New York Times

New York Times on Memorial Day Weekend: ‘Why Does the U.S. Military Celebrate White Supremacy?’

The New York Times published an editorial on the first day of Memorial Day weekend asking: “Why Does the U.S. Military Celebrate White Supremacy?” The article‘s byline is the entire editorial board, and it is accompanied by an image of a bullet shaped like a Ku Klux Klan robe. The central complaint of the article is that there are U.S. military bases named after Confederate Army officers: This same toxic legacy clings to the 10 United States military installations across the South that were named for Confederate Army officers during the first half of the 20th century. Apologists often describe the names as a necessary gesture of reconciliation in the wake of the Civil War. In truth, the namings reflect a federal embrace of white supremacy that found its most poisonous expression in military installations where black servicemen were deliberately placed under the command of white Southerners — who were said to better “understand” Negroes — and confined to substandard housing, segregated transportation systems and even “colored only” seating in movie houses. The editorial further claims that “The federal government embraced pillars of the white supremacist movement when it named military bases in the South.” It rejects the argument — offered by the U.S. Army during the Obama administration that “there was no need to expunge Confederate base names because the names were merely ‘historic’ and ‘represent individuals, not causes or ideologies.’” The editorial also claims that the names were adopted “as part of broader accommodation in which the military embraced stringent segregation so as not to offend Southerners.” The South has historically contributed disproportionately to the ranks of the U.S. military, and continues to do so today: in fiscal year 2017, it contained 33 percent of the nation’s young adult population, but provided 41 percent of the nation’s military enlistees. The Times provides no other example of the U.S. military “celebrating white supremacy.”

Of ALL the days in a given year that the extremely liberal, agenda-driven New York Times chose to print such a piece, they chose Memorial Day; a day we as Americans set aside to remember military service members who have made the ultimate sacrifice.  This is beyond disgusting and low-class on the part of their editorial board.  It was a cheap shot, and exposes these nauseating, un-patriotic tools for who they really are.  Shame on them.  If you have a subscription to that rag, NOW would be a really good time to cancel it.

NY Times Admits: Tight Labor Market Raises U.S. Wages on Dairy Farms

President Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration in the United States is producing higher wages and better working conditions on American dairy farms, the New York Times admits. Though 1.5 million legal immigrants continue to be admitted to the country every year, and illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border soars to historic levels, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency efforts to go after employers who hire illegal aliens are proving to be an economic surplus for lower-wage workers. The latest New York Times report on immigration details complaints from dairy farmers who argue that they needed illegal aliens to survive as a viable business. Recent ICE raids of dairy farms, they claim, have made dairy farming more difficult as they can no longer readily rely on cheaper, foreign workers. Dairy farm workers, on the other hand, are seeing the benefits of Trump’s “Hire American” tight labor market through increased wages and better working conditions: Without a legal alternative to informal migrant labor, the competition between dairy farms to retain migrant workers is so fierce that farm owners, once notorious for underpaying and mistreating workers, are now improving working conditions and wages to entice employees to stay on their farms, workers said. Victor Cortez is an immigrant who has worked on a dairy farm in western New York for 18 years. A few years ago, farm owners “wouldn’t let us leave the farm,” he said, adding, “They wouldn’t pay us as much as they promised they would.” “But the good thing about it now,” he said, “is that we get paid more and this farmer is good to me.” For decades, a flooded labor market for America’s working and middle class due to mass legal and illegal immigration has produced generations of low-wage workers, stagnant salaries, and a cheaper labor economy — a benefit to employers at the expense of American workers. Center for Immigration Studies Director Mark Krikorian said that rather than U.S. dairy farms relying on an endless flow of cheaper, foreign workers, the federal government ought to provide subsidized loans for smaller dairy farmers to invest in robots and machines that can do the work more efficiently and without Americans having to subsidize the cost of illegal alien labor. A Bloomberg report from 2015 highlighted the effectiveness of dairy farmers mechanizing: A recent analysis by Goldman Sachs revealed how Trump’s tightened labor market for America’s working and middle class helped grow wages by four percent in 12 months. ICE has played a crucial role in carrying out Trump’s “Hire American” economic nationalist agenda by indirectly reducing the foreign competition, which U.S. workers have been subjected to. Last fiscal year, for example, ICE agents deported more than a quarter of a million illegal aliens, including more than 95,000 deportations of illegal aliens who were living in the interior of the country. Currently, the nation’s Washington, DC-imposed policy on mass legal immigration — where about 1.5 million unskilled legal immigrants are admitted to the U.S. every year — is a boon to corporate executives, Wall Street, big business, and multinational conglomerates, as working and middle-class Americans have their wealth redistributed to the country’s top earners through wage stagnation. Research by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has discovered that immigration to the country shifts about $500 billion in wages away from working and middle-class Americans to new arrivals and economic elites.

New York Times: Trump’s Iran Sanctions ‘Working’; Foreign Policy ‘Success’

The New York Times gave President Donald Trump credit for oil sanctions on Iran, which it said had been successful in pressuring the regime without raising oil prices. In an article by Cliffor Krauss titled, “Trump Hit Iran With Oil Sanctions. So Far, They’re Working,” the Times reported that Trump had defied foreign policy experts and achieved what few of them would have thought possible. The Times noted: “When President Trump announced in May that he was going to withdraw the United States from the nuclear agreement that the Obama administration and five other countries negotiated with Iran in 2015 and reimpose sanctions on the country, the decision was fraught with potential disaster. If Mr. Trump’s approach worked too well, oil prices would spike and hurt the American economy. If it failed, international companies would continue trading with Iran, leaving the Islamic Republic unscathed, defiant and free to restart its nuclear program. But the policy has been effective without either of those nasty consequences, at least so far.” “The president is doing the opposite of what the experts said, and it seems to be working out,” said Michael Lynch, president of Strategic Energy and Economic Research, a research and consulting firm. Initial signs of a foreign-policy success could benefit Mr. Trump politically as Republicans try to hold on to control of Congress. The president and lawmakers allied with him could point to the administration’s aggressive stand toward Iran as evidence that his unconventional approach to diplomacy has been much more fruitful and far less costly than Democrats have been willing to acknowledge. The article also noted that while European governments have criticized Trump for pulling the U.S. out of the nuclear deal with Iran, European companies have been supporting Trump’s policy by pulling out of Iran.

Even “the failing New York Times” had to admit that Trump’s pressure on Iran IS working.  I bet that was a painful admission.      🙂

‘You Really Should Resign’: Perino Calls Out WH Official Who Authored NYT Op-Ed Against Trump

Dana Perino called out the unnamed White House official Wednesday on The Five who penned a New York Times opinion piece blasting President Trump. The piece, titled “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration,” is written by an anonymous senior official who said other top White House officials are “working diligently from within to frustrate parts of [President Trump’s] agenda and his worst inclinations.” Perino, who served as White House press secretary under President George W. Bush, called the author of the op-ed “extremely self-indulgent.” “You should not be lapping up the benefits of being a senior administration official, no doubt while scouting for lucrative opportunities for when you leave your post.” President Trump addressed the piece during a meeting with sheriffs from across the country at the White House, calling it “gutless.” “If I weren’t here, I believe the New York Times probably wouldn’t exist,” he said. Perino said that something about the release of the op-ed is suspicious, given that it was published just a day after excerpts of veteran journalist Bob Woodward’s book on Trump’s White House were published by The Washington Post. “If you are this person, you really should resign tonight,” she said. White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders tweeted a statement regarding the story Wednesday evening, agreeing with Perino’s sentiment. “This coward should do the right thing and resign,” Sanders wrote.

Agreed…  Dana Perino is spot on here.  So, kudos to her for calling out whoever the heck this is.  The whole idea of a treasonous almost shadow-like entity within the White House trying to undermine the President, who was duly elected by the people, should be terrifying to everyone regardless of political party affiliation or persuasion.  Hopefully this loser is found and fired soon…and IF he is guilty of any criminal wrongdoing, also charged for those crimes.  Newsflash to whoever this is..  You don’t work for Trump.  You work for US; we-the-people.  We pay your salary.  Like Dana said..  If this person really exists, and thinks all of this, then he/she should resign immediately.  For more, or to watch this segment from The Five, click on the text above.

Failing New York Times Set to Lay Off More Staff, Including Reporters

Peddling fake news does not, in fact, equate to a long-term successful business strategy, reporters for The New York Times are learning the hard way. The Gray Lady, which many in the media class consider the pinnacle of the information business, is struggling so much financially that reporters are expected to be laid off from the publication, along with many editors, the New York Post reports. “Reporters at the New York Times could soon be ‘vulnerable’ to the ax,” the Post’s Keith Kelly wrote. “If the ongoing round of voluntary buyouts being offered to editing staff does not get enough takers, the Gray Lady could begin another round, NYT Executive Editor Dean Baquet recently warned his top department editors.” Kelly reported that as part of an ongoing restructuring at the Times—which has been happening since early 2017—a whopping 109 copy editors have already been terminated while only 50 new jobs are likely to be created as the paper shifts its focus to digital.

Soo..  Now when we hear Trump say, “the failing New York Times,”..he’s exactly right.  To read the rest of this article, click on the text above.

Bolling: WaPo, NYT Should Be ‘Ashamed’ of Their Reporting

President Donald Trump is onto something with his criticism of the “fake news” mainstream media, Eric Bolling said on “The Fox News Specialists” today. He pointed to a “bombshell” Washington Post report that came out earlier this week about Trump revealing highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador. Bolling noted that the intelligence Trump revealed to the Russians – which was about an ISIS plot involving laptops on airplanes – was actually common knowledge. “So the ‘bombshell’ was a dud. Fake news,” Bolling said. He also took aim at a New York Times report that revealed then-FBI Director James Comey wrote a memo about Trump asking Comey to end the investigation into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Bolling pointed out that Comey had written the memo months earlier and had been sitting on it, calling the timing “pretty interesting.” He added that Comey also said during sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month that he had not been asked to stop any investigation on Russia’s meddling in the U.S. presidential election. “Another ‘bombshell’ fizzling out. Fake news,” Bolling said. “The Washington Post and The New York Times, you should be ashamed of your reporting.”

We agree!!  Go get ’em, Eric!    🙂

New York Times Snowflake Readers Melt in Horror at Climate Skeptic Columnist Bret Stephens

New York Times readers are deserting in droves in protest that its new columnist, Bret Stephens, thinks incorrect thoughts about man-made global warming. In his first column Stephens committed the cardinal sin of suggesting that maybe climate change isn’t quite the major existential threat that liberals have cracked up to be; and that maybe the environmentalists’ rabid zealotry is doing their cause more harm than good. ” Claiming total certainty about the science traduces the spirit of science and creates openings for doubt whenever a climate claim proves wrong. Demanding abrupt and expensive changes in public policy raises fair questions about ideological intentions. Censoriously asserting one’s moral superiority and treating skeptics as imbeciles and deplorables wins few converts.” Mighty has been the progressives’ wrath. According to Soros attack dog Joe Romm, it could scarcely have been worse if the New York Times had given the column to the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke. According to the Guardian‘s Dana Nucitelli, the most charitable thing you could say about Stephens’s piece is that it’s “ignorant and wrong.” Professor Ken Caldeira, of the Carnegie Institute for Science, has publicly cancelled his NYT subscription. So too has German climate professor Stefan Rahmsdorf…

And it continues..  To read the rest of this article by James Delingpole, click on the text above.  To even question the religion (or cult) of so-called “global warming,” or it’s latest incantation “climate change,” is something that those on the left simply cannot tolerate.

New York Times Destroys ESPN Anchor’s Career Based on a Lie of ‘Racism’

A sports reporter from The New York Times destroyed the career of an ESPN anchor, lying about what he said about tennis player Venus Williams and calling the ESPN anchor’s comment “racist.” So far, there have been no repercussions at all for the Times writer. The comment that sparked the row came from ESPN anchor Doug Adler, who said that Williams employed guerrilla tactics on the tennis court during her play at the Australian Open on January 18. Describing Williams’ play, Adler said, “You see Venus move in and put the guerrilla effect on. Charging.” Immediately, viewers and sports fans began tweeting that Adler had called the African American tennis player a “gorilla.” The “guerrilla tactics” comment is a known sports term, since sportswear giant Nike began using the term for an ad campaign in 1995, according to Kyle Smith of The campaign featured two white tennis players, Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras, so clearly the term “guerilla” had no racial connotation to it. In short order, Times reporter Ben Rothenberg, who is a tennis reporter, furthered the fiction by slamming Adler on Twitter, calling the mythical comment “appalling stuff.” Smith notes, “Rothenberg took one misunderstood word, turned it into an imaginary insult, then doubled the fantasy slur,” by making Adler’s comment about both Williams sisters instead of just Venus. Unfortunately, once he got off the air that day, ESPN bosses fired Adler even after initially saying they fully understood that he meant “guerrilla,” not “gorilla.” “During an Australian Open stream on ESPN3, Doug Adler should have been more careful in his word selection,” an ESPN statement said after firing the commentator. A month after being fired for no legitimate reason, Adler had a heart attack. He claimed it was stress-induced due to his firing, and Adler is now suing ESPN. “I knew I’d been treated badly and unfairly,” Adler told the media. “When I saw what it was doing to my reputation, I knew I’d have to fight for my name.” “It was not only political correctness gone overboard, but also a cowardly move that ruined a good man’s career,” Adler’s lawyer, David Ring told the Los Angeles Daily News. Much of this horrendous treatment of Adler was driven by the lies pushed by Rothenberg, yet both Rothenberg and The New York Times have remained completely untouched. Indeed, the so-called “paper of record” has practically ignored the story instigated by its own reporter. As Smith notes, “despite the key role one of its own writers played in his downfall, and despite the immense contemporary interest in accusations of race bias,” the whole episode has gone “unmentioned” in the pages of the Times. “For the Paper of Record to fail to take notice of such a culturally fraught story located at dead center of one of its chief areas of interest speaks volumes.,” Smith concluded.

Doug is well within his rights to sue the breathtakingly liberal, and politically correct, ESPN for their horrible treatment, and subsequent firing, of him.  The PC police and speech nazis and ESPN, and the NY Times, are out of control.  Kudos to Warner Todd Huston for this piece calling them out on it.

The New York Times Paid No Taxes in 2014

The New York Times has excited the Clinton campaign and the rest of the media with a revelation that Republican nominee Donald Trump declared a $916 million loss in 1995 that might have resulted in him not paying taxes in some subsequent years. The implication, reinforced by CNN’s Jake Tapper on State of the Union on Sunday morning, is that Trump “avoided” paying taxes, when in fact his tax liability was zero. But the Times itself has “avoided” paying taxes — in 2014, for example. As Forbes noted at the time: ” … for tax year 2014, The New York Times paid no taxes and got an income tax refund of $3.5 million even though they had a pre-tax profit of $29.9 million in 2014. In other words, their post-tax profit was higher than their pre-tax profit. The explanation in their 2014 annual report is, “The effective tax rate for 2014 was favorably affected by approximately $21.1 million for the reversal of reserves for uncertain tax positions due to the lapse of applicable statutes of limitations.” If you don’t think it took fancy accountants and tax lawyers to make that happen, read the statement again.” … for tax year 2014, The New York Times paid no taxes and got an income tax refund of $3.5 million even though they had a pre-tax profit of $29.9 million in 2014. In other words, their post-tax profit was higher than their pre-tax profit. The explanation in their 2014 annual report is, “The effective tax rate for 2014 was favorably affected by approximately $21.1 million for the reversal of reserves for uncertain tax positions due to the lapse of applicable statutes of limitations.” If you don’t think it took fancy accountants and tax lawyers to make that happen, read the statement again. That would include the New York Times — which, however, is still struggling. As Jazz Shaw of notes, the Times — or whoever was its source — likely obtained Trump’s tax document illegally. The ongoing IRS scandal, in which the federal government targeted conservative organizations, involved several cases in which the agency illegally shared taxpayer information with other branches of government, and in one case leaked taxpayer information to a conservative organization’s political opponents. In 2008, the confidential tax information of Joe “the Plumber” Wurzelbacher, who emerged as a critic of then-Sen. Barack Obama, was leaked illegally by an Ohio state official.

Model featured in Trump ‘hit piece’ slams NY Times, says her story was ‘spun’

A former model who was featured at the center of a lengthy New York Times report that assailed Donald Trump’s treatment of women said Monday that her account was taken out of context, misquoted and “spun” by the Times in order to portray the Republican presidential candidate in a negative light. “They spun it to where it appeared negative. I did not have a negative experience with Donald Trump,” Rowanne Brewer Lane told “Fox & Friends.” Lane briefly dated Trump after the 1990 encounter described in the Times article. But the way she described their relationship and that encounter on Monday was much different than the way it was portrayed in the front-page weekend article that ran under the explosive headline, “Crossing the Line: How Donald Trump Behaved with Women in Private.” The article opens by describing how Lane, then 26 years old, met Trump at a pool party at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Palm Beach, Fla., estate. According to the piece, Trump had barely met her “when he asked her to change out of her clothes.” He gave her a bikini, which she changed into. Lane is quoted as saying, “He brought me out to the pool and said, ‘That is a stunning Trump girl, isn’t it?’” The Times goes on to describe the incident as “a debasing face-to-face encounter between Mr. Trump and a young woman he hardly knew.” But Lane told Fox News that was not the case. “He never made me feel like I was being demeaned in any way,” she said, calling the article “very upsetting.” “The New York Times told us several times that they would make sure that my story that I was telling came across … that it would not be a hit piece,” she said. “That my story would come across the way that I was telling it … and it absolutely was not.” Lane said she did in fact meet Trump at that pool party, but said he had simply offered her a swimsuit – she said “okay,” since she hadn’t brought one. As for Trump’s comment about her being “stunning,” she said, “I was actually flattered” by that, not demeaned. “That’s what I told the Times and they spun it completely differently.” She described the now-presumptive GOP presidential nominee as a “gentleman” and said she planned to support him in the election. The Times reporters, meanwhile, defended their story on Monday.

Of course they do/did…  The NY Times is one of the major players in the dominantly liberal mainstream media, and they’re doing everything they can to support Hillary’s presidential aspirations.  That includes going all out in attacking Trump.  But, this was a curious angle.  Everyone knows Trump is a billionaire..and he was a playboy.  That’s not news…nor do Trump’s supporters care.  The real angle the Times is playing is that Trump is some sort of women abuser, etc.  So far we’ve not seen any evidence of that.  In fact, just the opposite…as evidenced by Ms. Lane’s interview here.  By EXTREME contrast, Bill Clinton’s numerous extramarital affairs, including allegations of abuse and even possible rape, are well documented (in court no less)…as is Hillary’s active role in covering up Bill’s actions, and in some cases paying some of those women under the table to just go away..  It would have been one thing if Hillary didn’t know, or had even turned a blind eye to her husband’s infidelity.  But, she was a willing, proactive, co-conspirator, and helped to run the infamous “Bimbo Eruptions” unit right out of the White House in the ’90s which dealt with all of the women accusers (of Bill) that came forward.  It’s a breathtakingly hypocritical, and frankly stupid, angle for the NY Times to portray Trump as this sexist, anti-woman biggot, given the Clintons well-documented abuse of women.  More and more people are starting to see how the NY Times and other members of  the dominantly liberal mainstream media are so brazenly hypocritical…and we predict it’ll backfire big time.