New York Times reporters Jeremy Peters and Susan Chira shamelessly played both the race card and the Trump card to dismiss and mock Brett Kavanaugh’s anger at being called a rapist in front of America, in Sunday’s “Court Pick Steals a Page From Trump’s Playbook On White Male Anger.” The word choice gave away the paper’s disbelief at the effrontery of the conservative Supreme Court nominee actually defending his own honor: "For many conservatives, especially white men who share Mr. Trump’s contempt for the left and his use of divisive remarks."
The Brett Kavanaugh confirmation saga has led the New York Times back into its bad old distorted labeling habits, in which stories included the term “conservative” as often as they included conjunctions. Friday’s front page led off with “Religious Right Wary of Delays On Court Pick – Threatening to Sit Out Midterm Elections.” The 1,600-word story contained a whopping 15 “conservative” labels, a “religious right” in headline and one in the text, plus a “further to the right” for good measure. Meanwhile, the anti-Kavanaugh liberal side was only given a single ideological label (“liberals”) deep into the story:
Friday’s New York Times featured political reporter Jeremy Peters hypocritically worrying President Trump and Republicans were politicizing the murder of Iowa woman Mollie Tibbetts by an illegal immigrant: “Lament Quickly Turns Into Politics In Wake of Young Woman’s Death.” Yet the paper didn’t hesitate a millisecond before politicizing the school shootings in Parkland, Fla. to push stricter gun-control measures. The reliable liberal media incantation “seized” made an appearance -- a code word for “A Republican is bringing up an issue we would rather not have to talk about.”
On Tuesday, MSNBC hosts and correspondents displayed their religious intolerance by attacking the faith of potential Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. During one hour after another, Barrett’s membership in a faith group was ridiculed and listed as one of her “potential weaknesses” in a Senate confirmation fight.
Saturday's New York Times story on President Donald Trump's popularity reads like a tortured liberal's lament. Jeremy Peters is astonished that Trump's support in the Republican Party has grown, and doesn't understand the "protective" reaction to the unhinged attacks on him. The Times reporter also overstated the significance of a tiny drop in reported GOP affiliation in Gallup's long-running poll while ignoring a significant shift in GOP-leaning tendencies among independents.
In Monday’s New York Times, Washington bureau Jeremy Peters tsk-tsked the new tastelessness among GOP candidates in “Forget About Restraint, G.O.P. Candidates Echo Trump’s Sound and Fury" -- as in "signifying nothing." The text box: “Greater ease talking about vanquishing foes than governing.” Peters much preferred "the lofty approach of the Obamas."
Showing viewers on Tuesday’s 11th Hour his liberal bias and how it’s absurd that he remains on television, host and disgraced former NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams blasted Republicans for not only lacking “courage” to discuss impeaching President Trump, but possessing “the opposite of whatever a profile in courage is.”
On Monday, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell repeatedly redirected any coverage of President Trump’s infrastructure plan back to discussions about the domestic abuse allegations against former White House staffer Rob Porter.
New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters covered the annual pro-life march in Washington, D.C. under this petulant headline in the print version: “President Reaches Out To Foes Of Abortion.” (Otherwise known as the annual March for Life.) The paper has traditionally ignored the annual march entirely, while devoting copious space to much smaller left-wing protests like those supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Appearing on the 1:00 p.m. ET hour of MSNBC on Monday, New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters proclaimed that Arizona Senator Jeff Flake’s outrageous comparison of President Trump to mass-murdering Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was actually an attempt by the retiring Republican lawmaker to “save” the GOP.
On Tuesday’s Deadline: White House, MSNBC’s pundits continued their pattern of shameless anti-journalism coverage. While in the midst of a discussion about the latest Trump-Russia collusion story, New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters and MSNBC contributor Charlie Sykes went on the warpath against Trump for his recent tweet calling for an investigation of longtime Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin and former FBI Director James Comey for mishandling of classified information.
On Thursday’s Morning Joe, the show’s liberal pundits continued their smear campaign targeting congressional lawmakers and journalists who have been trying to reveal the full extent of political bias within the FBI that may have adversely affected its investigations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. Working with the knowledge that there is now an official congressional investigation into the FBI and DOJ’s conduct last year, co-host Joe Scarborough and his guest panelists went into overdrive to paint any questioning of Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his investigative team’s professionalism as an illegitimate, desperate, and futile attempt to save Trump’s presidency. Former veteran NBC News anchor Tom Brokaw had some especially harsh words for Fox News’s recent coverage of FBI corruption, claiming that the network “is on a jihad right now” against Mueller and his agents.