Vice President Mike Pence denounced as “fake news” an imaginative front-page Sunday New York Times story on Republicans quietly plotting to run for president in 2020 in case, as their headline intimated, “Beleaguered Trump Isn’t on the Ballot.” Reporters Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns wildly speculated in the first paragraph that “Mike Pence’s schedule is so full of political events that he is acting more like a second-term vice president hoping to clear the field than a No. 2 sworn in a little over six months ago.”



Republican opposition to ObamaCare had little to do with spiraling costs, giveaways to insurance companies, or the rationing dangers and proven inefficiencies of government-run health care. According to the front of Saturday’s New York Times it all came down to anti-Obama rage. “An Angry Vow Fizzles for Lack of a Viable Plan -- After 7 Years, G.O.P. Can’t Turn Rage Into Results” was the A1 story from reporters Matt Flegenheimer, Jonathan Martin and Jennifer Steinhauer, all of whom are regular subjects at Newsbusters. It was a fitting conclusion to the NYT’s coverage of the so-far unsuccessful Republican drive to repeal the Affordable Care Act. For the last seven years Times reporters, not all of whom have a death grip on free-market principles, snidely insisted that Republicans were aligned against it not on principle, but for reasons of cruelty and anti-Obama racism (especially from the Tea Party).



Georgia Democrat and newly minted liberal hero Jon Ossoff may have failed to take advantage of glowing media coverage and huge out-of-state donations by falling short in a special election to fill a congressional seat, but Thursday’s New York Times front page used Ossoff’s moral victory (?) to spur national Democrats to fight in another special election, for a House seat in Montana. Inside the paper, reporter Richard Fausset hyped Ossoff optimism even after he failed to win on Tuesday. 



The New York Times has already made several pilgrimages down to Georgia to flatter Democratic candidate Jon Ossoff, who may take a House seat for the Democrats in a special election to replace Republican Tom Price, who joined President Trump’s cabinet. Political reporter Jonathan Martin made Monday’s front page with yet another one, this one focusing on GOP disarray: “For the G.O.P., A  House Race Blurs Identity.” The online headline was more direct: “As Georgia Vote Nears, G.O.P. Asks if Ideological Purity Matters Anymore.” Next to an odd, unflattering photo of two sad-sack looking Republicans at a debate, Martin sketched a Republican Party identity crisis.



News broke late Saturday night that North Korea launched a missile in a show of force during the Japanese Prime Minister’s visit to the United States. During a quickly put together media event PM Shinzo Abe spoke first to condemn the launch and was backed up with a brief statement of support from President Donald Trump. But that wasn’t enough for CNN’s Inside Politics, whose Nia-Malika Henderson proclaimed, “He has talked tough, I think Trump, on Twitter about North Korea, but when it got to his time to be that tough person that we've come to know, he just kind of whiffed I think in many ways.” 



In their Tuesday New York Times off-lead “news analysis,” reporters Jonathan Martin and Michael Wines tried to keep anti-Trump hope alive in “Trump’s Win, But Little Else, Is Now Settled – A Vast Divide Persists After the Electors Vote.” Bill Clinton, a former president, was posed as preaching truth to power. Another reporter took pains to explain that "Trump had an advantage in the traditional battlegrounds because most are whiter and less educated than the country as a whole."



Even when the New York Times does run articles (not on the front page) about Democratic scandals, it tried desperately to turn attention to old Republican Party controversies. That was the case with two Friday articles involving possible Democratic vote fraud and electoral disruption.



The New York Times coverage of the final presidential debate was dominated by what it termed “a remarkable statement that seemed to cast doubt on American democracy” -- Trump’s refusal to state he would accept the results of next month’s presidential election, along with a cutting front-page opinion on how Hillary flustered Trump. There was also another ideologically slanted fact-check of the debate.



On the eve of the final presidential debate, Wednesday’s New York Times went after Donald Trump cover to cover, with attempts to shame the Republican nominee and a cavalier dismissal of his allegations of election rigging as racist and paranoid, though the Times was quite amenable to Democratic conspiracy theories about Bush stealing the 2004 election. Wednesday’s off-lead story by Trip Gabriel was headlned “Few Answering Call by Trump To Watch Polls – Fraud Warnings Raise Intimidation Fears.” The text box cried racism: “Increasing worry about intimidation focused on minority communities."



The front of Monday’s New York Times continued the paper’s relentless and one-sided assault on Donald Trump’s campaign. First up, “Public Jolted As Campaign Turns Coarser -- Across Nation, Ripples From an Ugly Race” by Patrick Healy and Farah Stockman slanted toward Hillary Clinton while blaming Trump's comments for traumatizing women nationwide. In the lead slot story, “Officials Fight Trump’s Claims Of A Rigged Vote, Times reporters forwarded the worries of hard-left “civil rights” groups, while ignoring justified Republican concerns over vote fraud and relegating the firebombing of a local GOP headquarters to a single paragraph.



The New York Times went after the Republican candidate hammer and tong Friday and Saturday on accusations of past sexual misconduct, while continuing to downgrade long-standing, mostly unaired charges made against Bill Clinton, a man who would return to the White House if his wife defeats Trump in November. Reporter Jonathan Martin found Donald Trump flirting with anti-Semitism in “Trump’s Barrage Of Heated Speech Has Little Precedent.”



The New York Times is again promoting the shabby pretense that a liberal politician who rejects his church’s orthodoxy for Democratic Party orthodoxy can and should be described as “devout” in his faith. Jonathan Martin’s pre-debate story was headlined “With Tim Kaine and Mike Pence, Faith Is Back in the Mix.”

Kaine now represents a “different strand of Christianity,” the strand that somehow promotes Planned Parenthood and transgender privileges: