Politico acts as bodyguard for New York Times against the Washington Free Beacon. AGAIN.

Quick background: the Washington Free Beacon reported that the New York Times took one hundred thousand in donations from the Clintons in the same year that the NYT’s owner overruled the editoral board to endorse… surprise surprise, Hillary Clinton. Now, let us be correct, here: nobody has come out and said that this was a bribe. Or a quid pro quo. Or even an ‘understanding.’  The Washington Free Beacon is merely asking questions and noting where the money is going, which is something that journalists are supposedly expected to do.

Respecting this journalistic tradition, the New York Times offered a rebuttal to the Washington Free Beacon… HA! Of course not: they went whining to Politico for their response.  Again.  And unsurprising… although I have to wonder how often Politico is going to let the NYT go to that particular well.  Anyway… in light of the recent petulant refusal of the New York Times to even directly admit that, yet again, the Washington Free Beacon has maybe caught the NYT out engaging in shenanigans… I thought that I should provide this helpful checklist.

  • If you want to read actual stories about the New York Times and its poor journalistic behavior, read the Washington Free Beacon.
  • If you want to read the excuses that the New York Times makes about its poor journalistic behavior, read Politico.
  • And if you never want to read about poor journalistic behavior on the Left, then: by all means, keep reading the New York Times.

Hope this is useful!

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: This is, by the way, not the same as the earlier story on RedState about Politico and the Clintons.  Although it doesn’t surprise me that Politico will sometimes cut out the middleman and just shill directly for the Clintons.

One thought on “Politico acts as bodyguard for New York Times against the Washington Free Beacon. AGAIN.”

  1. I do wonder what Politico get out of these deals.
    I mean, we know what the grey whore got ..
    Too harsh?

Comments are closed.