The Times can run full court pressure campaigns over political scandals when they want to, as we saw with both Claudine Gay and EMAILS! the thing is they just don't want to with Trump
Remember when they kept running stories that were like "still no backlash for embattled MIT president, calls to resign stubbornly refuse to appear... so far"
Maybe if we can get Trump enrolled at Harvard the times will deem his anti semitic comments as newsworthy as some sophomore saying "from the river to the sea Palestine will be free" at a protest bsky.app/profile/rinc...
I think the problem is that they wouldn't at that point because "Well he's speaking in support of Israel how can that be anti semetic?"
Which like you just have to see the words but it's not like these clowns do that.
Would love to know what the dinner table conversation is like in the Peter Baker/Susan Glasser house after Susan published that piece that called all this shit out
Some of the political reporters, whether assigned to WH pressroom, did complain (albeit hushed) that the current administration is boring. They’re playing their own role with the matches and lighter fluid.
I think this is probably true but my Clusterfuckery Theory also comes into play: Trump gives too many storylines, it makes period of focus on any too difficult (not gish gallop, partly because often unintentional)
Maybe he’ll divorce Melania and marry an Ivy League graduate whose dad runs a hedge fund, with the wedding held at a leafy event space in Red Hook and the minister a UU-ordained poet who moonlights as a burlesque performer; that should be good for a couple of pages.
Kind of like how nobody in zombie movies has ever heard the word "zombie," the New York Times writes about a fictional world in which the New York Times doesn't exist
there's no storyline to be had in multiple high-profile trials & rulings including a half-billion debt to the state of New York, it's just not relevant to the Times or its readers' interests
live shot of the NY Times headquarters if these "Jewish Democrats hate Israel and their religion" comments were made by Ilhan Omar instead of Donald Trump
You know when NYT doesn't want to own up to how they cover Trump because they don't open the comments. This is exactly the kind of question they'd get if this story allowed comments.
The Times could run the exact same “age and mental capacity” stories they’ve run about Biden essentially word for word, and still have dozens of Trump-specific takes on the subject uncovered.
The Times C-Suite and Board of Directors won't get themselves a multi-trillion-dollar tax break with journalism.
Can you imagine if they don't get the divestiture they'd banked on? They might have to start living in America or something awful like that.
I wonder if the owners of the New York Times might have been included in information contained in Jeffrey Epstein's safe? The one that was opened by the FBI, full of hard drives and CD discs, the contents of which they weren't able to get a warrant to obtain for several days.
Is it possible they fear retribution? Trump is not exactly restrained in his criticism of them now - what would he do if they were actually going after him?
