FaKe neWS neWs!
The NYT is OK with a few bright lights but tries too hard to be “respectable”
I started following WaPo.
It doesn’t pussy foot around and in these pussy grabbing times, moderation gets you a stolen Supreme Court Seat and a lost Presidential election
Here added this:
Go look for yourself. I get this newsletter along with other feeds
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/?utm_term=.094e0b696a07&wpisrc=nl_todayworld&wpmm=1
No doubt Dumblefuck will take credit for this too.
Trump really is Triumph the Insult Dog. He Insults and the target of his insults often gets the triumph!
Was just reading the NYT about the Oscars and the big SNAFU. Wow.
Anyway, OT, but this is awesome. Wolves were reintroduced in Yellowstone, and you won’t believe the ecological change that occurred!
OT but I fully expect FOX News, Breitbart, Drudge and all the other Right Wing asshole fake news to give George W. Bush entire credit for the drone strike that killed an important Al Qaida terrorist. After all, if it hadnt been for the groundwork his CIA did, this obviously could never have happened.
If there is any silver lining in the “American carnage” that is the Trump administration, it is the resurgence of journalism, respect for investigative reporting, and the onset of the consolidation of opposition to the Repub agenda and policies.
NYT would be flogging Clinton crapola had she won. I’m not impressed.
IF any of that happens… Haven’t seen much of it yet
I wouldn’t call it a resurgence of journalism or respect for investigative reporting…it’s simply chasing after $$$$$$$$$$$
"Trump is the best thing to happen to the Times’ subscription strategy, yes… Every time he tweets it drives subscriptions wildly. I mean c’mon, why do you think I had my reporters spend so much time chasing Hillary’s “clouds and shadows” instead of focusing on the guy who’s spent his entire life right under our noses? Do you really have to think hard about why I refused to even print one line about the FBI’s investigation of the Trump-Russia thing? You think that President Clinton would have driven up subscriptions? Who gives a shit that we helped drive the narrative that Hillary was corrupt? You think my family is going to suffer under Trump? You think I’ll have to give up taking long vacations in Europe? I make so much money already that Bannon can destroy every public school system in the country and it won’t affect my kids one whit—you think they go to public schools? LOL. You think I care Trump is destroying the EPA? You think I have to live within 1000 miles of heavily polluted minority neighborhoods? You think my family will have any trouble traveling overseas? You liberals don’t get it, do you—the Sulzbergers and I will make mad bank under Trump, and now that we can play the role of the loyal opposition, you’ll just open up your wallets to us. Again.”
Well, as long as they’re making a buck, I guess it’s all worth it…
The only people subscribing are people who don’t move their lips when they read.
You know, what Trumpanzees call “elitists.”
Donald,
The Grey Lady thanks you bigly!
My news knows more than your gnus knows? Nu?
NRA: We liked The Black Guy as POTUS. He kept on taking our guns and people kept buying…
O/T slightly
You do know that reading was first done out loud? Bet it was some noisy back in the day when librarians couldn’t go SHHHHHHH!!!
If you are implying that subvocalization=stupidity, you are way off base.
Trump has railed against the New York Times since the campaign, along with other prominent news outlets,
