New York Times: Stop Publishing False Information About Hillary Clinton (HILLARY GROUP)

[DeepModem Mom]

I must add to the litany of complaints you have received regarding The New York Times’ coverage of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The pattern exhibited by your newspaper goes beyond errors in reporting and gives the appearance of a systematic campaign to derail her candidacy. The list is long: The faux email “scandal,” accusing her of breaking laws not in place until 20 months after she stepped down as Secretary of State; your paper’s questionable association with Peter Schweizer to launch a smear against the Clinton Foundation, an organization considered the gold standard in low administrative costs and donor disclosure; one that has helped millions of people around the globe. The latest report about a “criminal inquiry” into Clinton that does not exist, your refusal to print her team’s rebuttal and the inexcusable avoidance of Executive Editor Dean Baquet.

All this in addition to the steady drumbeat of subtle negative characterizations from reporters Chozick, Haberman, Healy and in particular, the odious bashing by columnists Frank Bruni and Maureen Dowd, whose recent columns present a new low, even for her. Her many years’ vendetta against Hillary Clinton is an embarrassment to your publication.

Then, the embarrassed “reporter” Michael Schmidt did it again, with another story lacking substance that attempts to justify his earlier faux “criminal investigation” report....

In a new development on September 10th, The Washington Times, a conservative publication, scooped everyone in reporting Department of Justice confirmation that Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong in deleting personal email sent or received while she was Secretary of State:

“There is no question that Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision — she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server,” the administration lawyers argued. “Under policies issued by both the National Archives and Records Administration (‘NARA’) and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record.”

This is significant and reduces the alleged “scandal” to an even smaller molehill. While The New York Times led the charge to criminalize this story, bashing Clinton on the front page for six months, your publication took 48 hours to report this exonerating development — and then only on page A14. Ruby Cramer of Buzzfeed and Chris Hayes of MSNBC, to their credit, later picked it up with Hayes even asking if “the New York Times was out to get Hillary Clinton.” Associated Press and Huffington Post finally ran the item — on the weekend, when it would be the least helpful. But they ran it. The New York Times remains silent as the grave....

http://www.epictimes.com/anitafinlay/2015/09/new-york-times-please-stop-publishing-false-information-about-hillary-clinton/?utm_content=buffera40ea&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer via Anita Finlay

[upaloopa]

1. The lies about Hillary will continue. I can't think

of another political couple that has had more made up shit put out about them then Bill and Hillary Clinton.
It won't stop her. She has so much experience dealing with the negativity.
Here is a person with so many accomplishments yet people who couldn't hold a candle to her make up shit about her daily.

[Gothmog]

2. I look forward to reading David Brocks book on the NYT lies against Clinton

[Thinkingabout]

3. They continue to tell lies, now the liar title needs to be hung on the NYT and

Others who are smearing by lying. Cognitive dissonance is always truthful information.

[riversedge]

4. wish we could point a scarlet letter on the nytimes.