NY Times reporter: Tough reporting on Biden's age is retribution for refusing an interview

[President Johnson]

Just their last headline where they essentially said that Biden and Trump are equally flawed messengers when it comes to abortion should have been reason enough for any self-respecting liberal to cancel their subscriptions.
These people are hellbent to normalize Trump when just a few years ago they used weasel words to imply that a meeting between then SoS Hillary Clinton and a Nobel Peace Prize laureate was somehow scandalous.

Yep. Just look at the comparison of Biden being old and Trump. No objective observer can say that their coverage is fair- The Hur report had something like 80 total articles on NYT the week it blew up. The amount of articles about Trump falling asleep at his trial? 1

Agreed, but the mainstream media was never really in favor of Biden to begin with. That wasn't even the case in 2020. I remember how they endlessly forced the narrative that he was just a status-quo candidate who aimed to revert everything back to 2015 without addressing any other major issue.

Even the international press accepted that nation unchecked. I full well remember how our media here always wrote that Biden had no platform other than "being not Trump". People took that for granted and I got tired explaning to family, friends and colleagues how this wasn't true at all. And now they're doing the same here as well. There's barely an article on Biden that doesn't mention his age, even when the substance of the article has nothing to do with it. Like "the 81-year old returned to DC for security consulations" or the "the 81-year old president announced the decision yesterday." I'm sure they wouldn't constantly remind the public if I was 51 or 61.

[All Along The Watchtower]

In addition to Trump’s own incessant drama and outrageousness, his White House had tons of people leaking to the Times on a daily basis.

Hard not to see self-interested behavior from the paper of record here.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Imagine believing that

A. The NYT's reporting on Biden's age has been particularly tough

B. The degree of toughness is because AG Sulzberger has a vendetta against Biden

I'm sure there's some grain of truth to this story, but it's much more "Biden won't sit down for an interview with us? Weird -- that sounds like he can't. Let's take a second look at the aging stuff." than "Biden won't sit down for an interview with us? We need to punish him. Let's take a second look at the aging stuff."

Also, all the journalists/Biden staffers are dramatically overestimating the importance of this. The NYT's coverage has not significantly impacted Biden's odds in the general election, because few people will actually end up voting on the issue of Biden's age, and those who do will probably have not have had their perceptions substantially altered by the NYT, especially given that only ~10 millionish people read the NYT in the first place, most of whom are already partisan liberals.

Says a guy who takes as the gospel of truth the garbage he hears everyday on Fox and Newsmax.

He's saying it to the guy who still believes Russiagate is a legit story.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Imagine believing that

A. The NYT's reporting on Biden's age has been particularly tough

B. The degree of toughness is because AG Sulzberger has a vendetta against Biden

I'm sure there's some grain of truth to this story, but it's much more "Biden won't sit down for an interview with us? Weird -- that sounds like he can't. Let's take a second look at the aging stuff." than "Biden won't sit down for an interview with us? We need to punish him. Let's take a second look at the aging stuff."

Also, all the journalists/Biden staffers are dramatically overestimating the importance of this. The NYT's coverage has not significantly impacted Biden's odds in the general election, because few people will actually end up voting on the issue of Biden's age, and those who do will probably have not have had their perceptions substantially altered by the NYT, especially given that only ~10 millionish people read the NYT in the first place, most of whom are already partisan liberals.

Says a guy who takes as the gospel of truth the garbage he hears everyday on Fox and Newsmax.

He's saying it to the guy who still believes Russiagate is a legit story.

Cope.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mueller_report

[wnwnwn]

Biden is the (old) man from Scranton, do you think MSM likes that?

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Imagine believing that

A. The NYT's reporting on Biden's age has been particularly tough

B. The degree of toughness is because AG Sulzberger has a vendetta against Biden

I'm sure there's some grain of truth to this story, but it's much more "Biden won't sit down for an interview with us? Weird -- that sounds like he can't. Let's take a second look at the aging stuff." than "Biden won't sit down for an interview with us? We need to punish him. Let's take a second look at the aging stuff."

Also, all the journalists/Biden staffers are dramatically overestimating the importance of this. The NYT's coverage has not significantly impacted Biden's odds in the general election, because few people will actually end up voting on the issue of Biden's age, and those who do will probably have not have had their perceptions substantially altered by the NYT, especially given that only ~10 millionish people read the NYT in the first place, most of whom are already partisan liberals.

Says a guy who takes as the gospel of truth the garbage he hears everyday on Fox and Newsmax.

He's saying it to the guy who still believes Russiagate is a legit story.

The big  "hoax" regarding Donald Trump, the GOP, and Putin's regime, is the one that there is no connection, which is consistently gaslit by Republicans of all stripes.

It started well before Donald Trump did this:


And only last month we found out that Bill Barr was making promises to a Putin-linked criminal Ukrainian oligarch, if only he would help him frame Biden.