What is with the NYT and Hillary Clinton? I knew in 2008 they disliked her, they published some seriously poor journalism, from biased to weird to disdainful (she's "mean", she "doesn't say Obama's name warmly enough", it got weird). But for some reason I thought that was just due to love for Obama. But apparently that is not the case at all. And trust me, I was one of those liberals who grew up thinking the NYT was nothing but straight forward journalism, it wasn't until 2008 that it became clear that's not always the case.
Well fast forward to now, 3 weeks ago NYT "broke" a news story, that actually was uncovered in 2013, but who's counting. There was a twist this time. Hillary Clinton "may" or may not have broken the rules... oh, except that rule that she "may have broken" didn't actually even exist at the time, but NYT got around to that detail and that indeed she *hadn't* broken a rule, about 10 days later.
Only this time, their complete lack journalistic integrity was so brazen that a number of outlets called them out on it. Here are a few of the articles that followed fraudulent reporting by the New York Times as they ran a non-story story of a non-scandal scandal that they further push after being busted..
-Hillary Email Scandal, Not So Fast... - Daily Beast-David Brock calls on the NYT to issue a retraction - Media Matters-Hillary Clinton did an Email thing that may or may not have been wrong and the NYT is ON IT. -Wonkette-NYT Doubles Down in Defense of Sloppy Reporting - Media Matters
Why the Hillary Clinton Email Scandal is Ridiculous - Business Insider
-- But they never issued a retraction or corrected the story, creating a snowball of nonsense ---
They even doubled and trippled down, changed the narrative and got excited that it got picked up by Drudge Report. Yes, that's right, Drudge.
Only CNN issued a correction to pushing a false statement asserted by the NYT:
CNN Debunks false 'rule breaking' story
NYT, refusing to retract in their paper because that is easily trackable, chooses televison medium to admit fault.Times editor admits their story is not quite true. Basically, okay, we said she didn't follow the rules, found out that was not true so now have found another rule that could have been broken so maybe they were right but about something else...maybe.