Everyone knows that the letters CYA stand for “cover your ass.” Everyone, that is, but the New York Times editorial board, which attempted to do just that with respect to Donald Trump and failed miserably today.
Lucian, thank you for pulling this hogwash together into a crisp little package! Just looking at the headline, my wife and I simultaneously blurted out: “Gimme two weeks of an unfit Trump drumbeat before I’ll reconsider my opinion of your sold-out state!” That the article is so vacuous - indeed, focusing on the anarchist themes that now make him even more popular among his cortisol-trained following - it’s laughable!
I take the “Behind the scenes at the Supreme Court” extravaganza of a week or so ago — not reporting on the out-of-control justices, but a godforsaken pictorial! — as an open slap in the face to freedom loving Americans.
I cancelled my subscription to The New York Times after their brilliant article on the neurologist who visited the White House eight times, completely failing to mention that those visits had nothing to do with President Biden.
Yep. That - and the associated utterly boorish, disrespectful behavior by DC press corps toward Press Sec. Jean-Pierre - was the final impetus for me too.
Well, the Times is the best in the world at elevating mediocre reporting and terrible opinion-writing into execrable journalism while retaining an apparently unassailable high opinion of itself and its mastery of that process. Asshats, all of them.
I completely agree. After the remarks of the lead editor that “democracy” is a partisan issue, and his comments that a second Trump term would be “exciting to cover”, I canceled my subscription to the Times. It has failed to defend democracy so many times and too often has given Trump and MAGA a free pass. They have forsaken the role that our founders saw for them as part of a free press. Instead, they are devoted to promoting salacious stories and ignoring the greater danger. Corporate media is not 5he same as a free press.
I was *floored* by that editor's comment. It would be exciting to cover, in effect, the death of the 1st Amendment?? Does the NYTimes think it alone would survive (along with Fox and all the Sinclair outlets, of course)?
Too little, too late, still a mere ripple in a raging sea of anti-Biden bullshit. Read the comments on the editorial if you want to get really depressed. My personal favorite "Our choice is between a crook and a vegetable". That voter must read either the NY Times or the NY Post (she is from NYC) to get that negative a view of Biden, and that mild a view of Trump.
The Times made a high-minded intellectual argument, not a visceral one. Most Americans have never lived under a dictatorship; they are sleepwalking into this like boiled frogs and the mainstream press has failed to sound the alarm.
I see it through the eyes of my companion, an immigrant with the wisdom of having lived in failed state, who watched January 6 with horror and says of Trump: if he gets in, we'll never get him out, it'll be him and then his children leaching off of us forever and none of us will be safe from his thugs and his violence...if we belong to the wrong group or get the way. Of him or his cronies. That will be the reality of losing the American constitution and rule of law for all the little people trying to live their lives, but they're not getting it, and no one seems able to tell them.
There is soooo much that is available and fully documented about what is going on and the majority of the US press remains silent. I actually downloaded and read through Project 2025. Scary stuff and Trump is in-escapably linked to the project. Where's the coverage? They hate unions and want to do away with overtime pay and have the chutzpah to say it. They essentially want to wipe out the middle class. Defund the DOE! It is scary and as this piece today by Lucian says where is the press reporting on it. They worship Hungary as a model for Democracy. Maybe the MAGA's should google the gun rights in that model Democracy. That would turn some heads. But let's not report on it. Let's just jump on Biden!!!
Many of Trump's appointees are inescapably linked to the project, but is Trump himself? I haven't seen real evidence of that. We do know that most, maybe almost all, of his appointments were handed to him by the Federalist Society, Mitch McConnell, etc., because Trump himself, having zero background in or knowledge of government, didn't have any ideas of his own. Except Ivanka and Jared, of course.
Trump stopped emails, text's and surely putting his name to any policy documents years ago. Giving him plausible deniability for what it says. But he speaks of many of the points they bring up at his rallies. He undoubtedly wants what project 2025 describes.
OK, but I question "undoubtedly." He's re-created himself in response to MAGA, and MAGA does likewise to him. Which one's the cart and which one's the horse is up for grabs. The one thing I'm pretty sure of is that a Christian he is not.
Oh, I think you can be totally confident that he's not a Christian, he's a religion unto himself or whatever Putin is. He only wants power and money, I doubt that he cares at all what the policies are. Whatever generates applause and votes in his cult are his policies.
Another thing we know is he's lazy and self centered and he didn't typically work over an average of three hours a day while in office. He may not be - he most assuredly is not - the "brains" behind Project 2025, but I believe he'll adopt every line of the plan unless there's something in there where he sees a missed opportunity for himself, and he'll do it just out of laziness and spite. He's like an obstreperous spoiled three year old who is difficult to lead except with an ice cream cone but those folks at Project 2025 worked with him before and they know this and have the ice cream cart lined up.
I think you've got it -- up to a point. He'll support any point of the plan until there's real pushback. Notice how he's back-pedaling on abortion? He wants opportunities for himself, but he also wants the adulation of the crowd. Also curious about whether the Project 2025 people actually "worked with him before." Do we know that? A bunch of them were indeed in his administration, but does that translate into "worked with him"? I don't think so. I don't assume that he even knows who they are.
I figure at a basic personality level he wants the adulation most, but at a level just up from that he wants not to go to jail and he'll say anything that he thinks increases his chances of avoiding that. I don't tend to put any credence into his back pedaling on abortion or his having pushed it as either one revealing what he thinks about it. I bet he doesn't really care either way (until some little girl he raped fears getting pregnant) because it's not about him.
Hmm... it occurs to me you might mean "worked with him" on actually developing the points of the plan and there I'd agree that he hasn't put in any work on it because... work. Boring. Just do it for me and hand it to me and I'll do as much of it as appeals to me.
Cancelled my NYT subscription today There is no way I can help give voice to this travesty.
Do all these morons want to see the criminal slime elected again ? What do they get out of it.? I can’t figure that out They are not all going to get rich , that’s for sure , if the unthinkable occurs LT you are so right as usual.
I already cancelled my subscription to the Times the day after! I still subscribe to the Washington Post. When I called the Times to cancel they asked me why and I told them honestly!
There are better papers out there is you are looking for an old style paper type (whether on paper or not) news source. The Philadelphia Tribune springs to mind, and there are a few others. I'm looking around, myself, because I don't even want to consider going back if they cease to be a shill for MAGAts and the GOP because their tactic of putting out one or two decent articles now and then make it too hard to detect when they're back over the shoulder on the scree slope.
And that's why I no longer subscribe to the New York Times.
Ditto!
Me neither. I have no use for Russian Trolls.
Lucian, thank you for pulling this hogwash together into a crisp little package! Just looking at the headline, my wife and I simultaneously blurted out: “Gimme two weeks of an unfit Trump drumbeat before I’ll reconsider my opinion of your sold-out state!” That the article is so vacuous - indeed, focusing on the anarchist themes that now make him even more popular among his cortisol-trained following - it’s laughable!
I take the “Behind the scenes at the Supreme Court” extravaganza of a week or so ago — not reporting on the out-of-control justices, but a godforsaken pictorial! — as an open slap in the face to freedom loving Americans.
You nailed it, Lucian!
I cancelled my subscription to The New York Times after their brilliant article on the neurologist who visited the White House eight times, completely failing to mention that those visits had nothing to do with President Biden.
NY Times, NY Post, what’s the difference?
Throw WaPo in there and you've got a trifecta!
Yep. That - and the associated utterly boorish, disrespectful behavior by DC press corps toward Press Sec. Jean-Pierre - was the final impetus for me too.
So did I!
Well, the Times is the best in the world at elevating mediocre reporting and terrible opinion-writing into execrable journalism while retaining an apparently unassailable high opinion of itself and its mastery of that process. Asshats, all of them.
Excellent assessment, Bill!
Sorry!
Ha!
During my 68 years of living, the Supreme Court & the NYT were the two things I could rely on without question. Not now.
Lucian,
I completely agree. After the remarks of the lead editor that “democracy” is a partisan issue, and his comments that a second Trump term would be “exciting to cover”, I canceled my subscription to the Times. It has failed to defend democracy so many times and too often has given Trump and MAGA a free pass. They have forsaken the role that our founders saw for them as part of a free press. Instead, they are devoted to promoting salacious stories and ignoring the greater danger. Corporate media is not 5he same as a free press.
Peace and stay safe,
Steve Dundas
I was *floored* by that editor's comment. It would be exciting to cover, in effect, the death of the 1st Amendment?? Does the NYTimes think it alone would survive (along with Fox and all the Sinclair outlets, of course)?
I gave up on NYT and WaPo years ago. I read independent journalists and their news sites for actual investigative and balanced reporting.
Iʼm with you. After Judith Miller, I gave up my subscription and I donʼt miss it.
Nothing new: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_New_York_Times_controversies
They have been a rag since they fired Molly Ivins!
Too little, too late, still a mere ripple in a raging sea of anti-Biden bullshit. Read the comments on the editorial if you want to get really depressed. My personal favorite "Our choice is between a crook and a vegetable". That voter must read either the NY Times or the NY Post (she is from NYC) to get that negative a view of Biden, and that mild a view of Trump.
The Times made a high-minded intellectual argument, not a visceral one. Most Americans have never lived under a dictatorship; they are sleepwalking into this like boiled frogs and the mainstream press has failed to sound the alarm.
I see it through the eyes of my companion, an immigrant with the wisdom of having lived in failed state, who watched January 6 with horror and says of Trump: if he gets in, we'll never get him out, it'll be him and then his children leaching off of us forever and none of us will be safe from his thugs and his violence...if we belong to the wrong group or get the way. Of him or his cronies. That will be the reality of losing the American constitution and rule of law for all the little people trying to live their lives, but they're not getting it, and no one seems able to tell them.
I cancelled it last week. Any minute now, I expect to see it sitting beside the National Enquirer at the supermarket checkout.
There is soooo much that is available and fully documented about what is going on and the majority of the US press remains silent. I actually downloaded and read through Project 2025. Scary stuff and Trump is in-escapably linked to the project. Where's the coverage? They hate unions and want to do away with overtime pay and have the chutzpah to say it. They essentially want to wipe out the middle class. Defund the DOE! It is scary and as this piece today by Lucian says where is the press reporting on it. They worship Hungary as a model for Democracy. Maybe the MAGA's should google the gun rights in that model Democracy. That would turn some heads. But let's not report on it. Let's just jump on Biden!!!
Many of Trump's appointees are inescapably linked to the project, but is Trump himself? I haven't seen real evidence of that. We do know that most, maybe almost all, of his appointments were handed to him by the Federalist Society, Mitch McConnell, etc., because Trump himself, having zero background in or knowledge of government, didn't have any ideas of his own. Except Ivanka and Jared, of course.
Trump stopped emails, text's and surely putting his name to any policy documents years ago. Giving him plausible deniability for what it says. But he speaks of many of the points they bring up at his rallies. He undoubtedly wants what project 2025 describes.
OK, but I question "undoubtedly." He's re-created himself in response to MAGA, and MAGA does likewise to him. Which one's the cart and which one's the horse is up for grabs. The one thing I'm pretty sure of is that a Christian he is not.
Oh, I think you can be totally confident that he's not a Christian, he's a religion unto himself or whatever Putin is. He only wants power and money, I doubt that he cares at all what the policies are. Whatever generates applause and votes in his cult are his policies.
Another thing we know is he's lazy and self centered and he didn't typically work over an average of three hours a day while in office. He may not be - he most assuredly is not - the "brains" behind Project 2025, but I believe he'll adopt every line of the plan unless there's something in there where he sees a missed opportunity for himself, and he'll do it just out of laziness and spite. He's like an obstreperous spoiled three year old who is difficult to lead except with an ice cream cone but those folks at Project 2025 worked with him before and they know this and have the ice cream cart lined up.
I think you've got it -- up to a point. He'll support any point of the plan until there's real pushback. Notice how he's back-pedaling on abortion? He wants opportunities for himself, but he also wants the adulation of the crowd. Also curious about whether the Project 2025 people actually "worked with him before." Do we know that? A bunch of them were indeed in his administration, but does that translate into "worked with him"? I don't think so. I don't assume that he even knows who they are.
I figure at a basic personality level he wants the adulation most, but at a level just up from that he wants not to go to jail and he'll say anything that he thinks increases his chances of avoiding that. I don't tend to put any credence into his back pedaling on abortion or his having pushed it as either one revealing what he thinks about it. I bet he doesn't really care either way (until some little girl he raped fears getting pregnant) because it's not about him.
I tend to think he knows these people though. There are just too many who were in too high a position in his administration and some he's been photographed hanging out with repeatedly https://www.eenews.net/articles/meet-the-ex-trump-officials-who-helped-draft-project-2025/ which doesn't mean he's studied up on their plan - he's much too intellectually lazy for that - but it would mean they have had the opportunity to have been talking points up to him. Mark Meadows? Steven Miller? He surely knows those charming fellows and more: https://www.salon.com/2024/07/11/i-know-nothing-about-project-2025-hundreds-of-allies-are-tied-to-heritage-foundation-scheme/
Hmm... it occurs to me you might mean "worked with him" on actually developing the points of the plan and there I'd agree that he hasn't put in any work on it because... work. Boring. Just do it for me and hand it to me and I'll do as much of it as appeals to me.
I’m sure he’s never read it since he doesn’t read. Perhaps he has been coached on the contents or the general scope of the document.
After 60 years of religiously reading The NYT, I have given up. I now scroll down immediately to the puzzles. SAD.
Cancelled my NYT subscription today There is no way I can help give voice to this travesty.
Do all these morons want to see the criminal slime elected again ? What do they get out of it.? I can’t figure that out They are not all going to get rich , that’s for sure , if the unthinkable occurs LT you are so right as usual.
I already cancelled my subscription to the Times the day after! I still subscribe to the Washington Post. When I called the Times to cancel they asked me why and I told them honestly!
I told them I was canceling because they had become a tool of the neofascists.
I told them months ago that if and when they ceased to be a shill for 🍊💩(it disturbs me to even type his name), I might consider resubscribing
There are better papers out there is you are looking for an old style paper type (whether on paper or not) news source. The Philadelphia Tribune springs to mind, and there are a few others. I'm looking around, myself, because I don't even want to consider going back if they cease to be a shill for MAGAts and the GOP because their tactic of putting out one or two decent articles now and then make it too hard to detect when they're back over the shoulder on the scree slope.
I was asked if it was because of the Biden coverage. I answered, "that's it."
Thank You. I had just read the NYT article before yours, and had been left feeling, um, cheated? Sharing yours.
what can one expect from ANY news outlet these days? it's pathetic, disheartening, + downright frightening
Chasing clicks and eyeballs.👀