Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience

Miguelito Loveless

(4,780 posts)

5. I guess it would depend on the time period

Reply to Laelth (Reply #3)

Fri Jul 24, 2020, 08:37 AM

Jul 2020

and who is in office. When HRC was running it was almost non-stop hit pieces, while the fact that Trump was under active investigation by the FBI for ties to Russia didn't warrant coverage until AFTER he was elected. Also, if memory serves, the NYT was an uncritical cheerleader for the Iraq war.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why is the NY Times spreading this bullshit? [View all] Archae Jul 2020 OP

Because, 90% of the time, Miguelito Loveless Jul 2020 #1

Bingo Sherman A1 Jul 2020 #2

I would suggest that 90% of the time ... Laelth Jul 2020 #3

True, but they aren't the paper they used to be either still_one Jul 2020 #4

I guess it would depend on the time period Miguelito Loveless Jul 2020 #5

That was depressing, admittedly. n/t Laelth Jul 2020 #7

Maggie Haberman is still there Miguelito Loveless Jul 2020 #8

Rogue X-Files fan on staff? nt CatLady78 Jul 2020 #6

What, exactly, is the criticism of the actual piece by the NYT? better Jul 2020 #9

+1. Ditto. yonder Aug 2020 #11

They're heeeere... progressoid Jul 2020 #10