"Abramson describes a generational split at the Times, with younger staffers, many of them in digital jobs, favoring an unrestrained assault on the presidency. 'The more "woke" staff thought that urgent times called for urgent measures; the dangers of Trump’s presidency obviated the old standards,' she writes [in her forthcoming book 'Merchants of Truth']. Trump claims he is keeping the 'failing' Times in business—an obvious exaggeration—but the former editor acknowledges a 'Trump bump' that saw digital subscriptions during his first six months in office jump by 600,000, to more than 2 million. 'Given its mostly liberal audience, there was an implicit financial reward for the Times in running lots of Trump stories, almost all of them negative: they drove big traffic numbers and, despite the blip of cancellations after the election, inflated subscription orders to levels no one anticipated.'"
From "Former NY Times editor rips Trump coverage as biased" by Howard Kurtz (Fox News).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
130 comments:
Given its mostly liberal audience, there was an implicit financial reward for the Times in running lots of Trump stories, almost all of them negative: they drove big traffic numbers and, despite the blip of cancellations after the election, inflated subscription orders to levels no one anticipated
It's just human nature. People like to have their biases confirmed and dislike having their world view challenged.
There's lots of money in mollycoddling young elite urbabnites. It doen't matter that it further distorts their view of reality, articificially inflating their senses of self worth, futher alienating them from middle America, and continuously balkanizes our political discourse. Money is all that matters.
Abramson would certainly know about biased reporting. She's just resentful for being left out. Or maybe she realizes that it's actually helping Trump. Or both.
Walter Duranty not available for comment.
Shocker!
Trump should send her a signed MAGA hat.
I don't blame the NYT paper/website for trying to make a buck while believing they're 'saving the nation'. But they're no better than Kirk Douglas in Wilder's Ace in the Hole except he at least had a crisis of conscience. They won't.
Now she tells us?
"Jill Abramson, the veteran journalist who led the newspaper from 2011 to 2014, says the Times has a financial incentive to bash the president and that the imbalance is helping to erode its credibility"
In another critical development, Jill Abramson goes swimming at the beach and discovers that water is wet, and the sun is hot!
It is shocking she would mention the obvious. Clearly she's not concerned about social alienation from leftie or perhaps it's that NYT arrogance shining through: People think what I tell them to think.
"Trump claims he is keeping the 'failing' Times in business—an obvious exaggeration—but the former editor acknowledges a 'Trump bump' that saw digital subscriptions during his first six months in office jump by 600,000, to more than 2 million."
Hmm. Sounds to me like Trump *is* keeping the failing Times in business.
Well, knock me over with a feather. I would have never guessed that the paper is biased.
Please. No "strange new respect" for Jill the Shrill. She's an AA hire for sex who got replaced by an AA hire for race. I would think the feminists would have learned how to shut up and suck hind tit by now.
Duh.
But the all-in catering-to-the-soap-opera-women-base strategy started earlier. They campaigned against August National in 2002, they smeared the Duke lacrosse players in 2006.
The rot runs deep and precedes Trump. But Trump clarifies prog preferences.
This is how the press is the enemy of the people: When division and contention drives revenue, and they allow their greed to take precedence over the unity and comity of the citizenry and the country. Happens all the time now.
Remember, if news were the product, the networks would be constantly and continually liable for the product defects and breach of warranty caused by inaccuracy and error. But the news isn't the product; YOU are the product - you are being served by the networks and newspapers, as a product, to advertisers. And the more of you they can serve up, the more money they make. That is why news that hooks viewers always wins, no matter the damage to the country or your sanity. (And in a prideful society, news that makes viewers feel fearful or angry or self-righteous will always win over truth, accuracy, or true import.)
Conversely, the defeat of Trump by their favored one, Kamala Harris, will result in financial ruin.
Or put another way, "Fake News" that hooks more viewers and readers (and thereby delivers more revenue) is always going to be preferred by the networks and newspapers, over true and material news that captures fewer viewers and readers. They simply can't layoff the drive for revenue. Their greed or drive for corporate profits, results in their disregard for accuracy. If they could be sued for product liability or deceptive trade practices, it would all stop in a second, but as I said, the news isn't the product.
They hate Trump - but they can't leave him.
Trump: A twisted love story. By Jill Abaramson
The problem isn't the bias but the audience that likes it. The bias will go where the audience is.
...and the sky is blue and the sun rises in the East. I am happy to see a NYT Alum admit the truth that has been obvious to a lot of us.
Ralph L wrote: “Trump should send her a signed MAGA hat.”
No, he should send her a purse-sized pincushion likeness of himself. She’s use it, too.
...and the sky is blue and the sun rises in the East. I am happy to see a NYT Alum admit the truth that has been obvious to a lot of us.
(This is my shocked face)
"Conversely, the defeat of Trump by their favored one, Kamala Harris, will result in financial ruin."
we'll be lucky if the NYT is the only one ruined.
NYT: I wish I knew how to quit you...
Trump: Ask your psychiatrist.
Who would have guessed it would be Jill Abramson who would at this late date would blow the whistle on the NYT?
In August 2016, the Times's media columnist essentially said that Trump was such an existential threat that a departure from traditional standards of objectivity was warranted. A few weeks later that view was endorsed by the Executive Editor, Dean Baquet. And sure enough, we've seen the Times abandon even the pretense of objectivity. By cheapening their currency and losing credibility, the Times (and the Washington Post and AP and most network and cable news outlets) have tragically undermined the role they once played as watchdogs over the government. The worst change during the Trump Administation in our system of governance may be the self-inflicted wound by our media.
Wait...hold on a second here. Ruin the NYT's credibility? What credibility? Didn't that go away with Duranty?
--Vance
It only erodes their credibility if they had any. Or perhaps more to the point the idea that they engage in anything other than biased political commentary for ALL their “news” has lost all credibility and they should stop lying about their bias.
'The more "woke" staff thought that urgent times called for urgent measures; the dangers of Trump’s presidency obviated the old standards,'
This is pretty much what the paper's media reporter Jim Rutenberg argued in a page 1 opinion piece two months before the 2016 election: That when a candidate is as bad as Trump, journalists should set aside ethics and promote the opponent.
It was line that cannot be uncrossed.
The substance here isn't news. The source is news.
The press is in business to sell credibility for leverage. What other enterprises enjoy constitutional, legal, ethical, social protections of their market?
Ruin the NYT's credibility? What credibility?
Millions of people who accept it as a first source. Perhaps a tribal effect. Perhaps something real, selectively, emotionally.
Quayle said...
"Remember, if news were the product, the networks would be constantly and continually liable for the product defects and breach of warranty caused by inaccuracy and error. But the news isn't the product; YOU are the product - you are being served by the networks and newspapers, as a product, to advertisers."
Interesting point. Because, in fact, they do get in trouble if they try to sell fake clicks. But they can sell all the fake news they like.
It is interesting that she believes erosion of credibility is in the papers financial interest. How did that work out for WaPo? Newsweek? Time? Weekly Standard?
Bias is the wrong term. It's just the way the world looks when viewed from lefty-land. For a long time, the NYT has been identified with a specific political and ideological perspective, like the Guardian and le Monde. What's happened is that in the age of Trump it's all become so obvious.
This isn't new. In August 2016 the Times announced:
"Trump Is Testing the Norms of Objectivity in Journalism"
If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, nonopinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.
But the question that everyone is grappling with is: Do normal standards apply?
The Times would go on to answer the question.
This is like the Donna Brazile tell all about how corrupt the DNC was, how it subverted its own rules to undermine Bernie Sanders and give de-facto DNC control to the Hillary Clinton campaign, and how their leadership should likely be in jail.
Don't forget that newspapers across the country depend on national news from the Associated Press, the Washington Post, and the New York Times, with occasional stories from the LA Times.
That's a lot of news concentrated in a few liberal hands.
Just out of curiosity, what would the NYT have to do or admit before Althouse would give them up?
Richard Dolan: "Bias is the wrong term. It's just the way the world looks when viewed from lefty-land."
Bias is the wrong term. It's just the way the world looks when viewed from lefty/LLR-land.
FIFY
Remenber, supposedly non-lefty news sources, like The Weekly Standard, became wholly-owned subsidiaries of the lefty media and direct, knowing, purposeful info conduits for leftist agit-prop from FusionGPS and others.
It is important to never forget that.
During 2018, The New York Times hired Sarah Jeong onto its editorial board. She is obsessed with publicly expressing her contempt for White men.
That is The New York Times for you.
She's an AA hire for sex who got replaced by an AA hire for race.
The women’s movement has always been affirmative action light.
Wait until California starts legislating board seats by race and sexual orientation.
Mitt Romney agrees with the “woke” staffers.
NYT current and former employees are ugly people inside and out.
Trump has them fighting among themselves. The magnificent bastard understands NYC Media like the back of his hand. And the Mormon Prophet is all the NYT has left to fire back at Trump. This is too easy. Even fighting them with one hand tied behind his back, the Trumpster easily destroys the Media's credibility.
We've been warning the NYT about their obvious biases since Bush.
Right now, I'd say the odds of Trump winning reelection in 2020 is slightly below 50-50. I think he will win Ohio & Fla. This gets him to 260 electoral votes -a mere 10 away from victory.
This means he needs to win Wis or Mich or Penn or, even, Minnesota to bring it all home.
So, this means, regardless of the incessant Trump bashing and heated rhetoric and threats of impeachment and bad CNN headlines, it's gonna be a real close race.
What's my point? The point is all this noise in the media is a lot of hooey. It will dissipate when we get down to "nut-cutting" time. Normal folks will ignore it, and continue enjoying their lives. How will the folks in Wis, Mich, Penn and Minn responding to this noise? Not sure. But I bet they spend less of their time glued to the hysterical leftists on CNN or the idiotic reporters who write for the NYT.
(eaglebeak)
Meanwhile, Jill Abramson is carrying around an Obama doll in her purse to keep her feeling serene, or at least she was a year ago:
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/NY-Times-Editor-Jill-Abramson-Keeps-Little-Plastic-Obama-Purse-476461173.html
“It’s easy to look at what’s happening in Washington D.C. and despair,” she wrote. “That’s why I carry a little plastic Obama doll in my purse.”
Abramson wrote, “I pull him out every now and then to remind myself that the United States had a progressive, African American president until very recently.”
in other fruitless exercises:
https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/02/cnn-grills-brother-of-detained-american/
"Where do I go to get my reputation back?" If I were the NYT I'd be asking that question, and the answer is, "You can't".
In the '60's, when I was in college and law school, the NYT was a reliable source of news. Editorially, it was Left, of course, but the news coverage was pretty reliable. In 1964 I'd read their opinion pieces about the terrible things Goldwater supposedly said, and then read their news coverage to find out he'd said something quite different. There ought to be a market for that kind of news coverage today, but I guess there really isn't, because no one's even attempting to provide it. The NYT isn't alone in picking out an ideological/partisan market to serve, but it's more offensive because it still claims to provide all the news that's fit to print.
Between this, and big advertising’s preference for a younger, more persuadable audience, that is to say, an audience of easily swayed morons, or in the vernacular, Democrats, the whole thing is falling apart.
NYT reader: "Mirror mirror, on the wall. Who's the smartest of them all?"
NYT editor: "You are. Everything you believe is true."
NYT reading: "Your credibility is immense. Renew my subscription!"
The NYT changed fundamentally when their readers revolted against their stance on the obviously corrupt Bill Clinton. That’s when they dropped out of the news business and went into cheerleading for the Democrats.
This is like the Donna Brazile tell all about how corrupt the DNC was, how it subverted its own rules to undermine Bernie Sanders and give de-facto DNC control to the Hillary Clinton campaign, and how their leadership should likely be in jail.
Anybody who doubts a motive for an inside leak of the DNC emails need only read Brazille’s book.
Lust for Lucre Poisons Printed Product, Turning Trump's Tweet True.
@Not Sure,
NYT reader: "Your credibility is immense. Renew my subscription!"
This, many times over.
The DC area is full of folks who read the NYT like Jill Abramson said her family did when she was growing up, "like scripture". They possess a special kind of invincible ignorance, a very special talent for not seeing how their primary (or only) source of news has been carefully "curated" even when given detailed examples (e.g. the failure to report on the John Edwards scandal at all until he resigned or the Duke lacrosse team scandal where they all but found the team guilty of rape).
"Trump was such an existential threat that a departure from traditional standards of objectivity was warranted."
That is some real smart thikin there.
1) If Trump is so bad then objectivity would not get in the way of showing that, unless the threat is really just a subjective opinion difficult to show with objective factual reporting.
2) Loss of objectivity is the most threatening of threats to a bona fide news organization, unless you are not really a news organization.
This amounts to the NYT confessing to being hacks.
Bald-faced Bias Brings Buyers Begging to Bolster Bubbles
The idea that it isn't obvious that the MSM is one giant arm of the democratic party - is laughable. just laughable.
People subscribe to the NYT because it is biased the way they used to subscribe because it was unbiased. If you're woke, that's progress.
@The Godfather,
"In the '60's, when I was in college and law school, the NYT was a reliable source of news. Editorially, it was Left, of course, but the news coverage was pretty reliable."
I buy this. The news coverage and reporting by the NYT -- until recently - has been pretty good.
But now, it's infected with the same Anti-Trumpism that infects the minds of Paul Krugman, Thomas Friedman, Gail Collins and all these other highly-educated nitwits at the NYT.
The Left and its patron saint, the NYT, are "Get Trump" 24/7. Nothing else matters. If they could sink the economy to hurt Trump politically, they'd do it, regardless of how many Dem voters would be hurt.
Nonetheless, the fact remains that Blue collar white guys in Mich, Wis, Minn and Penn will decide this election -- and I don't think they spend a lotta time reading the Times.
Blogger Gahrie said...
"Just out of curiosity, what would the NYT have to do or admit before Althouse would give them up?"
The NYT is a deep well for bloggers and talk show hosts. It performs the dirty job of (unintentionally) exposing the real face of the progressives. Conservatives read the NYT to understand their opponents. Critical thinkers read the NYT for material and arguments they can mock and parody. Progressives read the NYT because it is the queen bee of the progressive hive.
If you want a treat, dial up some YouTube video of Jill Abramson's astounding Valley-Girl-Does-Manhattan accent.
Abramson probably understands something that should be obvious, but isn't- the coverage of organs like the NYTimes is aiding Trump, and not really hurting him. It really is a badge of honor to be the target of these media enterprises. This wasn't always the case, but the internet changed things- Trump isn't dependent on these media outlets to get out his message, and that changed everything.
Well Godfather, like you I was in college and law school in the 60's and the NYT did exhibit at least a veneer of credibility. They managed to write the news, albeit with a left of center slant, and keep the editorial opinions on the editorial page. The WSJ generally manages to be able to do that today. But the NYT has let the loons among their columnists, and the young politically illiterate pups and plagiarists (Dean Baquet, Paul Krugman, Tom Friedman and Jason Blair, I'm looking at you) on their reporting staffs run wild. Credibility is like virginity--you can only lose it once--and you can't get it back.
Neither the NYT nor the Los Angeles Times (my local fish wrapper) even tries to separate editorial opinion from reportage. Doesn't take much time to read the LA Times today---and its subscription numbers are plummeting like a rock falling off a cliff. The paper is getting skinny too. Baquet was at the Los Angeles Times for a while--he didn't help it much.
Actions have consequences and the Los Angeles Times newsroom (now much diminished from its glory years) got so empty you could shoot a cannonball through it and not hit a reporter (either honest or dishonest). A wealthy local physician/investor bought the paper and moved the staff from the downtown mausoleum out to suburban offices. Physically it's not even a "downtown big city" newspaper any more.
Is anyone surprised? We're only surprised that they admit it.
Tommy Duncan: "The NYT is a deep well for bloggers and talk show hosts. It performs the dirty job of (unintentionally) exposing the real face of the progressives."
The NYT is a deep well for bloggers and talk show hosts. It performs the dirty job of (unintentionally) exposing the real face of the progressives and their LLR fake-con lackeys.
FIFY
Credibility is like virginity--you can only lose it once--and you can't get it back.
Of course the difference is that people *want* credibility back..
Gahrie said...
Just out of curiosity, what would the NYT have to do or admit before Althouse would give them up?
Maybe when she stops blogging. It is her main tool.
NYT Reader
Criticism from insiders is meaningful, except re DJT admin folks who shit on Don.
Carry on.
Dickin'Bimbos,
NYT Reader
Man, that is some serious mental issues right there. That former store clerk is an embarrassment to everyone he knows, and certainly his former employer. Nobody can say that Trump Derangement Syndrome isn't a real thing. That shit is worse crystal meth with a crack chaser.
"Just out of curiosity, what would the NYT have to do or admit before Althouse would give them up?"
Most of the chattering class use the NYT as a cloak of seriousness and substance, and even if they see it lacking in that, it's still a mandatory accessory like a bra or fashionable shoes regardless of how useful it is.
"Trump was such an existential threat that a departure from traditional standards of objectivity was warranted."
In other words, “It’s not over until we win."
So the bottom line is simple: when it comes to the Times, Trump is 100% right, now and always.
And Trump looks at the presidency as nothing more than a way to boost his own ratings - and profits. What's the point?
I'm not aware of a sloppier right-wing hack than Kurtz. He must be a good fit for FOX Noise.
Of course the Trump debacle will increase revenues for all serious media. If it bleeds, it leads - and he is the biggest open wound to be inflicted on our nation since 9/11. And he lies and hides everything - so of course the need for investigative journalism is greater than ever.
No President has been as accessible to the press as Trump, ever. He answers their questions with real answers, to the point, and does it for hours, and that's on top of all the tweeting they get to write and talk about. His is the most transparent administration in history. He does that with a media that is overwhelmingly anti-Trump. Democrats aren't even open with a media that they virtually control like a service dog. The media never even asks Democrats questions they don;t want asked except for "During these first 100 days, what has surprised you the most about this office? Enchanted you the most from serving in this office? Humbled you the most? And troubled you the most?" Some brutal fact finding there.
'And Trump looks at the presidency as nothing more than a way to boost his own ratings - and profits. "
The Presidency has not boosted Trumps ratings. He was already immensely famous with record TV ratings, and became the most famous man in the world on election night. It also made half the country hate him with hysterical passion. As for profits, he may be the only President in history to leave it less wealthy. All other Presidents, especially the Dems use it to become rich many many times over what they had before. That's just a fact.
It's from Buzzfeed, but this story, which Althouse has covered, is on the verge of blowing up. If we had a real DOJ it would have already.
The key point is that it was no "experiment" but was a deliberate attempt to influence the Alabama election and there's hard evidence of such.
"CNN Journalist of the Year Resigns for Making Up Fake Stories"
""Relotius penned an article titled “In a Small Town, Where they pray for Trump on Sundays,” which was designed to portray residents of Fergus Falls, Minnesota as a bunch of backward, racist supporters of the President.
A pair of investigators, however, have dismissed the article as “endless pages of an insulting, if not hilarious, excuse for journalism.”
The piece, they say, only bears truth when it discusses basic elements of the town, including such aspects as population and the names of businesses.
Nearly everything else was made up."
Does CNN really mind though, or just that he got caught?
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/claas-relotius-cnn-journalist-of-the-year-resigns-fake-news/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=mixi&utm_campaign=thepoliticalinsider
" As for profits, he may be the only President in history to leave it less wealthy."
That's really funny.
Drago-
It's 'FTFY'.
The Presidency has not boosted Trumps ratings. He was already immensely famous with record TV ratings, and became the most famous man in the world on election night. It also made half the country hate him with hysterical passion. As for profits, he may be the only President in history to leave it less wealthy.
You're a fucking moron if you believe that. What kind of an unapologetic capitalist as yourself pretends to believe that Trump wouldn't use the presidency to leverage his holdings with one of the only world leaders he refuses to criticize or profess anything other than complete admiration for?
A dishonest one.
But it's good that you think he hides his tax returns out of humility. That's funny.
PPT
And how, while President, does Trump "leverage his holdings" with Putin? Or out of office? Curious.
By giving the tyrant running that country in which he keeps those holdings favorable policy toward Russia. Duh.
You're a pretty gullible and incurious guy, Mike. Don't say you're curious. That's the one thing you're not. You'll trust anything Trump and Putin tell you.
PPT
And which "holdings" does he have in Russia?
PPT
You have had plenty of time to search. What are Trump's "holdings" in Russia?
Trump is a very virtuous man who would never think to use the presidency to enrich and enhance his Russian assets by how he treats Putin when ushering every other U.S. official out of the room.
Or at least, that's what Michael wants you to believe.
Keep on believin', Michael! Never stop believing!
Trump is also going to get Mexico to pay for that wall. He also believes that China invented the greenhouse effect to make American industry non-competitive. AND, he thinks that vaccines cause autism.
What else were you desperate to believe that I only need to get Trump to say for you to believe it?
Sorry, lonely Michael. I'm watching The Godfather. You'll have to comment to yourself your Trump-water carrying on your own. It's a much more interesting depiction of the sort of real mafia existence that Trump admires so much.
But we know you'll believe anything Trump says, no matter how many of his closest associates go to jail for having lied and broken laws about it.
If only you could have been closer in his inner circle, maybe you could go to jail for him too. What kind of a Trump loyalist are you? You know you're one of an elite few who actually do or at least pretend to believe everything he says. Isn't that worth his loyalty? Isn't that worth lying and cheating for him and going to jail for it? What kind of a Trump backer are you, anyway?
Well none of these knaves Klein Iglesias and co, were dismissed or barred, they created the Same echo chamber on Iran, and now againR the kingdom.
PPPT: "...Trump wouldn't use the presidency to leverage his holdings with one of the only world leaders he refuses to criticize or profess anything other than complete admiration for?"
LOL
I simply have to see this list of "holdings" Trump theoretically has with Putin!!!
Dont hold back now! Lets see it.
I'll bet it is extensive...and magnificent!
Be sure to include all of Trump's "holdings" with Putin. Even the smallest ones. Be comprehensive in your tabulation. Leave no stone unturned.
Do you think there are any Czarist palaces included?
Black Sea dachas?
Perhaps...perhaps...(dare we dream?)...uranium holdings?!!!
I'm on pins and needles here! This one might finally, finally, put PPPT over the top and claim the title of most ludicrous lefty poster from the tag team of Inga & LLR Chuck!
I know who I'm rooting for...
I wonder if Trump owns shares of Russian energy companies....you know, like the Podesta brothers did...before the DOJ gave Tony the quiet hi-sign "heads up" to retroactively register as a Foreign Agent under FARA just prior to the DOJ indicting the Podestas partner, Manafort, for the crime of not having registered as a foreign agent under FARA.
Uh oh! What if Trumps astonishingly lengthy list of Putin/Trump holdings includes nothing but secret, invisible, though incredibly lucrative "holdings"?
Darn it!!!
We might not ever get to bottom of all this!!
And it was so very very devious and clever of Trump to have Russian energy interests toss $145Million to the Clinton Foundation/Slush Fund abd a cool $500,000 to Billy boy for 1 30 minute "talk" right after Hillarys State Dept and Muellers FBI cleared the Uranium One deal with those same Russian interests....all the while Mueller hid the corruption/bribery investigation into that same Russian controlled Canadian firm!!
Oooooooh! Darn that sneaky Trump!!
Keep your faith in Drumpf, Dreck. You can follow him right into prison along with everyone else that's known him. Everyone else that isn't a tyrant, that is.
How's that Mexican-paid for wall coming along?
Dreck has faith in all the assets that Drumpf declared right on that sekrit tax return of his. Hey, he can't release it because he's bein' audited!
Drumpf is now ready for you to buy that Brooklyn Bridge he's been trying to sell you, Dreck.
PPPT, I know its hard for you to focus given your particular...uh..chemical requirements.
But still, show some grit, nose to the grindstone wut wut, and give us that list of Trump/Russian/Putin "holdings"!!
I tell you what, just give us the 3 biggest items on the list!
(Please please, let one of them be a Fake Russian Ice-berg Battle Station equipped with frickin lasers and used to blackmail the European nations for the tidy sum of 1 Meeeellion Euros!!)
Oh yeah. Drumpf is such a squeaky clean biznis guy that his closest confidante attorney got 7 charges decided against him. How many of them did he plead straight-up guilty to, BTW?
But you go right ahead and worry about non-politician/non-presidents, Dreck. Who somehow aren't being prosecuted.
That's what your belief in the state gets you, right? Go after the private citizens, and let the dirtiest politician to ever have that many close associates hauled off to Sing Sing do whatever he wants.
Dreck believes in Trump-State. Believes in it with all his tiny heart.
You do believe in Drumpf's innocence so badly you'd be willing to allow him to undergo prosecution, right? Or are you glad that his cronies on the court and in the DOJ made it their policy to refuse his prosecution?
Pretty convenient. You must be less confident of his innocence than you pretend to be here. Oh wait, you don't pretend to be. You just change the subject.
If only that worked in court. Tell the judge that other hypothetical defendants (who happen to be real-life political adversaries) are guilty of hypothetical crimes for which they've not been really charged so that makes Drumpf a real law-abiding guy!
The desperation you carry reeks worse than elephant poo. Go stick your dick in an orange.
Check out Dreck's belief in the ethical upstandingness of Trump-State.
Those tax returns are sekrit because of the audit! The wall needs $5 billion more because the Mexicans already paid their fair share!
LOL. Dreck thinks people are dumb enough to not see through that shit.
The List PPPT.
The List!
LOL
"Extensive Holdings!! Read all about it!! Get yur paper here!! Trump/Putin carve up world!! Extensive holdings!! Did I say extensive holdings?!!"
Not everyone's as dumb as you, Dreck. Or Trump. Or Michael Cohen.
Remember, Trump promises to pardon preemptively. Nothing incriminating about that. He'll pardon you right after the jury returns their decision.... as long as you pledge your political loyalty to him!
Mafia Don. Love what that lawyer told him about the orange jumpsuit. And how he argued against his being subpoenaed to testify on account of his dishonesty.
When even your lawyer says you're too much of a goddamn liar to testify, only a shit-for-brains (like Dreck-O) would choose to believe you.
You're a pretty dumb guy, Dreck. And very easily misled.
I have to admit. I thought PPPT would never outdo his "midwest homes average square footage causes people to poop on San Francisco sidewalks", but this newest Trump/Putin Extensive Holdings thing just might have done the trick.
What about Pence PPPT? Do you think maybe he got a ZIL limo out of the deal?
LOL
Dreck talks over me, so I talk over him.
I don't discuss things with stupid people, anyway.
Go ask your criminal-in-chief, your chief lawbreaker what to believe.
You have become boring. "I will believe anything Trump says!" makes you too boring to converse with.
It's like having sex with someone who can only masturbate.
Oh yeah. The SF thing. I'm sure that resonates with lots of people, dummy.
Tell us how that Mexican-funded wall is coming along.
You know, I'll bet Trump hasnt paid taxes for at least 10 years on any of his Extensive (and magnificent) Russian/Putin "holdings"!!
Somebody tell Harry Reid, STAT!!
Why, I'll bet Trump has a couple Faberge eggs hidden away right there in the oval office.....that double as back-channel communication devices to the Russian home office!
Could we at least get a list of The Trump/Putin Extensive Holdings Board of Directors?
I hope Trump is running that crew better than Eisner did at the end of his Disney Reign If Disaster.
Could we at least get a list of The Trump/Putin Extensive Holdings Board of Directors?
I hope Trump is running that crew better
than Eisner did at the end of his Disney Reign Of Disaster.
How much did you want to donate to that Mexico-funded wall, Dumb-dumb?
I mean, you're a taxpayer too, right?
Oh, my bad. You're just a Trump-state fanatic. Probably don't even make enough to care about your taxes funding Trump-wall.
What a great businessman! He got the taxpayers to fund what he couldn't get Mexico to pay for.
Just another one of his failings. But Dreck-O is still 100% on board!
Trump-State is Dreck's favorite place to be! He's its #1 citizen!
It's good that Dreck uploads dozens of posts about a single word he didn't like. I guess defending Trump is too hard a task for him to address directly. Yes, if I were a Trump booster I think I'd have to distract a lot of attention away from him and the issues as well.
You're doing a fine job making sure Trump goes unaddressed, Dreck! Running interference that manic/frenetic is very persuasive!
The list PPPT.
The list!
LOL
Extensive holdings. Lucrative, Putin-controlled, holdings...
Oh wait, let me guess. Brett Kavanaugh sent his massive rape gang from Maryland that apparently operated with impunity for a decade in Maryland to hide all the Extensive Holdings evidence.
Its all making sense now...
Just remember Dreck. The more manic your diversions, the more persuasive a defense of Trump you make.
Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. You change the subject any way you please. No one will ever be interested in piecing together Trump's massive web of wrongdoings. No one at all! It's everyone else's fault!
Actually, there is no evidence left. Not after that darn Ajit Pai and his murderous Net Neutrality ruling which the left said would literally lead to death.
Does Ajit Pai have Russian holdings too?
How deep does this all go??
Its all making sense now...
The only sense a Trump Statist like yourself knows how to make is to pretend that Trump is the least criminal and compromised of ALL our presidents! No matter HOW MANY of his closest confidantes land in jail, no matter how much he kisses up like a poodle to Putin, and no matter how many promises of pardons he makes to anyone pledging political loyalty to him.
Mueller needs to listen to you, Dreck! You're the expert on everything!
Do you personally advise the incarcerated Trump confidantes? How's that working out?
Later PPPT: ,You change the subject any way you please"
Earlier PPPT: "Trump is a very virtuous man who would never think to use the presidency to enrich and enhance his Russian assets by how he treats Putin when ushering every other U.S. official out of the room."
Later PPPT, I would like you to meet Earlier PPPT.
Here's a funny scene: Drago, Michael Cohen, Paul Manafort and Flynn sit around at night shooting the breeze and talk about how much Trump's done for them. LOL!
Trump's got your back, Drago. You know the workings of his inner circle well. So well, that you could be Michael Cohen's advisor!
There is no law only politics, remember!
"Russian assets"!!
Boo!
Drag, so here's the operative question. Which laws do you think you could break that you could count on Trump to pardon you for?
He's got your back, Drag! With a knife right to it!
I mean, it's not like you have the balls to face anyone anyway.
Later PPPT: I never listen to what EarlierPPPT says. Its far too constraining...
LOL
All right. I'm not as lonely or insane as Draggie the Drumpf-Diddler. I'm going to sleep while he dreams of all the crimes he can help his Daddy Figure get away with.
Do you think Drumpf is more like your daddy or your boyfriend, Dreck-O? I'm curious to understand what makes you such a fanboi of him. What makes you want him to get away with any crime he could conspire to break?
Drumpf awaits your very special diddling, Draglo.
Diddle him while he drips into your mouth, Drag-Glo.
Later PPPT: I am going to bed.
Earlier PPPT: The helk you are...
Later PPPT: SHUTUPSHUTUPSHUTUPSHUTUP...
Drago MacDougall.
Hmmmm, no TrumpRussia Holdings via googlesearch...
Hmmm, perhaps under his moms maiden name?
Years ago, I worked in a liquor store. As you might imagine, fairly regularly under-age people asked to provide an ID would try to convince me with some story that they were 21. Worst were the ones who thought the best way to convince me they were old enough was to get outraged when I wouldn’t take their word for it.
Pee Pee tape reminds me of those kids. No evidence, just insults and obscenities.
Nonetheless, the fact remains that Blue collar white guys in Mich, Wis, Minn and Penn will decide this election -- and I don't think they spend a lotta time reading the Times.
They don’t need to. The whole anti-trump thing is 24/7 everywhere. People are often single issue voters. Trump stands for management, the rich CEO getting richer on the backs of those blue collar workers. Regardless of the truth of the matter a lot of workers are brainwashed into believing management is bad.
The Mexican funded wall is coming along as well as my ability to keep my doctor.
Jesus Christ...could you guys at least move on to "your momma" jokes?
Here is the obvious question:
I have washed my hands of the NYT as have a wide swath of the 'deplorables'. We know and they have admitted that they will not give us or our issues a fair shake. It is historical fact.
What can they possible do now? If they suddenly lunge for the center and objective reporting, Inga and Chuck will quit their subscriptions because they aren't getting their daily Two Minute Hate.
But it is INCREDIBLY unlikely that I would suddenly, after decades of abuse and calumny, decide to suddenly kiss and make up with the Times.
They are in a cleft stick of their own design and have willfully and foolishly thrown away 40% of their potential customer base.
Post a Comment