‘SQUAD’ MEMBER AYANNA PRESSLEY TO INTRODUCE IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTION AGAINST KAVANAUGH

Despite latest debunked accusation, freshman congresswoman determined to unseat Supreme Court Justice

Jamie White – SEPTEMBER 17, 2019

Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), a member of the “Squad” of far-left freshmen congresswomen, will introduce a resolution calling for an impeachment inquiry of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh following a debunked New York Times hit piece against him alleging sexual misconduct.

“I believe Christine Blasey Ford. I believe Deborah Ramirez. It is our responsibility to collectively affirm the dignity and humanity of survivors,” Pressley said in a statement, reported WBUR.

“Sexual predators do not deserve a seat on the nation’s highest court and Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation process set a dangerous precedent,” she said. “We must demand justice for survivors and hold Kavanaugh accountable for his actions.”

Pressley plans to introduce the resolution even after the Times issued a major correction noting the accuser of the alleged misconduct claims she has no memory of the alleged incident even taking place, and refused to be interviewed.

The Squad’s leader Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) also called for Kavanaugh’s impeachment on Twitter before the NYT’s clarification, deleted her post following the clarification, then curiously, reposted her impeachment call on Monday.

This was almost a year ago.

It is unsurprising that Kavanaugh, credibly accused of sexual assault, would lie under oath to secure a Supreme Court seat.

Because sexual assault isn’t a crime of passion – it’s about the abuse of power.

He must be impeached.pic.twitter.com/9PhrgeYuHv

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) September 16, 2019

The latest accusation against Kavanaugh has been outright debunked. So why is the left still moving forward with efforts to remove Kavanaugh?

The answer is because their aim has always been about preventing Kavanaugh from serving in the court due to their belief that he will attempt to outlaw abortion and repeal Roe v Wade.

The lawyer of Kavanaugh’s original accuser Christine Blasey-Ford said just weeks ago that her client’s motivation to accuse Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct was rooted in her desire to protect abortion.

Pressley’s impeachment resolution has virtually no chance of passing, as it requires a majority of the House and two-thirds of the Republican-led Senate to unseat Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court.

September 17, 2019 0

Leftist Dark Money Group Behind Supposed Grassroots ‘Impeach Kavanaugh’ Movement

By Aaron Klein

NEW YORK — Demand Justice, an organization founded by former members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and associated with a “social welfare organization” financed by billionaire activist George Soros, has played a central role in leading activism against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh based on a quickly deteriorating claim in a controversial New York Times article.

Demand Justice is fiscally sponsored by a nonprofit arm of the secretive, massively funded Arabella Advisors strategy company that pushes the interests of wealthy leftist donors. Arabella specializes in sponsoring countless dark money pop-up organizations designed to look like grassroots activist groups, as exposed in a recent extensive report by conservative watchdog Capital Research Center.

Within hours of the release of the questionable Times article, Demand Justice not only launched a social media campaign but used the piece to push their October 6 event to “protest this corrupt Supreme Court and demand an investigation of Kavanaugh.”

The event is being organized with the radical Soros-funded Women’s March and CPD Action, whose sister group, Center for Popular Democracy, is also funded by Soros.

Within less than 24 hours, Demand Justice used the Times piece to further promote their rally and renew the event’s aim “to #ImpeachKavanaugh.”

Together with the Women’s March and CPD Action, Demand Justice went on a public relations offensive against Kavanaugh utilizing the latest accusation storyline to comment in the news media.

“This new report corroborates the allegations made by Debbie Ramirez and proves the FBI investigation conducted last year was a sham from the start,” the three groups said in a statement widely picked up by the news media.

“At this point, an impeachment inquiry in the House is the only appropriate way to conduct the fact-finding that Senate Republicans refused to conduct.”

The trio called on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler to immediately launch an impeachment inquiry.

Demand Justice has since blasted out emails and other messages to supporters urging Kavanaugh’s impeachment, based in part on the Times piece.

Demand Justice has been at the forefront of anti-Kavanaugh activism. Even before President Donald Trump first announced Kavanaugh as his official nominee, Demand Justice committed to spending about $5 million to oppose any eventual Trump nominee for the Supreme Court. The organization seeks to raise $10 million in its first year.

Breitbart News reported that within less than one hour of Trump’s announcement that Kavanough was his nominee, Demand Justice had already put up the website stopkavanaugh.com, exclaiming: “We need to demand that the Senate defeat the Brett Kavanaugh nomination.”

The news media has routinely produced articles on Demand Justice protesters, with many pieces failing to inform readers that this is not a grassroots group but an organization spawned by professional organizers and tied to deep leftist funding.

Brian Fallon, the head of Demand Justice, served as press secretary for Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. The group’s digital team is headed by Gabrielle McCaffrey, who was a digital organizer for Clinton’s campaign.

In an interview with the New York Times, Fallon would not comment on the source of the group’s financing, but the newspaper noted that he was recently a featured speaker at the conference of the Democracy Alliance, a grouping of progressive donors.

Democracy Alliance’s founding donors include billionaires George Soros and Tom Steyer. Indeed, Fallon’s panel at Democracy Alliance was moderated by Sarah Knight of Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

Demand Justice is fiscally sponsored by the Sixteen Thirty Fund, one of four nonprofits run by Arabella Advisors.

The Capital Research Center’s expose documented that from 2013-2017 alone, Arabella’s four nonprofits spent a combined $1.16 billion with the aim of advancing “the political policies desired by wealthy left-wing interests through hundreds of ‘front’ groups.”

“And those interests pay well: the network’s revenues grew by an incredible 392 percent over that same period,” the report related.

“Together, these groups form an interlocking network of ‘dark money’ pop-up groups and other fiscally sponsored projects, all afloat in a half-billion-dollar ocean of cash,” states the report. “The real puppeteer, though, is Arabella Advisors, which has managed to largely conceal its role in coordinating so much of the professional Left’s infrastructure under a mask of ‘philanthropy.’”

The New York Times piece at the center of Demand Justice’s latest anti-Kavanaugh push purports to have “uncovered” a “previously unreported story” about the Supreme Court justice. The article was adapted from a forthcoming anti-Kavanaugh book by the newspaper’s reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly.

At first, the Times reported these standalone details:

A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.

The Times issued a massive correction after it was reported that the newspaper had omitted the detail — included in the book — that the female accuser does not remember the incident.

The correction reads:

An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book’s account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.

The allegation itself is “confusing” to National Review writer John McCormack, who opines:

If you take this confusing accusation in the essay at face value, it doesn’t even appear to be an allegation of assault against Kavanaugh.

If Kavanaugh’s “friends pushed his penis,” then isn’t it an allegation of wrongdoing against Kavanaugh’s “friends,” not Kavanaugh himself? Surely even a modern liberal Yalie who’s been to one of those weird non-sexual “naked parties” would recognize both the female student and Kavanaugh are both alleged victims in this alleged incident, barring an additional allegation that a college-aged Kavanaugh asked his “friends” to “push his penis.”

Despite Demand Justice’s activism and amid the collapsing Times claim, Nadler does not seem to be in a rush to impeach Kavanaugh, saying, “We have our hands full with impeaching the president right now and that’s going to take up our limited resources and time for a while.”

September 17, 2019 0

To the people paying $4,200 to see Michelle Obama talk – do you expect her to say anything interesting?

Michelle Obama might have been a ‘classy’ First Lady, but she has rarely done or said anything remarkable or even entertaining. That the media has deified her into the ultimate role model for women is depressing.

The cult of Michelle continues to grow stronger since her departure from the White House. She has just been voted the most admired woman in a worldwide opinion poll, a ranking she already holds in similar US-only surveys.

Her second autobiography, Becoming, released last November, sold over 10 million in the first six months, and stands to become the biggest-selling memoir in history, at least until her husband’s is published, likely next year.

Tickets for the additional book tour dates she has scheduled – in which she recites incidents from her book after prompts from a moderator – are on sale for $2,500 apiece for a meet-and-greet during the Newark stop and up to $4,200 for a suite. The cheapest seats are offered at over $100.

I do not begrudge her making the money – there is genuine public demand – but what makes Michelle Obama special?

Is it her life story? A middle-class A-grade student goes to a good school, a prestigious university and a top place of employment, before meeting a man and putting her career on the back-burner to focus on being a wife and mother.

Is it her personal achievements? Obama has not practiced law in a quarter of a century, and most of her jobs have been admin positions or post-office board sinecures. While in the White House she was best-known for her organic vegetable garden, and promoting politically orthodox and safe causes like eradicating child poverty, bettering education and LGBT+ rights.

Is it her rare insight? Despite being in the public eye for well over a decade, her only truly sticky quote has been “when they go low, we go high,” which is as often used ironically as it is in earnest. Her pronouncements have consisted almost exclusively of vaguely defiant or vaguely empowering or vaguely celebratory platitudes. “When girls are educated, their countries become stronger and more prosperous” or “We need to do a better job of putting ourselves higher on our own ‘to do’ list.” Even middle-schoolers would probably cock an eyebrow at this stuff if they saw it in their Facebook feed.

Is it her candidness? Obama doles a perfectly measured dose of vulnerability or openness, such as her revelations about miscarriage or discussions about how much she loves dogs, without ever threatening the edifice of her public persona, marriage or morals. She is easily more sanitized than any of the candidates in the 2020 Democratic race.

In summary, what we have here is a vanity tour from a woman who has led a comfortable and happy existence and an unremarkable professional life, giving bland ‘inspirational’ advice off a big-room stage in a scripted set-up without revealing too much of herself.

So, what’s the secret ingredient? That she was married to a man who was president for eight years? That she is the first black American woman who got to redecorate the White House?

And that is enough to lift her over 3.8 billion women on the planet.

To me, that is an indictment of US-style feelgood identity politics, where it is enough to be someone rather than do something to be considered an idol. Even if that someone is primarily famous for that most traditionalist of things – being the wife of a powerful man, a commitment that curtailed her potential.

Secondly, it illustrates the transformation of even the most serious media into partisan hype machines, with the New York Times and Washington Post squealing in the presence of Michelle like little girls at a Harry Styles autograph session. Have some self-respect.

Thirdly, it betrays the unexamined worship of the Obama legacy among supporters. It is understandable that the likely 90-percent-plus Democratic-voting audience of Michelle’s Q & A is still reeling from the contrast between her and the current occupants of the White House. But will the time ever come to question another person who was lauded more for who he represented than what he achieved – on, say, his economic complacency paired with social divisiveness at home, or his ineffectiveness abroad? Or at least admit that he helped usher in Trump in 2016, and may do so again in 2020 if a decrepit Joe Biden manages to nab the Democratic nomination riding on black voters’ goodwill from the Obama connection.

Just the whole vibe of the sickly, sycophantic and corporate Obama industry – Netflix deals and all – seems not just vapid and grating, but weirdly passé already in a world where their life truisms and political philosophies have already been proven to be inadequate. Bill and Hillary Clinton – she the most admired woman in the US for an amazing 22 years – also seemed like the perfect power couple once. Now, we view both as more rounded, flawed characters. The same reckoning can’t come soon enough for the most recent Democratic Party White House family.

In the meantime, school girls and broadsheet editors looking for positive role models can look up to women who have actually earned their fame. From Simone to Malala to Scarlett to Adele, there are plenty to pick from.

September 16, 2019 0

Fake News Epidemic New York Times, CNN, Politico Unleash Outlandish Whoppers 2020 Campaign Gets Real

CAP

JOHN NOLTE

16 Sep 2019

Thanks to CNN, Politico, and the New York Times, last week was filled with the kind of fake news that used to end prestigious media careers. No more, though. Nowadays publishing fake news is nothing less than a résumé enhancer.

Early in the week, CNN and Politico dumped two MASSIVE pieces of fake news. And then, over the weekend, the Times said “Hold my beer” with a transparently dishonest smear of Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Let’s recap…

The week opened with CNN’s fake news about how President Trump’s mishandling of classified information resulted in the CIA having to pull a key intelligence asset out of the Kremlin. We now know this never happened. Whatever intelligence mishandling it was that forced the asset’s removal, it happened during the — wait for it, wait for it — Obama administration.

The fake news came from Jim Sciutto, who, like a lot of CNN “reporters,” is a former Democrat operative with a documented history of publishing fake stories. Of course, CNN also has a long and sordid history of publishing fake news, which is why he fits right in.

Sciutto’s story was so blatantly misleading that even the far-left New York Times cried foul. As did the far-left Washington Post.

Next up: the far-left Politico, with its own fake news bonanza, this one about the Air Force rerouting planes to Scotland so Trump’s Turnberry resort can benefit from the overnight stays, which helps to line the president’s pockets.

We now know this isn’t true and that Politico deliberately removed these rather pertinent facts from is now-debunked hoax: 1) the contract to land flights at this airport was signed during the Obama administration, 2) the contract to use Turnberry for overnight stays was signed during the Obama administration, 3) only six percent of the Air Force’s overnight stays occurred at Turnberry, and 4) Turnberry’s $127 per night room rate is not only the least expensive in the area, it is hardly worth risking impeachment.

Like CNN’s fake story about the CIA, Politico’s fake news about Turnberry was debunked by the far-left Washington Post.

Neither CNN nor Politico have corrected or retracted their debunked bombshells.

By the time Friday night rolled around, by the time the weekend kicked off, there were already two eggs dripping off the media’s smug and corrupt face. So you would think that at this point the institution as a whole might want to take a few days off to regroup, lick their wounds, soul search, and figure out how to regain the trust of the public.

LOL…

Sike!

No one believes the establishment media would ever do that, at least not any citizen of the planet we call Earth.

And so, on Saturday, the New York Times went for the fake news crown, the fake news brass ring, the fake news gold medal with a hoax so bold and audacious it makes CNN and Politico look like women competing in a weightlifting contest against a guy who says he’s a gal.

To the surprise of no one, the Failing New York Times dropped a bombshell about a sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh.

We all knew this was coming. You see, the Times and the media overall are still miffed over the fact that all their other phony allegations against Kavanaugh were not only debunked, but failed to keep him off the court, so they just went ahead and invented a new one.

According to the report, a former Clinton operative told some people Kavanaugh exposed his penis during his freshman year in college. Things then got out of hand (pun intended) when one of Kavanaugh’s frat buddies pushed him, which resulted in the penis ending up in the hands of some unsuspecting woman.

We now know there are three colossal problems with this story:

1) The Clinton operative refuses to talk to the Times, refuses to confirm he saw this, which means the Times is reporting on what other people said this guy told them. In a court of law this is called hearsay and is not admissible as evidence.

But that’s the least of it. Get this:

2) The alleged victim whose alleged hand the alleged penis allegedly ended up in does not remember this happening.

3) The fake New York Times story deliberately omitted the fact that the alleged victim whose alleged hand the alleged penis allegedly ended up in does not remember this happening.

Yes, you read that correctly: The Times knew this woman did not remember being sexually assaulted and not only still ran with the story, they omitted that information! The Times deliberately hid this fact from its readers!

Eventually, the Times was shamed into updating the story with this vital piece of information that proves the story never should have been written, that it’s totally bogus.

This is what I think is happening; why the media is recklessly selling out its credibility and moral authority in an all-new frenzy…

All the reports about the Deep State’s attempted coup against President Trump are about to be released, and to try and save themselves and their lying sources, the media are hurling any kind of shit they can get their corrupt hands on as a means to distract from their corrupt role in acts of government malfeasance that make Watergate look like a water balloon fight.

The other thing is that media know the American people are no longer paying attention to them, so they are just publishing stuff to impress each other, to give each other the sugar highs they became addicted to during the Russia Collusion Hoax.

But the media are not the enemy of the people, y’all… They’re only try to deceive us, overturn our elections, take away our guns…

Nevertheless, if you think the media are desperate and corrupt liars now, wait till the 2020 campaign begins.

September 16, 2019 0

New York Times Forced to Admit Kavanaugh ‘Victim’ Doesn’t Remember Assault Nolte: I Do Not Remember Dean Baquet Sexually Assaulting me

JOHN NOLTE

16 Sep 2019

**The far-left New York Times has been shamed into adding a humiliating “correction” to its latest and now-debunked smear of Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.**

The correction admits a fairly, somewhat, kinda, sorta, maybe important piece of information about how Kavanaugh’s alleged “victim” refused to talk to the Times and doesn’t remember the alleged “assault.”

Prior to publishing the smear, the Times knew this fact and still chose to deliberately hide it from the public. And we all know why… It proves the whole story is fake news.

Now…

Did you catch that?

Did you catch what the New York Times is now admitting…?

Let me repeat it for the CNN-impaired:

Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged victim doesn’t recall being an alleged victim.

The “victim” doesn’t remember the assault.

The “victim” doesn’t remember being sexually assaulted.

She doesn’t remember it happening.

And the New York Times not only went ahead and reported the story as credible, the New York Times hid that information from its readers.

On Saturday, the failing New York Times published a piece claiming it had found a new Kavanaugh accuser. Here’s the bombshell portion:

We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. [Deborah] Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly. (We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier.)

But what the Times didn’t tell its readers is that the alleged victim of this alleged assault, the very person into whose alleged hand the alleged penis was allegedly thrust, does not recall anything about the penis incident and does not want to talk to the media.

Does that piece of information not seem somewhat pertinent to the story? And when I say “pertinent,” I of course mean “the story is totally bogus and never should have been published.”

This now-debunked bombshell is based on an upcoming book by two New York Times reporters. In the book, they do admit the alleged victim does not remember the assault. But still, knowing this, the Times deliberately left that information — the only information that matters — out of its bombshell.

And the only reason we know the Times withheld this information is because the Times got caught.

Thankfully, and the Times obviously didn’t expect this, a few conservatives received an advanced copy of the book; they located this pertinent fact and blew it up on social media. This is the only reason why, after 36 hours of attempting to deceive the public, the Times grudgingly added the following correction Sunday evening:

Editors’ Note: An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book’s account regarding as assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports the female student declined to be interviewed and fr8iends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.

The updated story reads like this and even the update is a lie…

(We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier; the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.)

It’s worth pointing out Max Stier is a Democrat operative, a former attorney for the Clintons, and who also refused to talk to the Times.

Finally, when the Times claims in its update that it “corroborated the story” that’s a lie. All the Times did was talk to a couple of people who say Stier told them about a sexual assault that the victim doesn’t even recall happening. That’s not corroboration, that’s “hearsay.”

But…

Since this is the new standard of journalism, I have something to report…

I am deeply ashamed to admit it, but I honestly don’t remember New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet sexually assaulting me.

Here’s my headline:

I Do Not Remember Dean Baquet Sexually Assaulting Me

So a Democrat operative is running around claiming he witnessed an assault that the victim herself cannot remember, but even he is not talking to the Times about it — Gee, I wonder why?

Anyway, I honestly don’t remember Dean Baquet sexually assaulting me. How can I deny something when I don’t have any memory of it ever happening?

Feel free to quote me on that.

September 16, 2019 0

Some airplanes did something?! New York Times article ‘de-terrorizes’ 9/11 attacks

On the anniversary of the most devastating terrorist attack on US soil, a story by the New York Times suggested that “airplanes” brought down the twin towers. The seeming shift of responsibility did not sit well with readers.

“18 years have passed since airplanes took aim and brought down the World Trade Center,” read a tweet from the New York Times on Wednesday. “Today families will once again gather and grieve at the site where more than 2000 people died.” Inside an accompanying article, the same bizarre sentence was repeated.

Though technological dystopia was all the rage in 2001, what with the success of ‘The Matrix’ two years earlier and the passing of Y2K after that, the 9/11 attacks were not carried out by sentient airplanes, but by terrorist hijackers. Enraged readers made sure the NYT knew that, slating the newspaper for omitting the terms ‘Islamic terrorists’ or even the less-loaded ‘Al Qaeda’ from its story.

The Times later deleted the tweet and amended its story, which, this time around, read: “Eighteen years have passed since terrorists commandeered airplanes to take aim at the World Trade Center and bring them down.” Responsibility was placed squarely with Al Qaeda in the updated article.

But why the strange phrasing in the first place? The Times did not report the recent mass shootings in Texas as the work of a disembodied AR-15. Nor does the paper attribute President Donald Trump’s executive orders to levitating pens, or climate change to fossil fuels deciding to burn themselves.

To some observers, the watered-down description of the attacks was an effort to… not offend anybody, including ordinary Muslims who risk guilt-by-association for sharing their religious beliefs with the perpetrators. “Some airplanes did something,” jibed one commenter, comparing the Times’ coverage to a much-maligned soundbite from Democratic Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar earlier this year, in which Omar summarized the attacks as “some people did something.”

To be fair, radical Islamic terrorists aren’t alone in having their deeds sanitized by the New York Times in recent days. The paper marked the 43rd anniversary of Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong’s passing on Monday with a tweet describing how Chairman Mao “began as an obscure peasant” and “died one of history’s great revolutionary figures.”

After a similar backlash, the tweet was deleted, with the paper apologizing for not providing “critical historical context;” namely the famines that occurred on Mao’s watch and his role in the 1966-1976 ‘Cultural Revolution,’ events that left tens of millions of Chinese citizens dead.

September 12, 2019 0

NEW YORK TIMES BLAMES “AIRPLANES” FOR 9/11 ATTACK

Quickly deletes tweet after furious backlash.

Paul Joseph Watson – SEPTEMBER 11, 2019

**The New York Times chose to honor the 18th anniversary of the September 11 atrocity by blaming “airplanes” for carrying out the attack.**

Yes, really.

“18 years have passed since airplanes took aim and brought down the World Trade Center,” the Times tweeted from its official account.

The tweet prompted an immediate backlash, with respondents furious the Times appeared to be absolving the terrorists of blame and pinning the responsibility on inanimate objects instead.

The newspaper later deleted the tweet and half way apologized, tweeting, “We’ve deleted an earlier tweet to this story and have edited for clarity. The story has also been updated.”

“Imagine what it takes, as a newsroom with a huge editorial process, to get 9/11 so offensively incorrect. Scumbags,” tweeted Raheem Kassam.

The Times found itself in hot water only a few days ago for praising Mao Zedong, the Communist dictator who starved 45 million of his own people to death, as a “great revolutionary leader.”

They later had to delete and clarify that tweet. This one, appearing as it does on the anniversary of 9/11, is if anything worse.

September 11, 2019 0

NYT editor’s tweets mocking Jews, Indians amid newspaper’s ‘anti-racist’ drive

A politics editor at the New York Times faces charges of anti-Semitism and bigotry after a series of old insensitive tweets surfaced online. This comes after a similar scandal with its Washington editor and leaked editorial tapes.

Breitbart News uncovered the tweets in an investigation published on Thursday, detailing a litany of offensive and racially-charged remarks from senior staff editor Tom Wright-Piersanti, who has worked at the Gray Lady for a little over five years, according to his LinkedIn profile.

Before that, on New Year’s day in 2010, Wright-Piersanti said: “I was going to say ‘Crappy Jew Year,’ but one of my resolutions is to be less anti-Semitic. So… HAPPY Jew Year. You Jews.”

The tweet has since been deleted.

In another missive dated December 2009, the future Times editor posted a photo of a vehicle with what appears to be a menorah – associated with the religious holiday of Hanukkah – on its roof, and asked “Who called the Jew police?”

Though the “Jew police” tweet was still publicly viewable when Breitbart’s story first ran, it has also since mysteriously vanished from Wright-Piersanti’s Twitter page.

The apparently anti-Semitic comments prompted the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), one of the oldest Jewish political advocacy groups in the US, to demand for the editor’s swift termination, and a review of past stories he edited.

“The Zionist Organization of America urges the New York Times to immediately dismiss this individual and to undertake a review of all of the stories that he has edited for possible antisemitic bias,” a spokesperson for ZOA told Breitbart News.

In addition to members of the Jewish faith, Wright-Piersanti’s tweets often fixated on “Indians” as well, though it’s not always clear if he is referring to Native AmericRAans or people from India.

“There are four indian guys with mohawks in this one class, and each one is a douche in his own awful way,” he tweeted in December 2009.

I hate mohawk Indians.

A number of other posts singled out Indians for ridicule or insult as well, all of which remain public on Wright-Piersanti’s page at the time of publication.

In another deleted tweet, the Times editor mused “With asian babies, is it racist to say to the parents, ‘Aw, he looks just like you!’? What if you say it before you see any pictures?”

While the Times has not yet addressed the allegations publicly, Wright-Piersanti tweeted an apology on Thursday morning, after scrubbing a number of the offending tweets from his page, which he briefly set to private.

I have deleted tweets from a decade ago that are offensive. I am deeply sorry.

— Tom Wright-Piersanti (@tomwp) August 22, 2019

Following the publication of Brietbart’s investigation, Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, weighed in on the story, tweeting “Disgusting. But we shouldn’t expect any better from the New York Times. This is who they are.”

Earlier this month, the Times demoted its deputy Washington editor for “serious lapses in judgement” in the form of tweets criticized as ‘racist.’

NYT shifts from Russiagate to racism, insisting Orange Man Still Bad

Last week, a transcript of an internal town hall meeting surfaced, showing that the newspaper deliberately decided to shift its coverage of President Donald Trump from his supposed connections to Russia to “race and other divisions.”

August 23, 2019 0

Echo Chamber: NYT, WaPo Print 11 Similar Talking Points on Same Day to Blame Trump for El Paso Terror

By Aaron Klein – AUGUST 9, 2019

NEW YORK — In separate articles on the same day, the New York Times and Washington Post each seemingly parroted the same talking points 11 times in respective articles in their zest to baselessly connect President Trump’s rhetoric and policies to an unhinged manifesto attributed to the 21-year-old accused of murdering 22 people in cold blood and injuring dozens when he opened fire in a Walmart in El Paso.

The manifesto is clearly the work of a demented mind and expressed views that are all over the map, yet both newspapers selectively cited the document to divine the El Paso shooter’s alleged motives and link the mass murder to Trump.

Earlier this week, this reporter documented the manifesto attributed to shooting suspect Patrick Wood Crusius actually shows that the author did not have a coherent political viewpoint. While the text contains racist language targeting the Hispanic community, it also evidences hatred toward what the writer labeled “average Americans” and calls for a decrease in the general American population.

Missing from much of the news media coverage is that the manifesto promotes far-left policy prescriptions including universal healthcare and a socialist-style “universal income.” Perhaps the two main themes of the document are actually anti-corporatist and eco-extremist sentiment and the shooter repeatedly labeled both Republicans and Democrats as sellouts to corporations on a host of issues.

Still, two widely cited front-page articles, both published on August 4, were printed by the New York Times and Washington Post respectively in an attempt to link Trump’s rhetoric to the shooting.

Regardless of the El Paso shooter’s motivations, Trump throughout his presidency has stoked fear and hatred of the other, whether Latino immigrants or black people living in cities or Muslims.

Although he has not directly espoused the “great replacement” theory of white supremacists, Trump has openly questioned America’s identity as a multiethnic nation, such as by encouraging migration from Nordic states as opposed to Latin America.

4 – Times:

While other leaders have expressed concern about border security and the costs of illegal immigration, Mr. Trump has filled his public speeches and Twitter feed with sometimes false, fear-stoking language even as he welcomed to the White House a corps of hard-liners, demonizers and conspiracy theorists shunned by past presidents of both parties. Because of this, Mr. Trump is ill equipped to provide the kind of unifying, healing force that other presidents projected in times of national tragedy.

Post:

In speeches and on social media, the president has capitalized on divisions of race, religion and identity as a political strategy to galvanize support among his white followers.

After yet another mass slaying, the question surrounding the president is no longer whether he will respond as other presidents once did, but whether his words contributed to the carnage.

5 – Times:

“Hate has no place in our country, and we’re going to take care of it,” the president said, declining to elaborate but promising to speak more on Monday morning. He made no mention of white supremacy or the El Paso manifesto, but instead focused on what he called “a mental illness problem.

Post:

“Hate has no place in our country, and we’re going to take care of it,” Trump said in Morristown, N.J., just before flying home to Washington. He did not respond to questions from reporters about the El Paso shooter’s manifesto but said generally that “this has been going on for years” and acknowledged that “perhaps more has to be done.”

6 – Times:

Democratic presidential candidates wasted little time on Sunday pointing the finger at Mr. Trump, arguing that he had encouraged extremism with what they called hateful language. Mr. Trump’s advisers and allies rejected that, arguing that the president’s political foes were exploiting a tragedy to further their political ambitions.

“I’m saying that President Trump has a lot to do with what happened in El Paso yesterday,” Beto O’Rourke, a Democratic presidential candidate who represented El Paso in Congress, said on “Face the Nation” on CBS. Mr. O’Rourke said Mr. Trump “sows the kind of fear, the kind of reaction that we saw in El Paso yesterday.”

Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, said it was outrageous to hold Mr. Trump responsible for the acts of a madman or suggest the president sympathized with white supremacists.

“I don’t think it’s at all fair to sit here and say that he doesn’t think that white nationalism is bad for the nation,” he said on “This Week” on ABC. “These are sick people. You cannot be a white supremacist and be normal in the head. These are sick people. You know it, I know it, the president knows it. And this type of thing has to stop. And we have to figure out a way to fix the problem, not figure out a way to lay blame.”

Post:

But some Democratic leaders on Sunday said Trump’s demagoguery makes him plainly culpable.

Beto O’Rourke, a former congressman from El Paso running for president, said it was appropriate to label Trump a white nationalist and said his rhetoric is reminiscent of Nazi Germany.

“He doesn’t just tolerate it; he encourages it, calling Mexican immigrants rapists and criminals, warning of an invasion at our border, seeking to ban all people of one religion. Folks are responding to this,” O’Rourke said on CNN. He added, “He is saying that some people are inherently defective or dangerous, reminiscent of something that you might hear in the Third Reich, not something that you expect in the United States of America.”

Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, flatly dismissed the suggestion that Trump was to blame.

“Goodness gracious, is someone really blaming the president? People are sick,” Mulvaney said on NBC. He pointed to the manifesto, adding, “If you do read that, you can see him say that he’s felt this way for a long time, from even before President Trump got elected.”

Mulvaney acknowledged that “some people don’t approve of the verbiage that the president uses,” but he argued: “People are going to hear what they want to hear. My guess is this guy’s in that parking lot out in El Paso, Texas, in that Walmart doing this even if Hillary Clinton is president.”

7 – Times:

Linking political speech, however heated, to the specific acts of ruthless mass killers is a fraught exercise, but experts on political communication said national leaders could shape an environment with their words and deeds, and bore a special responsibility to avoid inflaming individuals or groups, however unintentionally.

“The people who carry out these attacks are already violent and hateful people,” said Nathan P. Kalmoe, an assistant professor at Louisiana State University who has studied hate speech. “But top political leaders and partisan media figures encourage extremism when they endorse white supremacist ideas and play with violent language. Having the most powerful person on Earth echo their hateful views may even give extremists a sense of impunity.”

This has come up repeatedly during Mr. Trump’s presidency, whether it be the white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville, Va., or the bomber who sent explosives to Mr. Trump’s political adversaries and prominent news media figures or the gunman who stormed a Pittsburgh synagogue after ranting online about “invaders” to the United States.

Post:

Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a professor of history at New York University and expert on authoritarianism, said Trump has been strategic.

“This is a concerted attempt to construct and legitimize an ideology of hatred against nonwhite people and the idea that whites will be replaced by others,” she said. “When you have a racist in power who incites violence through his speeches, his tweets, and you add in this volatile situation of very laxly regulated arms, this is uncharted territory.”

8 – Times:

David Livingstone Smith, a philosophy professor at the University of New England and the author of a book on dehumanization of whole categories of people, said Mr. Trump had emboldened Americans whose views were seen as unacceptable in everyday society not long ago.

“This has always been part of American life,” he said. “But Trump has given people permission to say what they think. And that’s crack cocaine. That’s powerful. When someone allows you to be authentic, that’s a very, very potent thing. People have come out of the shadows.”

Post:

Leonard Zeskind, author of “Blood and Politics,” a history of the white nationalist movement, said the ugliest phenomena often develop in countries when there is a vacuum of moral leadership. Zeskind explained that white nationalism is autonomous from any political formation, but that Trump energizes its followers.

“He gives it voice. He’s their megaphone,” Zeskind said. He added, “Donald Trump, dumping on immigrants all the time, creates an atmosphere where some people interpret that to be an okay sign for violence against immigrants.”

9 – Times:

He denounces immigrant gang members as “animals” and complains that unauthorized migrants “pour into and infest” the United States.

Post:

President Trump has relentlessly used his bully pulpit to decry Latino migration as “an invasion of our country.” He has demonized undocumented immigrants as “thugs” and “animals.”

10 – Times:

Illegal immigration is a “monstrosity,” he says, while demanding that even American-born congresswomen of color “go back” to their home countries.

Post:

Last month he attacked four congresswomen of color and said they should “go back” to the countries they came from, even though three were born in the United States and all four are U.S. citizens.

11 – Times:

At a Florida rally in May, the president asked the crowd for ideas to block migrants from crossing the border.

“How do you stop these people?” he asked.

“Shoot them!” one man shouted.

The crowd laughed and Mr. Trump smiled. “That’s only in the Panhandle you can get away with that stuff,” he said. “Only in the Panhandle.

Post:

“How do you stop these people? You can’t,” Trump lamented at a May rally in Panama City Beach, Fla. Someone in the crowd yelled back one idea: “Shoot them.” The audience of thousands cheered and Trump smiled. Shrugging off the suggestion, he quipped, “Only in the Panhandle can you get away with that statement.”

August 9, 2019 0

Hell freezes over? New York Times wants closer relationship with Russia, congratulates Trump

The New York Times’ editorial board, fresh from peddling anti-Russia conspiracies for two years, has made a remarkable about-turn. Now the paper wants closer relations with the Kremlin, all to thwart China’s ambitions.

‘Russiagate’ has maintained an iron grip on American political discourse for two years now, even after Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report cleared President Donald Trump of conspiring with the Kremlin to steal the 2016 US election. In the media, the public has been treated to nightly conspiracy theories and bizarre connect-the-dots articles claiming to prove collusion; and lawmakers have crafted ever more draconian sanctions bills against Russia and have slotted opposition to Russia into their campaign messages.

Meanwhile, Moscow and Beijing have looked to each other, holding joint military exercises and upping their trade volume to more than $100 billion in 2018. Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev recently announced plans to build a new, 2,000km-long highway linking Europe and China, while President Vladimir Putin has been mulling connecting Russia’s Northern Sea Route with China’s Maritime Silk Road, an ambitious global trade route linking China with ports in Southeast Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East.

The idea of closer Moscow/Beijing cooperation clearly worries the New York Times’ editorial board. In an op-edpublished on Sunday, the board wrote that “President Trump is correct to try to establish a sounder relationship with Russia and peel it away from China” – itself a remarkable compliment from a paper that ran op-eds titled “Donald Trump Hates America,” and “Trump is Racist to the Bone” in the last five days.

The board then suggested that the US could strengthen its cooperation with Russia in space exploration and Arctic cleanup – areas untainted by ‘Russiagate’. In addition, new arms control treaties could be a step towards geopolitical cooperation between the two rival superpowers.

All valid and worthy points, but from the New York Times? Yes, we’re talking about the same newspaper that last year called Trump a “treasonous traitor” ahead of his meeting with Putin in Helsinki. Instead of seeking rapprochement then, the paper argued that Trump should “be directing all resources at his disposal to punish Russia.”

We’re talking about the same New York Times that dubbed Trump “Putin’s Lackey” and released a mocking videodetailing a ‘love story’ between Trump and Putin, laden with homoerotic overtones and culminating in a tongue-locking kiss between the two leaders. It’s funny because they’re gay, see?

The piece surprised many, like pundit George Szamuely, who wrote that Washington has “demonized Russia and blamed it for every problem besetting [the] US,” while the Times “has for years berated Trump for advocating this perfectly sensible policy, at times suggesting that he was doing so only because he was Putin’s agent and a traitor to the United States.”

Bear in mind that the Times’ editorial board does not hold the same opinions as its revolving cast of op-ed writers. Still, for a newspaper whose writers almost unanimously despise the US president, Sunday’s op-ed represents a shocking repudiation of two years of anti-Russia, anti-Trump static.

Perhaps the outlet that often voiced the ideas of the American establishment has finally realized that the ‘Russiagate’ horse is too long dead for another flogging? Or maybe the Times saw it’s time for a new kind of politics: the politics of Detente. Either way, the change is a surprising one.

July 22, 2019 0