Tag Archives: New York Times

Love Triangle Exposed: Democrats-Mueller-NY Times, by Ray McGovern

Part of Robert Mueller’s job was to help Democrats win back the House in 2018. He performed admirably. From Ray McGovern at antiwar.com:

Yesterday on The Critical Hour, in connection with the flurry of commentary on the latest anti-Russian piece from The Guardian, I explained in some detail how Special Council Robert Mueller helped the Democrats win back the House in 2018. There were other factors in play, of course, but in retrospect, Mueller’s performance was highly instructive.

An obedient Marine, Mueller saluted and followed orders from a corrupt Justice Department and an FBI with lots of shenanigans – and much worse – to hide. Not to mention the incessant “guidance” Mueller and team got from an equally corrupt mainstream media, drumming Trump-Russia perfidy into the consciousness of all Americans.

All Mueller had to do was delay announcing that he and his platoon of sharpshooter lawyers could find nothing to prove media accusations that Trump was in Putin’s pocket. He slow-walked the investigation, allowing the Trump-Putin festering conspiracy charges to infect voters as they went to the polls in Nov. 2018. It worked like a charm. The Dems flipped the House.

Although visibly frail physically, Muller seemed to be fully compos mentis on May 17, 2017, when Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named him special counsel to investigate alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. No doubt he was aware he was being used. But with the corporate media singing his praises as “universally respected,” what’s not to like about seizing the limelight by ostentatiously appearing to shun it?

Continue reading→

The Pentagon Papers’ Legacy After 50 Years, by Peter Van Buren

Compare the Pentagon Papers to what Julian Assange has had to endure and it shows just how far journalism has fallen the last fifty years. From Peter Van Buren at theamericanconservative.com:

The courage of all those involved, including journalists at the New York Times, has all but vanished after half a century.

Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg speaks at a rally in Washington, D.C. (Joseph Sohm/Shutterstock)

It was a humid June on the east coast 50 years ago when the New York Times began publishing the Pentagon Papers. The anniversary is worth marking, for reasons sweeping and grand, and for reasons deeply personal.

In 1971 Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers, a secret U.S. government history of the Vietnam War, to the Times. No one had ever published such classified documents before, and reporters feared prosecution under the Espionage Act. A federal court ordered the Times to cease publication after an initial flurry of excerpts were printed, the first time in U.S. history a federal judge had invoked prior restraint and shattered the First Amendment.

In a legal battle too important to have been written first as a novel, the NYT fought back. The Supreme Court on June 30, 1971 handed down a victory for the First Amendment in New York Times Company v. United States, and the Times won the Pulitzer Prize. The Papers helped convince Americans the Vietnam War was wrong, their government could not be trusted, and The People informed by a free press could still have a say in things. Today, journalists expect a Pulitzer for a snarky tweet.

In our current shameful state, where the MSM serves as an organ of the deep state, the Papers also serve as a reminder to millennials OnlyFansing as journalists that there were once people in their jobs who valued truth and righteousness. Perhaps this anniversary may inspire some MSM propagandist to realize he might still run with lions instead of slinking home to feed his cats.

Continue reading→

Pentagon Papers Failed to Prevent Perpetual Media Kowtowing, by James Bovard

The press is so servile to the government that there’s no way the Pentagon Papers would ever get published today. As they have with Julian Assange, most of the legacy press would be calling for a modern-day Daniel Ellsberg’s conviction on national security grounds. From James Bovard at theamericanconservative.com:

Fifty years ago, the New York Times began publishing excerpts from a massive secret report called the “History of U.S. Decision-Making Process on Vietnam Policy.” Those excerpts, which quickly became known as the “Pentagon Papers,” provided shocking revelations of perennial government deceit and spurred an epic clash over the First Amendment. Unfortunately, many of the media outlets that will celebrate the Pentagon Papers anniversary have long since become lap dogs of perfidious politicians dragging America into new foreign conflicts.

The report that became the Pentagon Papers was a secret study begun in 1967 analyzing where the Vietnam War had gone awry. The 7,000-page tome showed that presidents and military leaders had been conning the American people on Southeast Asia ever since the Truman administration. Like many policy autopsies, the report was classified as secret and completely ignored by the White House and federal agencies that most needed to heed its lessons. New York Times editor Tom Wicker commented in 1971 that “the people who read these documents in the Times were the first to study them.”

Unfortunately, few Washingtonians bothered to read the Pentagon Papers after their disclosure and missed lessons that could have spared the nation fresh debacles. More than 30 years before the Bush administration exploited the 9/11 attacks to invade Iraq, the Kennedy and Johnson administrations dishonestly exploited alleged terrorist attacks to justify boosting U.S. military intervention in Vietnam. After its troops gunned down dozens of people at a Buddhist protest in 1963, the government of South Vietnam falsely claimed it was a Viet Cong terrorist attack. President Lyndon Johnson told Congress on May 18, 1964 that “the Viet Cong guerrillas, under orders from their Communist masters in the North, have intensified terrorist actions against the peaceful people of South Vietnam. This increased terrorism requires increased response.” At that time, the U.S. was carrying out an array of “non-attributable hit-and-run” raids against North Vietnam, including providing American planes that Thai pilots used to bomb and strafe North Vietnamese villages a few months later. But U.S. aggression was kept secret from both Congress and the American people.

Continue reading→

The False and Exaggerated Claims Still Being Spread About the Capitol Riot, by Glenn Greenwald

Mark Twain reportedly said, “A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” The truth about the Capitol riot has finally got its shoes on, but the lies have already traveled all the way around the world. From Glenn Greenwald at greenwald.substack.com:

Insisting on factual accuracy does not make one an apologist for the protesters. False reporting is never justified, especially to inflate threat and fear levels.

Damage is seen inside the US Capitol building early on January 7, 2021 in Washington, DC (Photo by OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images)

What took place at the Capitol on January 6 was undoubtedly a politically motivated riot. As such, it should not be controversial to regard it as a dangerous episode. Any time force or violence is introduced into what ought to be the peaceful resolution of political conflicts, it should be lamented and condemned.

But none of that justifies lying about what happened that day, especially by the news media. Condemning that riot does not allow, let alone require, echoing false claims in order to render the event more menacing and serious than it actually was. There is no circumstance or motive that justifies the dissemination of false claims by journalists. The more consequential the event, the less justified, and more harmful, serial journalistic falsehoods are.

Yet this is exactly what has happened, and continues to happen, since that riot almost seven weeks ago. And anyone who tries to correct these falsehoods is instantly attacked with the cynical accusation that if you want only truthful reporting about what happened, then you’re trying to “minimize” what happened and are likely an apologist for if not a full-fledged supporter of the protesters themselves.

One of the most significant of these falsehoods was the tale — endorsed over and over without any caveats by the media for more than a month — that Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick was murdered by the pro-Trump mob when they beat him to death with a fire extinguisher. That claim was first published by The New York Times on January 8 in an article headlined “Capitol Police Officer Dies From Injuries in Pro-Trump Rampage.” It cited “two [anonymous] law enforcement officials” to claim that Sicknick died “with the mob rampaging through the halls of Congress” and after he “was struck with a fire extinguisher.”

Continue reading→

We Have Immune Systems, New York Times Reveals, by Jeffrey A. Tucker

Kids need to play with other kids, get dirty, be outside, and all the other things they do that expose them to germs and build up their immune systems. In other words, moms know best. From Jeffrey A. Tucker at aier.org:

Scrub and spray everything with chemicals, bathe in Purell, mask up, stand no nearer to anyone else than six feet, stay away from crowds, douse yourself with alcohol, wash your hands and face raw, protect yourself from germs at all costs.

Some nations are closed completely. No one in or out.

We panic about “cases” even when they say nothing about severe consequences. Avoidance and finally suppression are the watchwords of the day, for a virus that is relatively mild by any historical standard, as Holman Jenkins just explained:

U.S. government scientists now estimate that 40% of cases are asymptomatic and 80% of symptomatic cases are mild—in short, 88% of subjects don’t know they are infected or have no great incentive to find out if they are suffering from Covid or some more familiar bug.

We could also mention the 99.9% survival rate, and that doesn’t consider the wildly disproportionate risk between the sick and healthy.

Is this an experiment? Yes, and likely a deadly one.

What precisely are we doing to ourselves? What are we doing to children?

Early in the pandemic, doctors went on the national stage to frame it up clearly: we are wrecking our immune systems and making ourselves vulnerable to more serious pathogens later.

The great discovery that viruses must be owned to be controlled was an achievement of 20th century cell biology. It’s the Godfather rule: keep your friends close but your enemies closer. It’s counterintuitive, which is precisely why it took thousands of years to discover, and a century to educate people about the problem of the conduct of public health.

Continue reading→

New York Times Job Listing Shows How Western Propaganda Operates, by Caitlin Johnstone

The New York Times posted a job listing for a propagandist. From Caitlin Johnstone at caitlinjohnstone.com:

People who are only just beginning to research what’s wrong with the world often hold an assumption that mainstream news reporters are just knowingly propagandizing people all the time. That they sit around scheming up ways to deceive their audiences into supporting war, oligarchy and oppression for the benefit of their plutocratic masters.

Once you’ve learned a bit more you realize it’s not quite happening that way. Most mainstream news reporters are not really witting propagandists–those are to be found more in plutocrat-funded think tanks and other narrative management firms, and in the opaque government agencies which feed news media outlets information designed to advance their interests. The predominant reason mainstream news reporters say things that aren’t true is because in order to be hired by mainstream news outlets, you need to jack your mind into a power-serving worldview that is not based in truth.

Continue reading→

COVID Vaccine Revelation Sinks Like a Stone; Disappears, by Jon Rappoport

The new Pfizer vaccine isn’t all it’s hyped to be. From Jon Rappoport at nomorefakenews.com:

In major media, certain stories gain traction. The trumpets keep blaring for a time before they fade.

Other stories are one-offs. A few of them strike hard. Their implications—if anyone stops to think about them—are powerful. Then…nothing.

“Wait, aren’t you going to follow up on that? Don’t you see what that MEANS?”

Apparently not, because…dead silence. “In other news, the governor lost his pet parakeet for an hour. His chief of staff found it taking a nap in a desk drawer…”

One-offs function like teasers. You definitely want to know more, but you never get more.

Over the years, I’ve tried to follow up on a few. The reporter or the editor has a set of standard replies: “We didn’t get much feedback.” “We covered it.” “It’s now old news.” “There wasn’t anything else to find out.”

Oh, but there WAS.

A few weeks ago, I ran a one-off. The analysis and commentary were mine, but the story was an opinion piece in the New York Times. The Times called it an opinion piece to soften its blow. I suspected it would disappear, and it did.

Its meaning and implication were too strong. It would be a vast embarrassment for the White House, the Warp Speed COVID vaccine program, the vaccine manufacturers, the coronavirus task force, and vaccine researchers.

And embarrassment would be just the beginning of their problem.

Continue reading→

When Corporate Power Is Your Real Government, Corporate Media Is State Media, by Caitlin Johnstone

And when corporate media is state media, what passes for news is mostly propaganda. From Caitlin Johnstone at medium.com:

Image for post

The New York Times published an astonishingly horrible article the other day titled “Latin America Is Facing a ‘Decline of Democracy’ Under the Pandemic” accusing governments like Venezuela and Nicaragua of exploiting Covid-19 to quash opposition and oppress democracy.

The article sources its jarringly propagandistic claims in multiple US government-funded narrative management operations like the Wilson Center and the National Endowment for Democracy-sponsored Freedom House, the extensively plutocrat-funded Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and the United States Naval Academy.

The crown jewel of this piece of State Department stenography reads as follows:

“Adding to these challenges, democracy in Latin America has also lost a champion in the United States, which had played an important role in promoting democracy after the end of the Cold War by financing good governance programs and calling out authoritarian abuses.”

Whoa, nelly.

Continue reading→

Did Neocon ‘Cancel Queen’ Stage NYT Exit to Fuel Her Next Move? by Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton

SLL posted Bari Weiss’ resignation letter to the NY Times, but as with most stories there are at least two sides to this one. From Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton at consortiumnews.com:

A closer look at Bari Weiss’ resignation suggests she omitted critical details about her toxic presence at the paper, and may have staged her resignation to publicize her next move, write Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton.

The New York Times Building in Manhattan. (Adam Jones on Flickr)

The New York Times Building in Manhattan. (Adam Jones on Flickr)

Neoconservative New York Times columnist Bari Weiss quit the newspaper on July 14. In a resignation letter published on her personal website, the pundit lamented a supposed “illiberal environment” at the publication in which Weiss’ colleagues mocked her right-wing views, supposedly called her “a Nazi and a racist,” and branded her a “liar and a bigot.”

Weiss’ unexpected departure came days after the hawkish columnist signed a letter in Harper’s Magazine lamenting an “intolerance of opposing views” and demanding an “open debate” in the U.S. media.

The signatories complaining of a “censoriousness” environment included architects of disastrous U.S. military interventions, anti-Palestinian fanatics, and some of the most powerful people in the media, including many who have spent decades censoring anyone to the left of them – and even attempting to cancel entire countries.

But there may have been more to Weiss’ dramatic resignation than her revulsion with the “illiberal” culture of a paper that had recruited her and several neocon allies. A closer look at the events surrounding her departure suggests she likely omitted some critical details about her toxic presence inside the paper, and may have staged her resignation to drum up publicity for her next move.

Continue reading→

Bari Weiss Resignation Letter

Bari Weiss, a writer and editor at the New York Times, calls it quits, tired of the paper’s straight-jacket political correctness and cancel culture. From Bari Weiss at bariweiss.com:

Dear A.G.,

It is with sadness that I write to tell you that I am resigning from The New York Times.

I joined the paper with gratitude and optimism three years ago. I was hired with the goal of bringing in voices that would not otherwise appear in your pages: first-time writers, centrists, conservatives and others who would not naturally think of The Times as their home. The reason for this effort was clear: The paper’s failure to anticipate the outcome of the 2016 election meant that it didn’t have a firm grasp of the country it covers. Dean Baquet and others have admitted as much on various occasions. The priority in Opinion was to help redress that critical shortcoming.

I was honored to be part of that effort, led by James Bennet. I am proud of my work as a writer and as an editor. Among those I helped bring to our pages: the Venezuelan dissident Wuilly Arteaga; the Iranian chess champion Dorsa Derakhshani; and the Hong Kong Christian democrat Derek Lam. Also: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Masih Alinejad, Zaina Arafat, Elna Baker, Rachael Denhollander, Matti Friedman, Nick Gillespie, Heather Heying, Randall Kennedy, Julius Krein, Monica Lewinsky, Glenn Loury, Jesse Singal, Ali Soufan, Chloe Valdary, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Wesley Yang, and many others.

But the lessons that ought to have followed the election—lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society—have not been learned. Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.

Continue reading