Thank God someone is hitting back. The NY Times obsession with promoting the phony email scandal has just been outrageous.
Predictably the Times claims that Brock is just a biased pro Hillary opportunist. But they themselves can hardly hide behind such a ad hominem response because while they just dismiss any criticism as the critics being in the tank for Hillary they are hardly clean in getting in bed with the author of Clinton's Cash a piece of GOP opposition research.
Well if the Times is so above board they shouldn't mind a little of the harsh light on themselves they so merrily put on Hillary.
"David Brock’s war against the New York Times just went nuclear — and the paper is responding with equal fury."
"Brock, the former right-wing journalist-turned-pro-Clinton crusader, takes aim at a top New York Times editor in a soon-to-be released book obtained by POLITICO. In the book, titled "Killing the Messenger: The Right-Wing Plot to Derail Hillary Clinton and Hijack Your Government,” Brock accuses senior politics editor and former Washington bureau chief Carolyn Ryan of helping to turn the paper into a “megaphone for conservative propaganda” by unfairly targeting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton."
"The founder of liberal watchdog groups Media Matters and Correct the Record casts Bill and Hillary Clinton, whom he tormented in the 1990s as a reporter with the American Spectator, as personal and political angels who offered him access to some of the Democratic Party’s biggest donors."
Predictably the Times claims that Brock is just a biased pro Hillary opportunist. But they themselves can hardly hide behind such a ad hominem response because while they just dismiss any criticism as the critics being in the tank for Hillary they are hardly clean in getting in bed with the author of Clinton's Cash a piece of GOP opposition research.
Well if the Times is so above board they shouldn't mind a little of the harsh light on themselves they so merrily put on Hillary.
"David Brock’s war against the New York Times just went nuclear — and the paper is responding with equal fury."
"Brock, the former right-wing journalist-turned-pro-Clinton crusader, takes aim at a top New York Times editor in a soon-to-be released book obtained by POLITICO. In the book, titled "Killing the Messenger: The Right-Wing Plot to Derail Hillary Clinton and Hijack Your Government,” Brock accuses senior politics editor and former Washington bureau chief Carolyn Ryan of helping to turn the paper into a “megaphone for conservative propaganda” by unfairly targeting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton."
"The founder of liberal watchdog groups Media Matters and Correct the Record casts Bill and Hillary Clinton, whom he tormented in the 1990s as a reporter with the American Spectator, as personal and political angels who offered him access to some of the Democratic Party’s biggest donors."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOY4e53h
Notice how Politico is taking sides too. Just because he's pointing out the long time unfair treatment of the Clintons this means he's claiming they are 'personal and political angels.' Which is not true. You can defend someone against a political hatchet job without claiming that the victim is an angel.
Maybe Politico can tell us who in politics is an angel? Let me guess-Jeb Bush?
Politico like most of the Beltway Press has happily followed the Times' anti Clinton clown car.
Politico continues to try a stealth defense of the Times:
"But he uses the book as a platform to attack the Times — whose editorial board endorsed Clinton over Barack Obama in 2008 — over its approach towards the Clintons from the Whitewater investigations of the 1990s to the current coverage of Hillary Clinton’s private email server."
Notice how Politico is taking sides too. Just because he's pointing out the long time unfair treatment of the Clintons this means he's claiming they are 'personal and political angels.' Which is not true. You can defend someone against a political hatchet job without claiming that the victim is an angel.
Maybe Politico can tell us who in politics is an angel? Let me guess-Jeb Bush?
Politico like most of the Beltway Press has happily followed the Times' anti Clinton clown car.
Politico continues to try a stealth defense of the Times:
"But he uses the book as a platform to attack the Times — whose editorial board endorsed Clinton over Barack Obama in 2008 — over its approach towards the Clintons from the Whitewater investigations of the 1990s to the current coverage of Hillary Clinton’s private email server."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOZ3OvWq
As Politco surely realizes the editorial board is one thing, a big shot like Carolyn Ryan is way above the lowly editorial writers. So that's neither here nor there.
"The 52-year-old Brock singles out Ryan, who directs the Times’ political coverage, for refusing to publish in full a Clinton spokesman’s response to the paper’s March scoop detailing Clinton’s use of a “homebrew” email server instead of her official State Department email account."
“Ryan held forth to colleagues that the response from [spokesman Nick Merrill] had been edited down to a few stray phrases because she — Carolyn Ryan — believed it was a lie — and that the Clintons just lie,” Brock writes, citing unnamed sources inside the Times New York newsroom.
“She has a hard-on for Hillary,” Brock quotes an anonymous Times source telling him. “She wants that coonskin nailed to the wall.”
As Politco surely realizes the editorial board is one thing, a big shot like Carolyn Ryan is way above the lowly editorial writers. So that's neither here nor there.
"The 52-year-old Brock singles out Ryan, who directs the Times’ political coverage, for refusing to publish in full a Clinton spokesman’s response to the paper’s March scoop detailing Clinton’s use of a “homebrew” email server instead of her official State Department email account."
“Ryan held forth to colleagues that the response from [spokesman Nick Merrill] had been edited down to a few stray phrases because she — Carolyn Ryan — believed it was a lie — and that the Clintons just lie,” Brock writes, citing unnamed sources inside the Times New York newsroom.
“She has a hard-on for Hillary,” Brock quotes an anonymous Times source telling him. “She wants that coonskin nailed to the wall.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOZkV1iU
I'd love for Ms. Ryan to give us the name of the politicians she says don't lie or lie a lot less than the Clintons-let me guess, Jeb Bush, who also used government emails and handed over far less of his emails than Hillary did?
Again, the Times has nothing to say except an ad hominem attack on Brock as a partisan opportunist.
"A spokesperson for the paper — responding to inquiries sent to Ryan — emphatically denied Brock’s allegations and accused him of embarking on a politically motivated crusade to discredit accurate, fair-minded reporting."
"David Brock is an opportunist and a partisan who specializes in personal attacks,” Eileen Murphy told POLITICO in an email.
Right anyone who defends Hillary Clinton is engaging in 'personal attacks.' Meanwhile The Times financially promotes Clinton's Cash-which allegedly isn't a personal attack?
“We've seen him lash out at some of our aggressive coverage of important political figures and it's unsurprising that he has now turned personal. He's wrong on all counts,” she added.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOasduNv
Your 'aggressive coverage' has been based on opposition GOP research which was written by-a partisan, opportunist. However, the author of Clinton's Cash is biased against Hillary so he's ok.
"To Brock, these weren’t isolated missteps by an honest news gathering operation but evidence of a decades-long pattern of bias that also included the decision to enter a publishing agreement with the conservative author of “Clinton Cash,” which detailed the fundraising activities of the family’s charitable foundation."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOcS6MEF
Here is Brock's book You can pre-order now-it will be available in a few days: Sept 15
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Messenger-Right-Wing-Hillary-Government/dp/1455533769/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1441941325&sr=8-1&keywords=david+brock
Here is that hit job on the Clitnons that Ms. Ryan saw fit to help publish
http://www.amazon.com/Clinton-Cash-Foreign-Governments-Businesses-ebook/dp/B00Q33PRDS/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1441941468&sr=1-1&keywords=Clinton%27s+cash
Look at both books and you tell me how it is that Brock is the one engaging in personal attacks.
"Still, it’s not the first time Ryan has been accused of being anti-Clinton by pro-Clinton allies. The Daily Beast’s Lloyd Grove delved into the Times/Clinton relationship and how many Clinton allies claim Ryan is out to get Clinton just last week."
I'd love for Ms. Ryan to give us the name of the politicians she says don't lie or lie a lot less than the Clintons-let me guess, Jeb Bush, who also used government emails and handed over far less of his emails than Hillary did?
Again, the Times has nothing to say except an ad hominem attack on Brock as a partisan opportunist.
"A spokesperson for the paper — responding to inquiries sent to Ryan — emphatically denied Brock’s allegations and accused him of embarking on a politically motivated crusade to discredit accurate, fair-minded reporting."
"David Brock is an opportunist and a partisan who specializes in personal attacks,” Eileen Murphy told POLITICO in an email.
Right anyone who defends Hillary Clinton is engaging in 'personal attacks.' Meanwhile The Times financially promotes Clinton's Cash-which allegedly isn't a personal attack?
“We've seen him lash out at some of our aggressive coverage of important political figures and it's unsurprising that he has now turned personal. He's wrong on all counts,” she added.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOasduNv
Your 'aggressive coverage' has been based on opposition GOP research which was written by-a partisan, opportunist. However, the author of Clinton's Cash is biased against Hillary so he's ok.
"To Brock, these weren’t isolated missteps by an honest news gathering operation but evidence of a decades-long pattern of bias that also included the decision to enter a publishing agreement with the conservative author of “Clinton Cash,” which detailed the fundraising activities of the family’s charitable foundation."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOcS6MEF
Here is Brock's book You can pre-order now-it will be available in a few days: Sept 15
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Messenger-Right-Wing-Hillary-Government/dp/1455533769/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1441941325&sr=8-1&keywords=david+brock
Here is that hit job on the Clitnons that Ms. Ryan saw fit to help publish
http://www.amazon.com/Clinton-Cash-Foreign-Governments-Businesses-ebook/dp/B00Q33PRDS/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1441941468&sr=1-1&keywords=Clinton%27s+cash
Look at both books and you tell me how it is that Brock is the one engaging in personal attacks.
"Still, it’s not the first time Ryan has been accused of being anti-Clinton by pro-Clinton allies. The Daily Beast’s Lloyd Grove delved into the Times/Clinton relationship and how many Clinton allies claim Ryan is out to get Clinton just last week."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOg2nnTp
"[Clinton ally and editor of the liberal-leaning National Memo Joe] Conason and others said certain unidentified Times reporters have privately expressed concern about the Washington bureau chief’s championing of aggressive, occasionally damaging reporting about the Democratic frontrunner,” Grove wrote.
"The Times, led by reporter Michael Schmidt, has mostly led the pack on the server story. Clinton’s use of a private email account — which may have been used to receive classified emails — prompted a Department of Justice investigation and raised new questions about her candor, transparency and trustworthiness. Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has vaulted ahead of Clinton in recent New Hampshire polls and tied her in Iowa, where she had held a 20-plus point lead weeks ago."
"Moreover, her weakness — and questions about Clinton’s viability in a general election — has enticed Vice President Joe Biden into a seriously considering another presidential run despite a lack of campaign cash or infrastructure."
"[Clinton ally and editor of the liberal-leaning National Memo Joe] Conason and others said certain unidentified Times reporters have privately expressed concern about the Washington bureau chief’s championing of aggressive, occasionally damaging reporting about the Democratic frontrunner,” Grove wrote.
"The Times, led by reporter Michael Schmidt, has mostly led the pack on the server story. Clinton’s use of a private email account — which may have been used to receive classified emails — prompted a Department of Justice investigation and raised new questions about her candor, transparency and trustworthiness. Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has vaulted ahead of Clinton in recent New Hampshire polls and tied her in Iowa, where she had held a 20-plus point lead weeks ago."
"Moreover, her weakness — and questions about Clinton’s viability in a general election — has enticed Vice President Joe Biden into a seriously considering another presidential run despite a lack of campaign cash or infrastructure."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/david-brock-new-york-times-hell-213484#ixzz3lOgmOT3J
Note how Politico sounds kind of defensive. They have piled on Hillary following the Times and the rest of the Beltway media pack.
Note how Politico sounds kind of defensive. They have piled on Hillary following the Times and the rest of the Beltway media pack.
The issue of how Hillary's poll numbers are going is really besides the point. Biden sure didn't sound like he wants to run tonight on the Stephen Colbert Show. But Politico and the rest of the pack keep pushing on that string as hard as they can. They are desperate to prove she's in terrible trouble.
As to the server-this line that it 'may have been used to receive classified emails' shows you how they are trying to spin this. Why not just say there is no proof at this point that there was any classified information? And the point about the 'private server' is besides the point as you aren't allowed to receive classified information on government emails either.
At the end of the day, the Times can claim that there publishing Clinton's Cash and putting out false information about Hillary being investigated they later had to take back is just part of their fair and balanced reporting-just like Fox is fair and balanced!
But if so they should have no problem with Brock's shedding some light on them. Or can they only dish it but can't take it?
As to the server-this line that it 'may have been used to receive classified emails' shows you how they are trying to spin this. Why not just say there is no proof at this point that there was any classified information? And the point about the 'private server' is besides the point as you aren't allowed to receive classified information on government emails either.
At the end of the day, the Times can claim that there publishing Clinton's Cash and putting out false information about Hillary being investigated they later had to take back is just part of their fair and balanced reporting-just like Fox is fair and balanced!
But if so they should have no problem with Brock's shedding some light on them. Or can they only dish it but can't take it?
No comments:
Post a Comment