From "Red Envelopes With Cash Are Changing Hands at Adams Campaign Rallies/New York Times reporters witnessed supporters of Mayor Eric Adams handing out cash-filled envelopes. Sometimes, that money went to reporters from Chinese-language outlets" (NYT).
Why did the NYT sit on this until after The City published "Eric Adams Advisor Winnie Greco Handed a CITY Reporter Cash Stuffed in a Bag of Potato Chips/THE CITY reported the incident to law enforcement and was promptly contacted by the Brooklyn U.S. attorney’s office"? That came out on the evening of August 20th. (Here's my blog post about it from midday yesterday.)
Was everyone tolerating this practice until the City reporter openly objected to it? Why was the City reporter's envelope delivered inside a potato chip back if it was not understood to be wrong? The NYT writes, "No established American news organization permits its reporters to accept cash payments for covering events" and "The Times’s ethical guidelines explicitly prohibit receipt of such gifts." And the NYT reporters seem to have witnessed the open delivery of red envelopes, without snack-food camouflage. Perhaps The City was viewed as in the gray zone between "established American news organization" and news organizations that had already been initiated into a system of paying for news coverage.
The NYT doesn't explain its waiting to publish. Perhaps it was working on a more detailed story explaining pervasive corruption and it just got scooped.
పోస్ట్లు
81 కామెంట్లు:
They hid this because the NYTs is a bunch of corrupt democrats. The best part is this is only working with people over 65. All other age demographics support republicans.
The entire democrat party is just a bunch of corrupt morally degenerate dishonest people.
From top to bottom.
accept cash payments for covering events
They prefer other forms of payment.
Ann:
The NYT is all in on the Dem corruption. What the NYT doesn't print is what's important. See, e.g., Biden's mental failures, auto-pen, etc.
"Perhaps it was working on a more detailed story explaining pervasive corruption and it just got scooped."
Or, perhaps the NYT people didn't get the "gift" and are pissed.
The move to merge the divided Mamdani opposition has begun. Sliwa will be next.
Ummm...
For the same reason dems get cheaper mortgages on two "primary" residences?
+1, tim maguire.
The NYT didn't want to blatantly torpedo Adams campaign but I'm pretty sure their interests align with the anti-Mamdani groups. More than likely the NYT brass let it be known they were working up this story with the knowledge that some publicity-hungry minor outlet would love to proclaim how they 'scooped' The Times.
Democrats are, as they say, “outraged by everything, ashamed of nothing".
If it ain’t the grift, it’s bribery or the attempted murder of a former POTUS.
Captain Renault is a Timesman? That does explain a few things.
Christopher B said...The NYT didn't want to blatantly torpedo Adams campaign but I'm pretty sure their interests align with the anti-Mamdani groups.
I took a look at the Times' polling page. Cuomo can beat Mamdani if Adams drops out, but Adams can't beat Mamdani under any scenario. So Adams has to go.
It's OK, because the envelopes given to the Times reporters were for their children.
I suspect Tim is correct- the machine has its candidate…
…what’s harder for me to fathom is why red envelopes are expected to be viewed as unsavory but a large line item from USAID to Bloomberg is okey dokey…or the Netflix deal or ‘book deal’ scam is accepted. Too difficult to understand for the average innumerate?
tim maguire said...
The move to merge the divided Mamdani opposition has begun. Sliwa will be next.
It is this.
Adams is no longer useful, so under the bus he goes. Everyone in NYC participates in this open corruption. It continues because everyone benefits from it. They all get their slice of the tax payer dollars.
And make no mistake, this guy was handing out money paid by people paying taxes. Every government antipoverty or homeless program is just a slush fund for corrupt democrats. Los Angeles Spent over a billion dollars last year and all of their homeless people are strung out in the middle of the street.
Connected to Chinese CCCP members and handing out cash and under investigation. Great people the democrats are working with there! I am not at all surprised the NYT covered it up actively and purposely.
Hochul has one like this too.
It is a near certainty that the money in the bags came from one of the homeless/poverty programs in DC. Much of it was from federal programs.
The real fight now over counting illegals and homeless people in the census is that the federal money programs are distributed based on census numbers. Homeless people are literally farmed for money. For every homeless person planted in a park the city gets X number of dollars from several different programs from the federal government.
Just don’t get caught with a gold brick, eh Bob?
Did Adams know about the cash? Or was it Chinese agents doing it on their own? If the latter, what better way to take Adams out to help Mamdani than by creating an appearance of corruption and a scandal?
NY Times is gonna NY Times. What’s a retired law professor to do about it except keep reading it faithfully until she departs this mortal coil? She has even noted, from time to time, as the mood suits, the tireless mocking of the same outlet by her commentariat. I seem to even recall a defense of the habit by the hostess in maybe the 8-10 years ago range. Might be informative to dust that off and see what has changed.
Google AI…
“President Donald Trump has publicly praised and shown support for New York City Mayor Eric Adams.
Specifically
Trump referred to Adams as a "very good person" and claimed to have "helped him out a little bit" when Adams faced a federal corruption probe, which Trump suggested was politically motivated due to Adams' criticism of the migrant situation.
Trump defended Adams at the Al Smith dinner, drawing parallels between Adams' indictment and his own legal issues, stating they were both being persecuted for speaking out against open borders.
Trump noted that Adams was being treated "pretty unfairly" in his criminal case, likening Adams' legal challenges to his own.
After Trump's election, the two men met briefly at an Ultimate Fighting Championship event, where Trump reportedly praised Adams' leadership, calling him "one of the greatest mayors the city has ever had"”
"The entire democrat party is just a bunch of corrupt morally degenerate dishonest people."
Yes, largely so. And the entire Republican party are quintuple times worse, in every aspect mentioned, (and probably in others not mentioned).
As I understand the story, a "supporter", unconnected with the campaign, gave a reporter an unsolicited cash gift. My understanding is that there was no request for a favorable story or anything else.
If that is correct, can someone please tell me what law was broken? Someone asked yesterday but I did not see any answer.
If I go to the NYT sales dept and say "Write a nice story about Changeover.com but don't say I asked you to write it, and here's a couple bucks." that is not only legal but common practice. It is called a "Native Ad"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_advertising
A lot of what we see in the news, thinking it is legitimate news stories, is actually paid native advertising.
Even if the giver had asked the reporter to write a specific story inexchange for the payment, I still don't see it as illegal.
If the gift giver is connected with the campaign or the funds came from the campaign I guess there might be a campaign finance law broken. I don't see evidence of that.
I am not arguing for the morality of this. That is up to the reporter's employer. Might be grounds for firing, it would depend on the employers internal rules.
I just want to know what law has been broken.
John Henry
Considering how the corrupt left need Adams to go away - is this another frame job?
J A Q.
"I took a look at the Times' polling page. Cuomo can beat Mamdani if Adams drops out, "
This is motivation for the Times to not report the bribes. They want Adams to remain in the race.
Of the shit show of candidates for NY Mayor -why would anyone blame Trump for backing Adams?
Trump didn't know about his prior to anyone knowing about this.
You MSNBC/The View types think this is a Gotcha?
Grok says:
In March 2016, Ann Althouse explicitly defended her habit of reading the New York Times in a blog post where she highlighted a "Sunday Routine" column from the publication. She wrote, "Yes, I still read the NYT. Get over it, people," directly addressing and dismissing criticism from her readers who disapproved of her engaging with what they viewed as a left-leaning outlet. In the same post, she also noted reading The New Yorker despite similar objections, reinforcing her commitment to consuming a range of media sources for her blogging.
She has defended the habit in other ways across her blog, often by emphasizing its utility for her work and affirming its regularity despite pushback. For instance, in a January 2010 post about the impending New York Times online paywall, she explained that her reading is intertwined with blogging: "For me, reading on line is tied to blogging. I'm not going to spend my time reading sites that I can't blog, and I'm not going to blog and link to sites that you can't read without paying. Currently, I link to the NYT a lot, perhaps several times a day." This positions her reading as essential for generating content and engaging her audience, implicitly defending it against any complaints about over-reliance on the source.
In a June 2016 post explaining why she skipped blogging a particular New York Times article, Althouse asserted, "I read The New York Times. Does anyone blog NYT things more than I do?" This rhetorical question highlights her extensive engagement with the publication as a point of pride and a core part of her routine, serving as a subtle defense amid her frequent citations of it.
More recently, she has casually reaffirmed her daily reading habit in posts without overt defensiveness but in contexts that acknowledge reader skepticism. For example, in April 2024, she stated, "I read the NYT every day and have closely followed presidential campaign news for the last 20 years," while critiquing the publication's standards.
Similarly, in January 2022, she wrote, "I read the NYT every day, and it's my impression that the NYT strongly supports affirmative action," using her consistent reading to inform analysis.
Overall, Althouse defends the habit by framing it as integral to her blogging, intellectual curiosity, and understanding of cultural/political discourse, while brushing off detractors who see it as inconsistent with her centrist-to-conservative leanings. These defenses appear in blog posts spanning from at least 2010 onward, with the most direct pushback against criticism occurring in 2016.
Inag is so excited - perhaps Trump can be impeached!
btw- KAMALA HARRIS LOST.
The NYT also didn't tell you that for the Uniparty taking classified documents and then leaking them is a cottage business. Joe's garage wasn't the only hoarding location and I'm thoroughly enjoying FAFO Friday!
And, of course, Robert. You have proof.
Yes, largely so. And the entire Republican party are quintuple times worse, in every aspect mentioned, (and probably in others not mentioned).
We are about to find out but there is a really stark difference at play. Republican voters hate the corruption and have tried to mend it for years (part of the Tea Perty platform) and we are pleasantly surprized Trump is actually doing cobnstructive things to expose and end the self-dealing and secret-trading.
But democrat voters by and large do NOT care if their elected representatives are corrupt or not, which is why they returned the southern guy with frozen cash to office, and Marionberry Pie back to office and on and on and on.
WE are cheering Bolton's raid because he was a leaker of classified info betraying his post. I haven't heard any lefty voices condemning the mortgage fraud of Tish James or Schiff or Cook (the FED fuck). Just like y'all don't condemn sandwich tossers and executive shooters or would-be assassins: you just don't.
Wow lots of typos. Message comes thru. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
I don't know the law John Henry but I can tell the the "supporter" is a close confident and "advisor on her community" to Adams, was caught funneling illegal donations to his campaign before and is now "mishandling" cash either on his behalf or another candidate's behalf. She is not "unconnected" to Adams by any means.
Radicalized democratics in NYC want their Hamas representative - smothered in Israel/Jew hate and Commie sauce.
As soon as Adams complained about the Illegals in his city - overwhelming hotels and resources - the corrupt mob-left lowered the boom on Adams. We all have eyes to see.
Alternative theory: In my mind, this smacks of the Soros Open Society playbook. So, the Socialist candidate is too scary? Too Communist? What we need here is something to show the voters that the current mayor isn't as far away from our candidate as you think. He ain't gonna win anyway. See? Our candidate is really main stream. And doesn't he have a nice smile?
Reporter to editor: "A sketchy supporter of Adams just gave me this envelope with $500 cash in it. I didn't know what to do with it so I am turning it in to you, boss."
A couple weeks later, the busted, now pissed off supporter: "I have no idea what happened, I gave the reporter $10,000 from my own pocket. I have no idea what happened to the other $9,500."
Hilarity ensues.
John Henry
Politicians, most notably Democrats, have handed out packets of money for decades. It's often called "walking around money".
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2008/10/what-exactly-is-walking-around-money.html
Mike Wolf for the win. 8:48.
Loyal creepy cult democrats never condemn corruption of their side. They refuse.
Of the shit show of candidates for NY Mayor -why would anyone blame Trump for backing Adams?
Trump didn't know about this strange money in bags - prior to anyone knowing about this.
You MSNBC/The View types think this is a Gotcha?
(fixed)
Mike (MJB Wolf) wrote:
“Republican voters hate the corruption and have tried to mend it for years (part of the Tea Perty platform) and we are pleasantly surprised Trump is actually doing constructive things to expose and end the self-dealing and secret-trading.
But democrat voters by and large do NOT care if their elected representatives are corrupt or not, which is why they returned the southern guy with frozen cash to office, and Marion Barry back to office and on and on and on.”
Exactly. This is it. That’s the difference between Democrats and Republicans.
I don't fault the Professor for reading the NYT. Partially because she is not, seemingly, "baffled by their bullshit" as are so many leftists. Nor does she knee-jerk reject the writing.
Finally I note the NYT materials often generate many comments some even pertaining to the topic. :)
Cash to reporters, shocking. I thought reporters only took Venmo or Cash App.
Not only do I not fault AA for her choice of sources for blogging, I applaud her. As has been oft said here, she reads them so I don't have to. I particularly appreciate her insight into their decisions of what and how to cover various issues.
The greater prevalence of election-related corrupt practices among Democratic partisans reflects a paradox: the greater the moral urgency animating a political side, the lower is the threshold for justifying dishonesty to achieve the transcendent moral objectives. This is why Bolsheviks fought dirtier than the Mensheviks, and the list of historical examples goes on and on. The psychological cost of dishonesty is lowered when the objective to be attained has enormous positive significance.
Republicans' great objective is a sort of bourgeois normalcy in which people get to lead productive and interesting lives. Fewer people will set their hair on fire in pursuit of the quotidian pleasures that are the Republican agenda.
Big cities = big things at stake = big corruption.
All of that is Democrat, so I really doubt Republicans are four times as corrupt.
This is very funny. Here, little reporter monkey. See the red envelope? Dance, dance for me now little press monkey.
And people read the paper and believe what they say.
The Ends just met the Means, and are scrambling now to parse out the appropriate Justification.
Wikipedia has "The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage" last revision in the year of our lord 2002.
Obviously the nascent rule against publishing stories that could damage a yet to be endorsed candidate (like say Joe Biden) is still in it's formulation stage, according to a NYT reporter not allowed to speak on the record do to the delicate nature of the reporting... or something.
The Democratic party is 100% corrupt. In every direction. You submit to the mob - or else.
Forget it Jake, its New York
HOW MUCH did Kammy pay Oprah for incidentals?
HOW MUCH did Kammy pay Bouncy to NOT sing?
HOW MUCH has democrat support evaporated since the closing of USAID?
Does ANYONE Actually Support the democrats? or, are they ALL paid?
The NYT probably didn’t want the world looking too close at the possibility that purveyors of news can be bribed. Their bosses prefer that half the country believe them to be stupid. OTOH, Adam’s may be standing in the way of the Islamic Commie. How juicy for the Times to chronicle the further destruction of NYC at Mamdani’s hands and the establishment of its ports as POEs for terrorists and other riff raff.
Thank you Eva Marie!
When I was a beat reporter in Bethlehem, PA I was once given a potato chip bag stuffed with potato chips. I was easily bought.
It is funny that NYT's is doing a story to hurt Adams, since they don't want Mandingo to win. It could be damage control. Lets get the story out now, instead of closer to the election. Or maybe they want Adams to drop out, and a new and better candidate to run and win.
You can be sure of one thing, the NYT's doesn't care about NYC corruption. So its all politiical.
I think we're only a few news cycles away from hearing that these payments are common, and a good thing.
I asked Grok if there are better ways to hand over a red envelope without sticking it in a potato chip bag. Grok gave me a number of ideas for how to do this. But, they did also say, "In the U.S., such actions might be scrutinized under anti-bribery laws or journalistic ethics codes. Consider whether this approach aligns with your goals and the potential consequences." But still, there are quite a few smarter ways to do this than the old potato chip bag trick.
RCOCEAN II said...
It is funny that NYT's is doing a story to hurt Adams, since they don't want Mandingo to win.
Or perhaps they think Adams is even worse than Mamdani?
"Perhaps it was working on a more detailed story explaining pervasive corruption and it just got scooped."
Yeah, sure, lets go with that.
Robert Cook said...
"The entire democrat party is just a bunch of corrupt morally degenerate dishonest people."
Yes, largely so. And the entire Republican party are quintuple times worse, in every aspect mentioned, (and probably in others not mentioned).
It is important to remember that the average leftist is as stupid as Robert Cook who thinks this is some sort of intelligent response.
This was the Cuomo supporters' last ditch effort to force Adams from the race. The latest polls make it clear that Adams can never win and Cuomo can't win with Adams in the race.
Maybe New Yorkers deserve what they will get with Mamdani. Maybe a communist can put all of the corrupt capitalists up against the wall, figuratively at least.
But that’s how I like my potato chips. Light on the chips. Heavy on the cash.
"Perhaps it was working on a more detailed story explaining pervasive corruption and it just got scooped."
Yeah . . . that's it. that's the ticket. I was, ah, working on a more detailed story. At the Bijou.
With Morgan Fairchild, my wife, whom I've seen naked.
"The NYT doesn't explain its waiting to publish. Perhaps it was working on a more detailed story explaining pervasive corruption and it just got scooped."
See the first comment under "From NYT" for an "explanation" from a Times reporter.
My husband and I used to joke about the Ithaca paper that it covered everything that everybody already knows.
It is important to remember that the average leftist is as stupid as Robert Cook who thinks this is some sort of intelligent response.
…take a walk in the upper west side nowadays and the average resident is shuffling around mumbling the things Cookie says to nobody in particular…
Betcha can’t take just one!
Bianca Pallaro
Reporter 4h ago
"The decision about when to publish depends greatly on the amount and quality of reporting we have at any given time. This report is part of our continuing investigation into China's covert influence campaigns in America. It was originally intended to be part of a broader story that we are still working on, but we felt it was important to publish now, given the news on Wednesday about Winnie Greco."
I have no issue with Althouse reading and commenting on the NYT and WaPo. It lets me know that I am not missing anything, without having to read the crap myself.
Ya know, this tell-tale red envelopes thing reminds me of the 1930's Nanking Rebellion against the Japanese occupiers, where the rebels wore red scarves to identify themselves to each other.
Alas, when the rebellion failed, the remaining rebels were easily identified, as the dyes in the scarves had bled onto their necks--leading the Japanese to sneer, "No Moo Goo Gai Pan for you!!"
(OK, I made that last part up)
Why did the NYT sit on this until after The City published "Eric Adams Advisor Winnie Greco Handed a CITY Reporter Cash Stuffed in a Bag of Potato Chips.”
Of course the journalists at the Times sat on it until their hand was forced! Do you have any idea how hard it is to make ends meet in New York City on a reporter’s salary without accepting a bribe here and there?
A more-detailed story would take three reporters weeks to write, about someone who has been caught committing illegal acts on the part of the chi-coms for many years?
They should have been able to turn it out in five hours.
I hate-read the NYT at 5a.m. when it switches on new content and have done so for so many years that I am one of their first digital subscribers, and they had to work with me to update my archaic sign-in at one point. I estimate that at least 5% of subscribers are hostile readers like me, Oso. Reading the Times every day can be a path to rejecting them too, as displayed by their increasingly hostile comment threads. The backlash is real. Althouse has the useful perspective of calmly noting their deteriorating standards.
“ The NYT writes, "No established American news organization permits its reporters to accept cash payments for covering events" and "The Times’s ethical guidelines explicitly prohibit receipt of such gifts." And the NYT reporters seem to have witnessed the open delivery of red envelopes, without snack-food camouflage.
The NYT doesn't explain it’s waiting to publish. Perhaps it was working on a more detailed story explaining pervasive corruption and it just got scooped.”
Or perhaps they were trying to figure out how their reporters knew the envelopes were filled with cash unless they took a few themselves.
“ The NYT doesn't explain it’s waiting to publish.”
I guess most people don’t notice these days, but for some of us the it’s/its thing really grates.
JournoLism is a jaundiced profession where democracy dies in darkness h/t WaPout.
Forget it, Jake...
Tipping was Un-American until it wasn’t. Don’t forget to tip your journalist.
Seriously,
IF the democrats don't Pay for good press; will they still get it?
కామెంట్ను పోస్ట్ చేయండి
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.