Tucker Carlson vs. New York Times' public editor -Dec 3 2016



Just a few weeks after Trump's election in 2016, Tucker Carlson discussed with the New York Times' public editor the bias of her paper on full display. On the factual evidence of her paper's malicious spin of Trump's election, as compared to that of the Wall Street Journal and other papers.
And as evidenced by the ultra-partisan social media posts of New York Times reporters. Not New York Times columnists or opinion writers, but the blatantly skewed opinion of hard news reporters who write with a veil of neutral objectivity that their online posts clearly betray.

She feigns a level of embarassment, but still denies much of the obvious that is factually beyond dispute. I frankly think under the circumstances Carlson was kind, and let her off easy.



More recently, the New York Times' latest display of skewed bias was yesterday when its opinion page recommended both Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar as their endorsements for the 2020 presidential election. Anyone but Trump, who has overseen the best economy and trade deals in over 50 years, right?
But more than that, they just absolutely refused to endorse Joseph Biden or Bernie Sanders or any other male candidate, unwilling to endorse white males, despite they are the front runners. They just went for the most "woke" politically correct choices they could pick.
Also noteworthy that the New York Times hasn't recommended a Republican candidate for president since Eisenhower. Approaching a century. No bias, none at all.

Or the weirdness that they recommended two candidates for president. Both Democrats, of course!