Reporter Michael Wines hyperventilated again over “dangerous to democracy” gerrymandering by Republicans in Wisconsin, in Thursday’s New York Times: “Push to End Partisan Maps Is Held Up by the Map Makers.” He led off with strong language: When the Supreme Court concluded this summer that it had no authority to strike down partisan political maps, no matter how outrageous, Chief Justice John G. Roberts offered solace to those who call the maps dangerous to democracy."



The Supreme Court made two important political rulings this week -- on “gerrymandering” and a proposed citizenship question for the U.S. Census, and the New York Times gave them lead story status Friday under the banner headline, “Court, Ruling 5-4, Gives Green Light To Gerrymander.” Reporters Michael Wines portrayed Democrats as victims of Republican perfidy: "...the Republicans’ flouting of the rule book is already prompting Democratic talk of similarly tough tactics like packing the Supreme Court."



Monday’s New York Times used a new White House office to go after a conservative who represents two of the things it most loathes: limits on immigration and crackdowns on vote fraud. Both trends are encapsulated in the person of Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach. Reporters Michael Wines and Julie Bosman penned: “A ‘Passionate’ Seeker of Voter Fraud in Kansas Gets a National Soapbox.”



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."



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.”



The New York Times’ front pages over the weekend dealt with the awful police-related events over the last few days, culminating with the assassination of five policemen in Dallas during a Black Lives Matter demonstration. The paper fanned the flames of racial discord, pointing a finger at “some whites who feel they are ceding their long-held place in society." Another story lamented how the murders threatened to sabotage the "still-young civil rights movement" of Black Lives Matter.



The New York Times resolutely refused to see a pattern of jihad on the part of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in its sympathetic front-page Tuesday profile of his prison conditions. Yet on Wednesday the Times ran an op-ed that used an anti-Semitic killer in Kansas to represent the hidden domestic terror threat of military veterans.

First, try not to shed a tear for Tsarnaev as you read the opening strains of Michael Wines and Serge Kovaleski's Tuesday story, "Marathon Bombing Suspect Waits in Isolation."