New York Times reporters Jeremy Peters and Katie Benner caught up to a weeks-old story, keyed to a speech by Attorney General William Barr to The Federalist conservative legal society that frightened the left. On Monday’s front page, they tried to transform Barr into a “far-right...authoritarian” bogeyman: “Right Rejoices As Barr Assails Liberal Culture -- No-Apologies Style Fits the Party of Trump.” They wrote: "His politicization of the office is unorthodox and a departure from previous attorneys general in a way that feels uncomfortably close to authoritarianism, critics said."
Wednesday was Mueller Day on Capitol Hill. For seven hours the special counsel provided testimony before the House Judiciary Committee and the House Intelligence Committee, carried live for those Americans still interested in his completed investigation into Russian meddling in the U.S. electoral process in 2016. The Times saw "conservative conspiracy theories" and griped that Rep. Devin Nunes was "desperately trying to portray Mueller, the F.B.I., the Democrats and the media as working together to take down the president.” Where could Nunes have gotten that idea?
Saturday’s New York Times “news analysis” was filled with regret that straight-shooting Robert Mueller was outfoxed by dastardly Donald Trump and his “handpicked” sidekick Attorney General William Barr. Mueller turned out just too principled for his own good: "Mr. Mueller’s refusal to pass judgment on whether the president broke the law is one example of how the special counsel operated by rules ill fitted for the Trump era. He said nothing and the president said everything. He worked in secret, allowing the president to fill the void with reckless accusations of a witch hunt. His damning conclusions were encased in dense legal jargon that the president distorted into a vindication."
As NewsBusters illustrated all day on Sunday, MSNBC’s nonsense was shooting out into the ether like water from a fire hose During the 6:00 p.m. Eastern hour, so-called experts offered hot takes such as “the Russians have clearly won” and “Mueller basically seem to abdicate or punt on” the obstruction portion of the investigation.
After 22 months of speculation, special counsel Robert Mueller released to Attorney General Bill Barr on Friday afternoon his report on allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election (which the press and Democrats winnowed down to the catch-all accusation of “collusion”). While the report itself is under wraps, thus far it appears Mueller and his team have wrapped up their investigation without charging any Americans for conspiring with Russia. Saturday’s New York Times front page was laden with petulance and disappointment.
The front page of Tuesday’s New York Times focused on the Trump administration “planning to roll back Obama-era policies aimed at ensuring that minority children are not unfairly disciplined, arguing that the efforts have eased up on punishment and contributed to rising violence in the nation’s schools.” Reporters Erica Green and Katie Benner don’t seem to approve of the move, though they make a stronger attempt at balance than the headlines: "Trump’s Parkland Inquiry Shifts To Attack on an Obama Legacy.” The inside-page headline: “Trump Parkland Panel Attacks Obama Policy On Race and Schools.”
The New York Times’ attacks on the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Devin Nunes, continued in Sunday’s news section: “Wielding Threats, Nunes Attacks Justice Dept.” The text box featured typical liberal media weasel wording: “Some see an effort to weaponize documents and undermine the Russia inquiry.” When the Times claims “some see,” one can safely substitute the phrase “Liberal Times reporters see.” The Times and the left are furious at Nunes’ muddying the soothing narrative of Russia-Trump “collusion” in Campaign 2016.
Some crimes, like the Parkland massacre, earn the full outraged attention of the New York Times, which is fitting. But when Trump wages a rhetorical war on other murderers, like the immigrant gang MS-13 who bludgeon teens to death, the paper responds with hand-wringing explainers like Friday’s front-page corrective suggesting the threat of MS-13 is overblown and surely is unrelated to Obama’s negligent immigration policy: “A Gang’s Fearsome Reputation, Further Inflated by the President.”
The media meltdown continues, in the wake of the release of the House Intelligence Committee memo detailing alleged misconduct by the FBI and the DOJ. In “Trump’s Unparalleled War,” on the front of Sunday’s New York Times, reporters Sharon LaFraniere, Katie Benner, and Peter Baker’s fancy they’ve uncovered a conspiracist in the White House who has launched “an unparalleled war on law enforcement.” It’s quite odd and hypocritical for the liberal New York Times, which giddily leaks sensitive information to wreck terror-fighting programs and published the name of a covert CIA official, to suddenly hallow the nation’s domestic surveillance organization as a vital and sacred institution.
Greece is the perfect example of the eventual outcome of unchecked spending – especially as it creeps closer and closer to defaulting on its massive debts, despite multiple government bailouts in May 2011. One recent BBC News headline warned: “Greece: ‘Default within the euro is possible’.”
But, looking back, some journalists predicted the opposite: that the Greek economy would survive because of government bailouts. Huge fan of government-deficit spending, Paul Krugman, has been writing about Greece a lot, arguing that its trouble is proof that austerity doesn’t work.