More than two months after the New York Times began an ambitious plan to “reframe” the history of slavery in this country, the August 18 issue of the newspaper’s magazine referring to the 1619 Project has sold out in the publication’s online store. In addition, supporters of the effort have encouraged its producers to add to their crusade by expanding the articles into a book.



It's always interesting when people who tout the "people's right to know" decide to sit on information that they don't want the people to know. Jack Crowe and Tobias Hoonhout at National Review discovered a reporter who now works for The New York Times sat on public records which he obtained in April that cut against Elizabeth Warren's continuous claim that she was dismissed from a teaching job for being visibly pregnant: 



New York Times political writer Lisa Lerer made Tuesday’s edition with news of the resignation of the formerly rising Democratic Rep. Katie Hill of California after a bizarre sex scandal involving campaign and congressional staffers, fueled by explicit photos reported by a conservative website. The headline was loaded to show how disturbed the Times felt about the spectacle of a Democratic congresswoman forced out of office in such fashion: “Revenge Porn Reaches Washington.”



The media are opposed to anything that remotely resembles a neutral approach. So when Facebook decided to leave political ads from politicians untouched, the liberal news media  declared war. Head of Facebook News Campbell Brown wrote in an Oct. 30 Facebook post that she was “astonished at the reaction by other journalists to Facebook's decision not to police speech from political candidates.”



The New York Times petulantly refused to grant President Trump any credit for the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, who died in a U.S. raid in Northwest Syria. David Sanger’s Monday “news analysis,” “Strategies Spurned by Trump Led to Triumph in Operation.” The online subhead read: “The president cast the death of the ISIS leader as validation of his disengagement strategy. But it required intelligence agencies and allies he has spurned.”



While reading the absurd New York Times impeachment porn fantasy by Carl Hulse, you have to pinch yourself every few sentences to remind yourself that you are actually reading a bizarre what-if written by the chief Washington correspondent for that newspaper and not the wild speculations of a DUer loon at the Democratic Underground. What-if an asteroid were to hit the planet to disrupt the impeachment process? Nope. Something even more ridiculous.

 

>What if the Senate votes to convict Trump after he was impeached by the House, meaning about 20 Republican senators would willing commit political suicide to satisfy the Democrats, and then, and then just a majority of them could vote to keep him from running for President again.



The New York Times has abruptly changed its tune on the “Deep State,” a name given to the entrenched bureaucracy supposedly determined to work via secret machinations and selective media leaks to bring down the Trump administration from within. As Trump and his Republican allies railed against the “Deep State,” the Times typically mocked the very idea as a phony conspiracy theory. The headline under a March 2017 analysis: "What Happens When You Fight a ‘Deep State’ That Doesn’t Exist.” But the Times has changed its tune in startling fashion. Now the Deep State is real, and it’s just wonderful.



Liberal megadonor George Soros believes the arc of history doesn’t bend on its own, so he’s actively engaged in working to bend it. An Oct. 25, New York Times propaganda piece headlined “George Soros Has Enemies. He’s Fine With That,” drooled over “liberal champion” Soros’ current perspectives on our country’s state of affairs, his suggestions for policymaking, his 2020 election predictions and his hatred of President Donald Trump.



CNN New Day hosts Alisyn Camerota and John Berman got a kick out of New York Times columnist Gail Collins inviting NYT readers to “vote” for the “worst” Trump cabinet member, on Monday's show. While the CNN hosts gushed over the “reality tv show” “contest” that bashed the administration, Collins marveled at how much liberal readers hated the Republican cabinet.



The New York Times broke the story late Thursday night with this headline: “Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation.” Then came the front page sub-headline: “The move is likely to raise alarms that President Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies.” 



As the presidential race deepens, the New York Times is trying to convince voters that two safely liberal Democratic candidates are in fact moderates or even “centrists.” They went all out on Thursday’s front page, with reporter Reid Epstein’s “Buttigieg Slips Into the Lane To Biden’s Left.” The jump-page headline: “Buttigieg Slips Into a Centrist Lane Between the Progressives and Biden.” The online headline underlined: “As a Centrist Path Opens, Pete Buttigieg Moves Toward It.” Liberal Sen. Amy Klobuchar was also constantly called a moderate by reporters.



Some nerve: New York Times anti-Brexit reporter Benjamin Mueller devoted 1,350 words Monday to going after his competitors on the Brexit-beat, accusing other media outlets of slanting the news in favor of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s quest to fulfill the 2916 vote to withdraw the United Kingdom from the European Union. As if the Times and Mueller himself hasn’t been notoriously, often hysterically, anti-Brexit in news coverage: “Pro-Brexit Press Frames Johnson as Defiant Hero.” The online headline deck: “For Pro-Brexit Press, Boris Johnson Is Already a Winner -- The right-wing newspapers that dominate in Britain shaped a narrative of events that could have not been more pleasing to the prime minister.”