NY Times Does It Again, Spins Yet Another Headline to Defend Dems, Attack GOP Over Virus Relief Bill

FILE- This May 2, 2017, file photo, shows the corporate signage on the headquarters building of The New York Times in New York. The New York Times Co. reports earnings Thursday, May 3, 2018. (AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews, File)


As we reported, Democrats blocked a virus relief bill meant to help a lot of Americans.

Up through Saturday, it had looked like the bill was going to pass with what people — including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer — said was a lot of “bipartisanship.”

But then, reportedly, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) came in and completely mucked up the works, demanding that Republicans accede to all kinds of crazy pork provisions that had nothing at all to do with the virus, blowing up the deal. What does early voting or the diversity of corporate boards have to do with virus relief? Just insanity.

As the Chief of Staff and Communications Director for Rep. Mark Meadows, Ben Williamson observed:

But on Sunday, when the Democrats first blocked the bill, the New York Times’ reaction was something else. First, the headline to their story told the truth. But then it was changed to blunt what the Democrats had done, as Ken Farnaso, the deputy press secretary for the Trump campaign, observed.


Then apparently, that wasn’t enough because it was still clear that Democrats had done it, so it was changed again to remove that.

As we asked, did a call go out? Or is there someone always there checking to make sure that the spin is favorable to Democrats?

After Democrats blocked things yet again on Monday in a revolting display of naked partisanship, it looks like we got our answer on that question.

Although it was the Democrats blocking the bill, this is what we got from the New York Times editorial board as a headline.

That’s an insane rewriting of the truth. Republicans apparently forced the Democrats to block the bill because Democrats didn’t get every piece of crazy pork they wanted in a bill that’s supposed to be about virus relief. Talk about having no shame.

But remember, this is the same editorial board that has the member who thought Michael Bloomberg spending $300 million on his campaign meant he could have donated one million to each American.


The NY Times is literally trying to rewrite history. But we’ve got them on record.

We will remember come November.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos