The New York Times: American Pravda

Elder Patriot – The Old Grey Lady has been peddling some incredibly anti-American-worker crap for some time.  It’s as though they are the official propaganda arm of the Globalist-Deep State Cabal.  Now there’s proof that they’re reporting is not only contemptible but that their reporters are equally contemptible.

And, the Times sanctions their disgraceful and disreputable methods every step of the way.

The 11-page indictment handed down this past Thursday against James Wolfe, a senior Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) staffer in charge of security included references to an unnamed Reporter #2.

   James Wolfe Indictment – Senate Intelligence Committee – Leaker by The Conservative Treehouse on Scribd

While the indictment implicates 4 unnamed reporters it tells us that Wolfe was involved in an on going “personal relationship” with Reporter #2.

That narrows the field considerably, all the way down to Ali Watkins.  In 2013 Watkins, while still in school at Temple University tweeted:

The Times must’ve missed this during the hiring process.  Or, they didn’t miss it at all.  Whatever could go wrong with a young honeypot flat backing for her next breaking story?

And Watkins kept “breaking” stories so the Times ignored the methodology she employed that never included corroboration through a second source.  It was all good until at some point the information she was “fed” was not factual.

Busted!

Watkins didn’t need a second source because she was convinced her information was solid, didn’t she?  This almost Pulitzer winner appears to have been nothing more than a mouthpiece – and a sex doll – for corrupt members of the SSCI.  And, all evidence now points to Dianne Feinstein staffer Dan Jones as the source for the story that put her on the map.

Stop to consider the implications of a news organization approving of reporters trading sex for favors.  From there it’s just a short jump for the liberal mind to accept news outlets hiring call girls to conduct deep extraction from targets.

And, for this they’ll demand First Amendment protections for their sources and methods.

The Times apparently didn’t care about any of this as long as she moved the needle on their left-wing agenda.

The problem is this kind of  “by any means necessary” approach hasn’t been anywhere near a one off occurrence that the Times can simply write off.  They ran this headline on the morning of Donald Trump’s inauguration:

The Times spent the better part of the next year denying the surveillance ever took place and undermining everything the president proposed as well as trashing him personally before finally admitting that, well yes surveillance was conducted against the Trump campaign but it was necessary because, as we’ve been telling you for 18 months, he’s a detestable Russian puppet.

The Times also ran this predictive headline on November 9, 2016, the day after the election:

“It really does now look like President Donald J. Trump, and markets are plunging. When might we expect them to recover? A first-pass answer is never… So we are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight.”

Paul Krugman is billed by the Times as the recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences and a distinguished scholar and professor.  He’s actually a radical leftist, partisan hack, who is rarely right about anything he has predicted.  But he does serve a purpose for the Times; to make historically disproven bullshit economic modeling sound reasonable to those who are willing to accept socialist dogma.

So the Times consistently prints his anti-capitalism diatribes to discredit conservative candidates and their policies during the run up to elections and then afterwards to stir sentiment against sound fiscal policy.  It’s a story as old as time.

Krugman’s gift is that he sounds smart until the evidence comes in.

He is really a political hit man masquerading as a serious economist.

Now, even the Times has had to admit that they’ve run out of superlatives to describe Trump’s economy.

So, I ask you again, why do we believe anything the Times tells us?  They’re little more than American Pravda employing Soviet era techniques at even juncture to defend Washington’s Globalist OneParty.