Diversion For Trump, Courtesy Of The New York Times

On October 31, 2016 two New York Times reporters wrote “even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump." Less important than the misleading statement eight days before the presidential election was the headline "Investigating Donald Trump, FBI Sees No Clear Link To Russia."

Reuters found

U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help President-elect Donald Trump win the White House, and not just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, a senior U.S. official said on Friday.

U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that as the 2016 presidential campaign progressed, Russian government officials devoted increasing attention to assisting Trump’s effort to win the election, the U.S. official familiar with the finding told Reuters on Friday night, speaking on condition of anonymity....

U.S. intelligence analysts have assessed “with high confidence” that at some point in the extended presidential campaign Russian President Vladimir Putin’s government had decided to try to bolster Trump’s chances of winning.

The Russians appear to have concluded that Trump had a shot at winning and that he would be much friendlier to Russia than Clinton would be, especially on issues such as maintaining economic sanctions and imposing additional ones, the official said.

The headline on that story was "Russia intervened to help Trump win election: intelligence officials."

Unfortunately, that that came a month after the election- too late for Hillary Clinton; too late for the nation; too late for the world.

Four years later, The New York Times, grotesquely misunderstood as the ringleader of the (imagined) "liberal media," regales with a headline "Trump's Aggressive Advocacy of Malaria Drug for Treating Coronavirus Divides Medical Community."

It seems like "he said, she said."  However, fast-tracking a drug found dangerous yet touted by President Trump is more than a little suspicious. Oh, and this nugget, curiously missing from the headline:

If hydroxychloroquine becomes an accepted treatment, several pharmaceutical companies stand to profit, including shareholders and senior executives with connections to the president. Mr. Trump himself has a small personal financial interest in Sanofi, the French drugmaker that makes Plaquenil, the brand-name version of hydroxychloroquine.

Not only does the President have a financial interest in hydroxychloroquine, so, too, do movers and shakers who helped make him president and will try to do it again. And the headline is "Trump's Aggressive Advocacy of Malaria Drug for Treating Coronavirus Divides Medical Community."

In 2016, Hillary Clinton had to fight Donald Trump, the mainstream media, and others. In 2020, Joe Biden (or whomever is the nominee) will, hopefully, face the opposition of only the media and Donald Trump. And the false image of that same media as "liberal" only makes it worse.

Share |