New York Times on Trump the bully
9 responses | 0 likes
Started by cfdr - Oct. 5, 2018, 1:29 p.m.

A friend sent this link to me.  His comment was

Interesting.  Stephens was an editorial writer for WSJ and a good one.  But he just couldn’t stomach Trump and ultimately left for the NYT where he’s prospered, moved a little bit more to the left and serves the function of being the NYT’s “house conservative.”  This piece will raise hell with his standing in that community.

By TimNew - Oct. 5, 2018, 1:55 p.m.
Like Reply

An editorial in the New York Times by a purported liberal that I both enjoyed reading and with which I agreed..  Surely pigs are flying.

By mcfarm - Oct. 5, 2018, 2:03 p.m.
Like Reply

holy cow, what an article.....great read.....warning to carl and the others who had already convicted a very good man of a crime worse than murder, better be careful if venture to far into this article, your tender mercies might be impaired

By metmike - Oct. 5, 2018, 8:19 p.m.
Like Reply


Thanks but the NYT says that I reached my limit of free articles and I can't see it. Can you post more of it?


No need to make it personal with remarks aimed at Carl before he even had the chance to comment. I appreciate his views here and the manner that he communicates them............respectfully. 

By cfdr - Oct. 6, 2018, 8:41 a.m.
Like Reply

i'll try to post some:

For Once, I’m Grateful for Trump

In the president, one big bully stands up to others.

Bret Stephens

By Bret Stephens

Opinion Columnist

For the first time since Donald Trump entered the political fray, I find myself grateful that he’s in it. I’m reluctant to admit it and astonished to say it, especially since the president mocked Christine Blasey Ford in his ugly and gratuitous way at a rally on Tuesday. Perhaps it’s worth unpacking this admission for those who might be equally astonished to read it.

I’m grateful because Trump has not backed down in the face of the slipperiness, hypocrisy and dangerous standard-setting deployed by opponents of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. I’m grateful because ferocious and even crass obstinacy has its uses in life, and never more so than in the face of sly moral bullying. I’m grateful because he’s a big fat hammer fending off a razor-sharp dagger.

A few moments have crystallized my view over the past few days.

The first moment was a remark by a friend. “I’d rather be accused of murder,” he said, “than of sexual assault.” I feel the same way. One can think of excuses for killing a man; none for assaulting a woman. But if that’s true, so is this: Falsely accusing a person of sexual assault is nearly as despicable as sexual assault itself. It inflicts psychic, familial, reputational and professional harms that can last a lifetime. This is nothing to sneer at.

The second moment, connected to the first: “Boo hoo hoo. Brett Kavanaugh is not a victim.” That’s the title of a column in the Los Angeles Times, which suggests that the possibility of Kavanaugh’s innocence is “infinitesimal.” Yet false allegations of rape, while relatively rare, are at least five times as common as false accusations of other types of crime, according to academic literature.

Since when did the possibility of innocence become, for today’s liberals, something to wave off with an archly unfeeling “boo hoo”?

A third moment, connected to the second: Listening to Cory Booker explain on Tuesday that “ultimately” it doesn’t matter if Kavanaugh is “guilty or innocent,” because “enough questions” had been raised that it was time to “move on to another candidate.”

This is a rhetorical sleight of hand in three acts: Elide the one question that really matters; raise a secondary set of “questions” that are wholly the result of the question you’ve decided to ignore; call for “another candidate” because it will push confirmation hearings past the midterms, which was the Democratic objective long before most anyone had ever heard of Blasey’s allegation.

Fourth moment: Watching Julie Swetnick, the woman who accused Kavanaugh of attending parties decades earlier where women were gang raped, change key details of her story in an interview with NBC News.

Swetnick’s claims border on the preposterous. They are wholly uncorroborated. But that didn’t keep Kavanaugh’s opponents, in politics and the press, from seizing them as evidence of corroboration with Blasey’s allegation, which is not preposterous but is also largely uncorroborated, and with the allegation of Kavanaugh’s Yale classmate Deborah Ramirez — uncorroborated again.

By metmike - Oct. 6, 2018, 10:03 a.m.
Like Reply

Thanks very much cfdr, it was worth your extra effort. 

This shows that one side stepped so far over the line this time that it's backfired badly. Even some of their own were so repulsed by the unethical tactics by their side, that it resulted in an article like this..............celebrating Donald Trump standing up to something even worse than Donald Trump. 

It's hard to imagine more than a small minority of Trump haters actually connecting to this message but it's crystal clear that many of those that did not hate Trump previously, got a big wake up call. 

The dems went into the hearings with the momentum. It's went the other way now.

The ironic thing is that they could have won the 2016 election by running several different candidates. The never Clinton(because of corruption) vote is what cost them.

Now, 2 years later, a blatant example of corruption before a key election........ironically, using a tactic related to the election itself is costing them some votes.....or at least energizing those who want to vote against this kind of sleazy politics. 

Will it matter enough to ward off the anti Trump vote from the democrats?

By TimNew - Oct. 6, 2018, 10:49 a.m.
Like Reply

Interestingly enough, Trump's approval rating has had a strong upward move over the last week with the latest Rasmussen showing him at +3.   This during an equity sell off  :-)

I think the dems have helped him more than he can ever help himself..

By JP - Oct. 6, 2018, 7:16 p.m.
Like Reply

Metmike -- The browser you're using may have what in Google Chrome is called Incognito Mode. Going into that will get you unlimited free access at most sites that offer some free access each month.  

By silverspiker - Oct. 7, 2018, 7:37 a.m.
Like Reply

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which can not fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance-that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

By carlberky - Oct. 9, 2018, 3:25 p.m.
Like Reply

Rather than responding to an opinion piece, I find I am defending myself  from an accusation of having " ... convicted a very good man of a crime worse than murder".

Having doubts about his truthfulness and defending Ford from the lynch mob mentality shown on this Forum does not equate to my being  convinced.

Have you no shame, mc, for what your post would do to my wife and daughter ... if they were still here.