As Jeff Tiedrich points out, NYT gives the game away with this bit: "And it was hardly the only time Mr. Trump has seemed confused, forgetful, incoherent or disconnected from reality lately. In fact, it happens so often these days that it no longer even generates much attention."
Over and over again we have seen them write ONE story on some Trumpian outrage, then wash their hands of additional coverage because "old news." I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.
Not that its not welcome but it just seem so contrived with the favorite son Baker directed to lift the embargo on Trump's mental state - within prescribed parameters. It just doesn't feel like journalism. It may not be too little for this election if it really does open the flood gates. Harris-Walz are running a phenomenal campaign but this provides a significant boost. Sadly, its too late. The NYT and corp media are complicit in Trump's rise, his election and the havoc wreaked on our democracy. We can work to fix it but we can't undo it the damage wrought by this man.
Sad that the NYT muddied their name by waiting till almost too late to publish. I don't blame Baker et al for any of it. I blame the Publisher who realizes that he's waited too long and too late to release his reporters. Very sad.
I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for this to be daily front page news across the spectrum of the corporate media. In fact, I would doubt that we will see much more about it in the NYT. They will be thinking that they did the story. Now they can move on. They also did two stories in the Sunday Magazine that they will believe absolve them of all the sanewashing - one about Trump's probable abuse of the justice system and one about the Christian Nationalist billionaires in Texas that are pouring money and MAGAs into Trump.
Grossly overdue. That said, if Peter Baker -- who, as you point out, is a publisher's favorite -- didn't feel comfortable writing this until now, I can't imagine that any other Times reporter could have written it sooner. We'll see if it's too late or not, but I honestly don't think it will change many minds about Trump. What it might do is motivate some people who already oppose Trump but weren't planning to vote to go ahead and vote for Harris.
It's a step. But the reluctance to treat him with kid gloves because he is a candidate for President is still palpable. It shouldn't be. They should all be pointing out that he is not capable of tying his own shoes let alone being President of the United State. J.D. is no more capable than Trump is.
They didn’t hesitate to take off those gloves when Hillary was running. Or when they decided Biden needed to go because they decided he was too old even though he was — and is — sane.
Please push this on your next 2way. Sean gets away with false equivalencies, charm (yes, even some charm), and some keen insight. This morning, Sean tried balancing the scales of Harris' faults with Trumps. Please write and talk about this. False equivalencies are something the D's have done a terrible job lacking any rebuttal. For all of Harris' weaknesses in policy and speaking, please use your own scales on the next 2way.
The Baker piece was OK as far as it went, but better still- WAY better - would be more attention to the Jack Smith filing and its (mildly) redacted release. There's enough newish material in the document to keep Peter Baker, Charlie Savage, Jonathan Swan, et al busy for the next couple of weeks-worth of updated and meaty stories.
Sure, tRump's a demented POS, but let's spell out his previous actions up to and including Jan6, 2021, and how he, his campaign, and a broad collection of MAGA-fied election officials are looking for a rerun in Nov 5, and the weeks following.
My sentiments exactly. Jack Smith’s case has been all but ignored. And when it was being reported on the attention was directed to Trump’s so-what attitude towards Mike Pence. That shouldn’t have surprised anyone, and certainly not the media my. They should be talking about Trump‘s taking action to steal the 2020 election even before all the votes were counted in November. If this were the 1970s, the media and the voters too would be demanding his head.
NYT has abhorred the word "lie" for decades. Even when someone said under oath in a court case that he lied, the NYT ran the AP story, changing "lied" to "stated falsely.:"
Dan makes a good poing. On Point today discusses 'sanewashing" Trump --by the medial-- interviewing the New Republic's editor. It does not omit criticisms of Harris. Earlier this morning, I also listened to Dan on "2way". I would recommend reading Dan's columns with the other media coverages. (2way is available on YouTube, Zoom, among others). Today's On Point detailed instances of the media not covering issues, not just mental health issues. Fear mongering, incendiary, lies, and racial purity arguments have been used so often by Trump that they have stopped being newsworthy. And the journalism profession remains stuck in figuring out how to cover Trumps' words, while dutifully covering Harris/Walz's own narrative issues. Insightful discussion on growth of Fox media over past 30 year.s
I cancelled WAPO for similar reasons. The both sides BS finally was too much for me to stand.
The problem as I see it is his Republican enablers.
TFG wouldn’t have gotten nearly as far it weren’t for them. The Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society and Mitch McConnell have all contributed to the division and radicalization of the GOP. Only the complete repudiation and destruction of that party will bring about a new, more moderate GOP.
As Jeff Tiedrich points out, NYT gives the game away with this bit: "And it was hardly the only time Mr. Trump has seemed confused, forgetful, incoherent or disconnected from reality lately. In fact, it happens so often these days that it no longer even generates much attention."
Over and over again we have seen them write ONE story on some Trumpian outrage, then wash their hands of additional coverage because "old news." I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.
Not that its not welcome but it just seem so contrived with the favorite son Baker directed to lift the embargo on Trump's mental state - within prescribed parameters. It just doesn't feel like journalism. It may not be too little for this election if it really does open the flood gates. Harris-Walz are running a phenomenal campaign but this provides a significant boost. Sadly, its too late. The NYT and corp media are complicit in Trump's rise, his election and the havoc wreaked on our democracy. We can work to fix it but we can't undo it the damage wrought by this man.
Sad that the NYT muddied their name by waiting till almost too late to publish. I don't blame Baker et al for any of it. I blame the Publisher who realizes that he's waited too long and too late to release his reporters. Very sad.
I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for this to be daily front page news across the spectrum of the corporate media. In fact, I would doubt that we will see much more about it in the NYT. They will be thinking that they did the story. Now they can move on. They also did two stories in the Sunday Magazine that they will believe absolve them of all the sanewashing - one about Trump's probable abuse of the justice system and one about the Christian Nationalist billionaires in Texas that are pouring money and MAGAs into Trump.
Grossly overdue. That said, if Peter Baker -- who, as you point out, is a publisher's favorite -- didn't feel comfortable writing this until now, I can't imagine that any other Times reporter could have written it sooner. We'll see if it's too late or not, but I honestly don't think it will change many minds about Trump. What it might do is motivate some people who already oppose Trump but weren't planning to vote to go ahead and vote for Harris.
Still reluctant to trust Peter Baker.
It's a step. But the reluctance to treat him with kid gloves because he is a candidate for President is still palpable. It shouldn't be. They should all be pointing out that he is not capable of tying his own shoes let alone being President of the United State. J.D. is no more capable than Trump is.
They didn’t hesitate to take off those gloves when Hillary was running. Or when they decided Biden needed to go because they decided he was too old even though he was — and is — sane.
Dan,
Please push this on your next 2way. Sean gets away with false equivalencies, charm (yes, even some charm), and some keen insight. This morning, Sean tried balancing the scales of Harris' faults with Trumps. Please write and talk about this. False equivalencies are something the D's have done a terrible job lacking any rebuttal. For all of Harris' weaknesses in policy and speaking, please use your own scales on the next 2way.
Too little Too late.
The Baker piece was OK as far as it went, but better still- WAY better - would be more attention to the Jack Smith filing and its (mildly) redacted release. There's enough newish material in the document to keep Peter Baker, Charlie Savage, Jonathan Swan, et al busy for the next couple of weeks-worth of updated and meaty stories.
Sure, tRump's a demented POS, but let's spell out his previous actions up to and including Jan6, 2021, and how he, his campaign, and a broad collection of MAGA-fied election officials are looking for a rerun in Nov 5, and the weeks following.
My sentiments exactly. Jack Smith’s case has been all but ignored. And when it was being reported on the attention was directed to Trump’s so-what attitude towards Mike Pence. That shouldn’t have surprised anyone, and certainly not the media my. They should be talking about Trump‘s taking action to steal the 2020 election even before all the votes were counted in November. If this were the 1970s, the media and the voters too would be demanding his head.
== it failed to use the word “lie” even once.==
NYT has abhorred the word "lie" for decades. Even when someone said under oath in a court case that he lied, the NYT ran the AP story, changing "lied" to "stated falsely.:"
Maybe because they knew they had been guilty of spreading lies — Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, Chinagate, WMD…….
Don’t hold your breath. Corporate media thinks he’s just kidding.
Too little, too late.
Dan makes a good poing. On Point today discusses 'sanewashing" Trump --by the medial-- interviewing the New Republic's editor. It does not omit criticisms of Harris. Earlier this morning, I also listened to Dan on "2way". I would recommend reading Dan's columns with the other media coverages. (2way is available on YouTube, Zoom, among others). Today's On Point detailed instances of the media not covering issues, not just mental health issues. Fear mongering, incendiary, lies, and racial purity arguments have been used so often by Trump that they have stopped being newsworthy. And the journalism profession remains stuck in figuring out how to cover Trumps' words, while dutifully covering Harris/Walz's own narrative issues. Insightful discussion on growth of Fox media over past 30 year.s
I cancelled WAPO for similar reasons. The both sides BS finally was too much for me to stand.
The problem as I see it is his Republican enablers.
TFG wouldn’t have gotten nearly as far it weren’t for them. The Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society and Mitch McConnell have all contributed to the division and radicalization of the GOP. Only the complete repudiation and destruction of that party will bring about a new, more moderate GOP.
That may take decades.
I hope I live long enough to see it.
It was three years into his presidency before I saw a reference to any declension of “lie.”
Trump lies constantly and always has. Nobody cares anymore.