As Democrats make hay out of the potential “obstruction of justice” details in the Mueller report and ponder impeachment proceedings, the New York Times is taking a much more enthusiastic line on impeaching a president than it did the last time it was done, to Democrat Bill Clinton, in 1999. Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Nicholas Fandos reported on Thursday’s front page under a headline suggesting Democrats would only be upholding their sacred duty by impeaching Trump: “Impeachment Divides a Party Balancing Duty With Danger.”
On Saturday's PoliticsNation show, MSNBC host Al Sharpton devoted a segment to fretting that the rebuilding of three black churches struck by arson in Louisiana have not received as much attention as the destruction of Notre Dame Cathedral in France. Sharpton went along with his guest's blatantly incorrect claim that the national media ignored the black churches even though nearly every network covered the story even before MSNBC or Sharpton himself got around to it.
The New York Times’ hostile coverage of the annual White House Easter Egg Roll proved the paper wouldn’t dare give the Trump administration an easy boost with the non-offensive ritual, the way it did during the Obama administration. The headline in Tuesday’s edition was the giveaway: “Easter Eggs Come With a Side of Politics.” The online headline: “At a White House Tradition, Politics Color Everything but the Easter Eggs."
Outraged about the hundreds of people blown to shreds as they were (in Dem PR-speak) Easter worshipping in Sri Lanka? You might be a member of the “far-right.” So say the Washington Post’s Adam Taylor and Rick Noack. The pair sought to delegitimize anger at the Islamist barbarism by reactions from “far-right” figures in Europe and the U.S.
Al Jazeera’s never exactly been a reliable source of news when it comes to Islamist atrocities. So it’s not surprising that an Al Jazeera English reporter cried “Islamophobia” in response to reports that an outspoken extremist Muslim leader had a part in the attacks in Sri Lanka that killed almost 300 people and injured 500 others visiting local Christian Churches for Easter Sunday services.
In back-to-back articles, The Washington Post slimed conservative commentator Ben Shapiro as being ‘far-right’ and that his recent comments claiming that Notre Dame belongs to the “Judeo-Christian heritage” have contributed to “baseless, racist conspiracy-peddling” targeting Muslims.
Even the release of the Mueller report wasn’t enough to dissuade Hollywood from its collusion delusions.
In the midst of CNN’s Chernobyl-style meltdown regarding the Special Counsel’s finding, Anderson Cooper seemed irate that President Trump’s written answers to Robert Mueller included 30 instances where he couldn’t remember the events asked about. The response came from the same news outlet that applauded Hillary Clinton’s similar answers during the Benghazi hearings. But Cooper found Trump’s answers to be an unspeakable offense.
Accusing the president of “trying to get” someone killed is pretty over the top. But Vox’s David Roberts isn’t exactly known for keeping his mouth shut.
Former model and cover girl turned First Lady Melania Trump hit back at Vogue after its editor-in-chief made her preference for Democrats clear to CNN.
The pro-life biopic Unplanned movie is doing well in theaters and that has the left-wing press freaking out — even claiming it could “could get someone killed.” New York magazine’s culture outlet “The Cut” attacked the movie about former Planned Parenthood nurse Abby Johnson’s biopic as an “anti-abortion propaganda film” based on her “personal (and also precarious) account.”
The New York Times pompously (and hypocritically) declared its concern for “privacy” with a special edition of the Sunday Review wholly devoted to the theme: “The Privacy Project.” But when it comes to the full concept of privacy, the left-hand doesn’t know what the far-left hand is doing. Times former reporter Binyamin Appelbaum made it into print on tax day Monday with “Everyone’s Income Taxes Should Be Public.” Appelbaum is making the opposite argument: Let the general public know how much you make, how you make it, even what charities you donate to, in the name of reducing income inequality.