The New York Times: More risible and intolerable by the day
The paper can't even communicate the basic facts of a story anymore.
It’s outrageous that we continue to let America's Pravda set the national news agenda through its woke, corrupt and insane lens. Clearly, it’s time to turn to agenda-setting over to The St. Joseph News-Press, The Waxahachie Daily Light, The Antelope Valley Press or some other serious journalistic enterprise.
Even reporting on a simple grand jury investigation is too much for the Times.
A grand jury is investigating whether Trump grifted $250 million from his supporters to fight a stolen election, then pocketed the money. The end.
But the Times can’t convey that information because it would prefer to keep arguing about whether or not the election was stolen, something utterly irrelevant to whether Trump defrauded donors.
You can start a PAC to prove John Fetterman is a Kanamit. (Probably true.)
If you spend the PAC money trying to prove that he is - no problem! If you spend the money on personal business ventures, a new private plane, or an addition to Mar-a-Lago, that’s fraud. The Times’ opinion of whether or not Fetterman is a Kanamit has nothing to do with the existence of fraud.
But the Times can’t explain the investigation into Trump’s post-election PAC because it’s too busy reminding readers that Trump’s claim that the election was stolen is WRONG! FALSE! MISINFORMATION!
From the Times:
“A federal grand jury in Washington is examining the formation of — and spending by — a PAC created by Donald J. Trump after his loss in the 2020 election as he was raising millions of dollars by baselessly* asserting that the results had been marred by widespread voting fraud.”
Not relevant, New York Times.
“[The] Save America PAC and Mr. Trump’s campaign raised $250 million after the election by claiming they were fighting widespread fraud …”
Should the rest of this sentence be:
a) … but did not spend any of the money fighting election fraud;
b) … but used the money on projects unrelated to election fraud;
If you guessed c), you are a Times reader and should stop this very minute.