It is also puzzling that the media generally and the top newspaper editorial pages in particular remain so tolerant of stonewalling on taxes by all the candidates. That wasn’t their attitude toward disclosure four years ago, when Mitt Romney tried that strategy.
When the corrections and retractions reach critical mass and the “investigative” articles start to read like Henry James novels — i.e. diffuse and impenetrable — the end of a given “scandal” episode is near.
In another sharp departure from historic U.S. policy, Trump said in an interview published on Sunday by The New York Times that he would consider letting Japan and South Korea build their own nuclear weapons, rather than rely on America for protection against North Korea and China.
“Where I think Hillary Clinton faces, you know, certainly more of a burden is that the controversies she’s been in are immediately labeled, you know, Travel-gate or Email-gate… if you actually asked people what about any of these controversies bothers them, they don’t know anything specific about any of them.”
The New York Times reported on March 15 that part of the reason Trump “wins primary after primary with one of the smallest campaign budgets” is that he “dominates” earned media.
Is she right? My back-of-the-envelope calculations show that Clinton has received more than 4.1 million votes in primaries and caucuses.
Editorial board calls Hillary Clinton one of the most “deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history.”
In my experience, you can fool a golden retriever exactly twice with the old hidden ball trick. So if the paper’s latest blunder is any indication, a golden retriever is overqualified to edit ‘The New York Times.’
History may someday note that Trump has almost single-handedly revived the art of two-fisted newspaper editorial writing. Just because he is such a scoundrel and a worm.
As long as he believed in God, he trusted he had a get-out-of-Hell-free card, no matter what violence he advocated or inflicted upon the people in his life.
Kovaleski “should stop using his disability to grandstand and get back to reporting for a paper that is rapidly going down the tubes,” Trump said in a statement,
Anonymous sources are tricky enough, but journalists simply have no business contriving dramatized scenes with dialogue and characters — describing their innermost thoughts and feelings with no attribution whatsoever. To do so is inherently deceptive.
On national television, Joe Biden went out of his way to correct the record: “Nothing like that ever, ever happened.” Nothing like that – and Maureen Dowd’s column, which set the tone of subsequent sensational coverage in the New York Times and everywhere else, was a lot like that.
Appearing on ’60 Minutes,’ Vice President Biden denied that the affecting deathbed scene between him and his older son Beau, as famously recounted by Maureen Dowd, had ever occurred.
So here is yet another absurd episode, humiliating both for Rep. Trey Gowdy and the journalists who promoted this fraudulent story, and highly reminiscent of the bogus “criminal referral” leak that made the front page of the New York Times last summer.
My instincts told me that if we just gave the Hillary email story another poke or two, the whole house of cards would collapse.
Having failed to entomb Bill Clinton and drive a wooden stake through his heart, wrecking Clinton’s candidacy has become the Washington press clique’s overriding goal.
If one were of a low and suspicious nature regarding The New York Times’ historically inept Washington Bureau, one might suspect yet another example of the “Clinton Rules” — that is, a shaky allegation unsupported by facts.
Facing declining sales, Coca-Cola donated $1.5 million last year to start an organization to promote exercise as a salve for obesity-related diseases.
Suspicion grows that the leaks behind the bungled New York Times “criminal referral” story came from the Republican side of the House Select Committee on Benghazi chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy.
The Clinton campaign’s letter clearly suggests that somebody else outside the Justice Department — on Capitol Hill, perhaps? — planted a false charge against a presidential candidate on the front page of the nation’s most important newspaper.
Determining who leaked the phony “criminal referral” is important because – if we accept the ‘Times’ editors’ version – then one or more federal officials evidently tried under cover of anonymity to smear a presidential contender.