New York Times
The photo dominated the front of the New York Times Styles section over the title “The Fashionista.” Who is this new impresario taking over the fashion world? The next line: “Fidel Castro received rock star treatment and left an indelible mark on fashion when he visited New York in 1959.” Yes, Fidel Castro, Communist dictator and fashion plate, "highly educated" and comparable to Frank Sinatra and James Dean. This nauseating propaganda as fashion piece was penned by Tony Perrottet, who with this article has successfully infiltrated another seemingly unlikely Times section with Castro propaganda.
The New York Times Friday edition was chock-full of post-Mueller report coverage emphasizing President Trump’s attempts to hinder an investigation into what amounted to no underlying crime, while glossing over his vindication from criminal charges and the discrediting of the media's “collusion” narrative of the last two years. Special counsel Robert Mueller found no conspiracy by the Trump campaign to cooperate with Russian agents and Mueller did not cite the president for obstruction of justice. So the paper changed the subject to Bob Barr's "Nixonian" spin and Democrats pushing impeachment.
President Trump happily greeted the Mueller report release by saying "No collusion, no obstruction." The nation's Trump-loathing newspapers weren't going to paint this "historic day" as good for Trump. The Washington Post front-page headline under the top photo said it all: "Frame it however you like, but it's a damning portrait of Trump's presidency."
After a 22-month investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller investigating Russian ties to the Trump campaign and possible presidential obstruction of justice, the final 448-page report on the investigation has been released, confirming the previous summary by Attorney General Bill Barr that Mueller found no collusion and uncovered insufficient evidence to charge Trump with obstruction. Which didn’t stop the New York Times from sounding bitter, and in particular targeting Barr for sounding too much like an advocate for Trump (who, after all, was not charged with anything).
Chevron’s winning streak in the courtroom against Ecuador over rainforest pollution continued in April. So did the liberal media’s silence on the battle.
Was Hardball host Chris Matthews speaking to viewers Wednesday night from the past? Because it sure felt like Matthews had rewound back to March 22 because, just as things were on the day the Mueller report officially concluded, the mood of the MSNBC pundit was DEFCON-1 screeching all hour about how the Mueller report rollout “looks like an inside job.”
Saturday marks 20 years since the tragic Columbine school shooting in Littleton, Colorado. Liberal journalists have already begun their retrospectives that included requisite attacks on the NRA and gun owners. The following is a look back at the most biased and ugliest broadsides in the weeks following the April 20, 1999 Columbine shooting:.
Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar’s latest disturbing comment, this time describing the 9-11 terror attacks dismissively as “some people did something....”, provided fodder for the New York Times to get offended. Not offended by Omar’s comment, of course, but against Donald Trump and New York Post for tough responses. Maggie Haberman and Sheryl Gay Stolberg tried to artificially widen Trump’s Twitter attack on Omar’s 9-11 comments into an assault on all Muslims in America on Tuesday’s front page: “Trump Rekindles Campaign Threat Of Islamic peril.” It began: "President Trump has often seen the political benefits of stigmatizing Muslims."
Cable news continued hailing Democrat Mayor Pete Buttigieg as the second coming Tuesday after he officially tossed his hat in the ring for President, Monday. Over at MSNBC, “center-right” columnist for the New York Times, David Brooks touted Buttigieg as the anti-Trump that America needed right now, in the wake of the “moral and spiritual crisis” that President Trump had created.
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.
There are actually three certainties of life: death, taxes and that the liberal media will condemn tax cuts.
The New York Times published side-by-side stories on tax day about the impact of the 2017 tax reform bill. The first was about people “shocked” by lower refunds or owing taxes this April. The second proved that although most people got a tax cut (estimates varied from 64.8% to 80% of filers), many remain “skeptical” that they did.
The Daily Caller is reporting that former senior adviser to President Obama, Valerie Jarrett, may have bought her spot on the New York Times’ Best Sellers list with her new memoir, Finding My Voice, despite having poor selling rankings, elsewhere.