampling of bigoted spoutings by the GOP, all in the course of a week. Here’s the bit about Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas:
Around the same time, House Republicans released their report on impeachment charges against Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the Cuban-born homeland security secretary who is the first Latino to lead his department. Using unusually loaded language for a committee report, the panel described its action as “deporting Secretary Mayorkas from his position.”
In private, the language was uglier. During a closed-door meeting of House Republicans, Representative Mark E. Green, Republican of Tennessee and the panel’s chairman, referred to Mr. Mayorkas as a “reptile with no balls” because of his refusal to resign from his post, according to Politico. A White House official condemned the statement, noting that Mr. Mayorkas is Jewish and that the comment echoed an antisemitic trope.
source
Top three stories in today’s online New York Times:


Why would Biden’s protective White House aides worry that even his small mistakes would be exploited and endlessly repeated in a right wing and corporate media echo chamber? Do you read your own headlines, Grey Lady?
I guess the partisan Robert Hur did his job as well as NY Times star reporter Judith Miller did her job back in 2001 for Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld and all the other administration talking heads who cited the NY Times for the quote they fed to her “don’t let the smoking gun be a mushroom cloud” to insinuate that Saddam Hussein was on the verge of having nuclear weapons, to justify the illegal invasion of iraq after 9/11.
As for Judith Miller, her Wikipedia entry begins:
Judith Miller (born January 2, 1948)[1] is an American journalist and commentator who covered Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) program both before and after the 2003 invasion, which was later discovered to have been based on inaccurate information from the intelligence community.[2][3] She worked in The New York Times‘ Washington bureau before joining Fox News in 2008.
It makes perfect sense that she wound up at Fox, but the larger question is — what the fuck New York Times?
Jen Rubin says it better than I do:
Can you spot the New York Timesisms here?

The New York Times continues:
“The Biden campaign has built its strategy around telling voters that the November election is a choice between the president, whatever doubts the public has about his age, and an opponent in Mr. Trump, 77, whom they paint as a threat to democracy and personal freedoms.“
Fair is fair, it is the centerpiece of Biden campaign strategy to paint Trump as a threat to democracy and personal freedoms. It is a two billion dollar campaign strategy to portray Trump, an ordinary political candidate for president with an unremarkable history, mounting a typical reelection campaign, as some kind of existential threat. Calling him a threat as part of an attack ad campaign, like they all do.
Fair is fair, the Trump appointee who Merrick Garland appointed special counsel to investigate Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents, made comments well beyond the scope of his brief — which was to determine if Biden had or had not committed a crime related to taking government documents. Hur (no relation to Ben) determined that Biden could not be prosecuted and then opined, gratuitously as this blahg you are reading now, that Biden is perhaps in too feeble a mental state to have even been able to form any kind of plan to commit the crimes. No jury would convict such a feeble, doddering, sad, amiable but pitiable old man who barely knew what was going on, added Hur in his final report. You know how the DOJ always like to include a little gossipy stuff in their official reports, spill a little tea, like cattily opining about people’s fitness for their elected position and the political reasons to doubt their abilities.
NY Times, taking the ball and running with it, along with the rest of corporate media.
Or as Biden ad libbed the other day at that news conference where he was angry at special counsel Trump appointee Hur being out of line and working in the interests of a political opponent:
FOX reporter: Are you having problems with your memory?
Biden: I must be, I’m taking a question from you.
Isn’t that right, Grey Lady?
This passes for sober analysis by the New York Times, in our current Age of Narcissism:
Donald J. Trump’s decisive victory in Iowa revealed a new depth to the reservoir of devotion inside his party. For eight years, he has nurtured a relationship with his supporters with little precedent in politics. He validates them, he entertains them, he speaks for them and he uses them for his political and legal advantage.
This connection — a hard-earned bond for some, a cult of personality to others — has unleashed one of the most durable forces in American politics.
source [1]
You won’t read in the New York Times that millions of Americans have been mercilessly screwed for decades by a system, designed to protect the interests of the super-wealthy, that doesn’t give a rat’s ass about them. It’s not a hard-earned bond between Trump and the people who support him. He constantly validates their rage, which comes from his own rage at being the world’s greatest winner, yet still not having everything. Trump’s enraged inner child snarls resonantly at the enflamed inner children of his supporters. They love the thought of being him, able to grab women by the pussy (and brag about it), orchestrate a scheme to overturn an election, steal secret documents, lie about having returned them, incite a violent riot to keep himself in power, etc.
Super-wealthy and poor alike get the transgressive thrill of loving a powerful cartoon character who has never been wrong about anything, ever, gets a pass for fraud (his shuttered university, the shut down of his “charity”) and is applauded for doing what they’d all love to be able to do: constantly launch vicious attacks against those you hate and lie in your fucking face you goddamned fucking fuck.
As for a deep bond with little precedent in politics — what the devil are you talking about, Grey Lady? There’s plenty of precedent, all of it ended very badly for those who didn’t like being annihilated by an insane demagogue/cornered rat with a deeply devoted following willing to kill and die for their leader.
[1] The Grey Lady’s headline and lede:
If Donald Trump’s rivals want to stop his rise, they’ll need to break his bond with his supporters. They didn’t come close in Iowa.
from Jennifer Szalai, in a recent NYT book review
By “we,” Musk presumably meant Tesla in that instance. But Musk likes to speak of his business interests in superhero terms, so it’s sometimes hard to be sure. Isaacson, whose previous biographical subjects include Leonardo da Vinci and Steve Jobs, is a patient chronicler of obsession; in the case of Musk, he can occasionally seem too patient — a hazard for any biographer who is given extraordinary access. At one point, Isaacson asks why Musk is so offended by anything he deems politically correct, and Musk, as usual, has to dial it up to 11. “Unless the woke-mind virus, which is fundamentally anti-science, anti-merit and anti-human in general, is stopped,” he declares, “civilization will never become multiplanetary.” There are a number of curious assertions in that sentence, but it would have been nice if Isaacson had pushed him to answer a basic question: What on earth does any of it even mean?
Elon Musk Wants to Save Humanity. The Only Problem: People. https://nyti.ms/3sTPLUX
For President Biden, a Political Liability That May Not Go Away Soon
The collapse of a plea deal and the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden mean the president could face political fallout for months to come.
What the fuck? The New York Times leads with four variations on this theme — the appointment of a special counsel, the same Chrump-appointed US attorney who negotiated the plea deal with Hunter Biden that was attacked over and over by Republicans who sent “friend of the court” briefs to the Crump-appointed federal judge who took the extraordinary step of voiding the agreement of the parties, rejecting Hunter Biden’s guilty plea to rarely charged misdemeanors.
Elected Republicans screamed bloody murder that Hunter Biden had received special treatment, a “sweetheart deal” somehow after his laptop and his dick pics, and his drug taking and his late payment of taxes and his job, making a lot of money capitalizing on his famous father’s name. In exchange for peace he pled guilty to a misdemeanor most people are not even charged with, late payment of income tax.
Then a Chrump appointed federal judge, egged on by Chrumpie’s myrmidons, threw out the agreement. The Chrump-appointed US attorney who was appointed special counsel has already written two letters to MAGA extremists in the House informing them that there was no fucking evidence of there there and that Garland had not interfered in any way in an investigation that lasted years longer than Mueller’s, even John Durham’s equally damning investigation.
So, of course, on a day that defendant Chrump got warned in federal court about posting things like “IF YOU COME AFTER ME, I’LL HAVE YOU ASPIRATIONALLY FUCKING KILLED” the New York Times leads with four articles about a political liability for Joe Biden that might not go away soon.
What the fuck? Seriously, Grey Lady, what the fucking fuck?
It turns out the Times is talking about that solid 37% of Republican voters who find Chrumpie’s feces indescribably delicious and the seeming inevitability, given his standing with this solid, faithful block, of him being impossible for another extreme right wing candidate to beat in the Republican primary.
0% of this 37% of Republicans, according to a recent NYTimes/Sienna College poll about the 2024 election, believe he has committed any crime, just 2% concede he might have done something wrong.
Why is he so hard to beat? Better title: Why are 37% of Republican voters so fucking stupid and immune to evidence? It’s not like 37% of one of only two major American political parties are actually Klan members or Nazis… I don’t believe that, even in the most Exceptional totally non-racist nation a white, angry, intolerant, violence-endorsing Jesus ever blessed.
Got to wonder how the guy who was beaten twice by a total of 10,000,000 votes, lost his party seats in 2018, 2020, 2022, leads the NY Times to pose the key question, after noting his rock solid 30% is rabidly loyal:
