The New York Times was single-minded in its attack on President Trump’s first budget proposal. Little emphasis on the potential savings to taxpayers and reductions to the deficit (if the optimistic economic growth goals are met). Instead the Times went on a nationwide person-hunt for potential victims of the hypothetical budget cuts, based on current spending levels that have been inflated over decades of federal overspending. Obama's budget-busting budgets by contrast invariably received optimistic treatment of their most dubious and grandiose promises, from supposedly cynical Times reporters.
The New York Times has found its line of attack against the seemingly unassailable Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. Reporter Matt Flegenheimer went phony populist as he signed on to the approved Democratic angle against President Gorsuch, in Tuesday’s “Democrats Move to Cast Justice Nominee as Enemy of the Little Guy.” The day before, the Times had attacked from the left another Trump pick, Labor Secretary nominee Alexander Acosta, Flegenheimer led off with the maximalist dose of Democratic attack rhetoric: "Corporate tool. Enemy of disabled people. Deferential to the privileged, including the man who chose him."
Wednesday on Morning Joe, the discussion centered around immigration policies and deportation. Host Joe Scarborough began the segment righteously stating why illegal immigration is wrong and that the media has a “blind spot” in seeing where most Americans stand on the issue. Scarborough made this point first to political analyst Mark Halperin:“So Mark, you have said this is the biggest disconnect between red state America and blue state America. I agree. My only caveat to that is I think there are a lot of people in blue state America that also think, wait, they are here illegally? What is wrong with the government deporting them? I know that is not popular in this area code.”
After a hectic Thursday of media meltdowns reacting to President Trump’s press conference, the lunacy was still flowing on MSNBC’s Hardball. In less than 20 minutes, host Chris Matthews compared a “manic” Trump to Jack Nicholson from A Few Good Men and Alger Hiss attempting to wiggle his way out of being deemed a Soviet spy.
New York Times reporter Yamiche Alcindor filed a full-page ad for the anti-Trump “resistance” for Wednesday’s edition: “Activists for Liberal Causes Join Forces Against Common foe: Trump.” The page was designed for maximum impact, with four good-sized photos of protesters, plus several long quotes from lefties running under a different eye-catching font under the headline “‘Resist’ Becomes A New Battle Cry.” The Times performed similar puffery for the unhappy left-wing campers of Occupy Wall Street, a movement that faded to nothingness despite the paper's best publicity efforts (the Tea Party, of course, got the old, white, racist treatment).
A full-court press by the left and congressional Democrats failed to take down the nomination of Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education, and the New York Times is bitter. Emmarie Huetteman and Yamiche Alcindor on the front of Wednesday’s paper: "Betsy DeVos, a wealthy Republican donor with almost no experience in public education, was confirmed by the Senate as the nation’s education secretary on Tuesday, but only with the help of a historic tiebreaking vote from Vice President Mike Pence after weeks of protests and two defections within her own party."
What a difference an election makes: The annual pro-life March for Life, long ignored by the New York Times, led the paper’s National section on Saturday, driven by a little political star power in the form of Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway and Vice President Mike Pence. Jeremy Peters and Yamiche Alcindor’s account was teased with a photo from the rally on the front page: “Thousands March Against Abortion.” The headline read “A Rallying Cry, and an Act of Defiance.” The text box: “Anti-Abortion Marchers Take Hope In Trump’s Outspoken Support."
As Inauguration Day draws closer, Monday’s New York Times lead story by Yamiche Alcindor all but called the president-elect a racist: “In Trump Tweets, Blacks Perceive A Callous Rival – Some To Skip Inaugural – Democrats Voice Anger After Trump Impugns a Civil Rights Icon.” She also smeared Sen. Jeff Sessions as a racist. Also on the race front, the NYT compiled a huge, amazingly gushing collection of interviews with kids whose lives were transformed simply by being in the presence of The One.
President-Elect Donald Trump’s latest batch of cabinet nominations is drawing fire from liberal media elites with smears like “The wealthiest cabinet in history.” But the frustration over the nominees’ financial success is made humorous when it’s other super wealthy people throwing the fit, such as Al Sharpton during MSNBC’s PoliticsNation on Sunday. “I mean, how concerned… should Democrats be about the fact that all of these multi-corporate connected Wall Street millionaires guys,” he wondered.
Occasionally, MSNBC’s Hardball host Chris Matthews flashes a pillar of his Catholic upbringing and Monday night was one such instance as he pressed New York Times reporter Yamiche Alcindor on whether or not she has any pro-life co-workers at the liberal paper after she laughed at the idea of liberal media bias.
Saturday’s New York Times attacked Republican positions on voting from two angles. Reporter Yamiche Alcindor responded to Donald Trump’s refusal to say he would accept the election results with typical liberal hyperbole, comparing Trump’s comments to actual dictatorships abroad: “For Some Immigrants, Trump’s Warning on Election Results Sounds All Too Familiar.” Reporter Michael Wines took another angle, dismissing the danger of vote fraud as a false campaign tactic by Republicans in “How Citing Voter Fraud Became a Political Tactic.”
According to New York Times reporter Yamiche Alcindor, the outcry over Donald Trump’s hot-mic audio has something to do with race. After the presidential candidate’s lascivious comments went public last week, many Republicans rescinded their endorsement. But some journalists claim that the reason was not the mogul’s vulgar words, so much as the target of those words: a white woman.