40 Burst results for "The York Times"
What Is Liz Cheney Saying About the People Who Need to Vote for Trump?
"Now, Liz Cheney gave an interview to the talking a lot, CNN, New York Times, she doesn't really campaigning because she's going to lose next week. She told The New York Times she'd find it very difficult to support Ron DeSantis for president. If Trump doesn't run. She would find it very difficult to support governor desantis because of how he has lined himself up almost entirely with Trump. Are you paying attention are you as the media does this whole adulation of Liz Cheney? Do you get what she has become? So I said to this friend of mine who's a never trumper. I said, listen, when Liz Cheney says that she doesn't mind losing her seat. As long as Trump stays out of office, what is she saying about the American people who need to vote for Trump? In order for him to be reelected. And I mean, I was blown away by his answer. He said, she would say, and I believe he knows her and probably knows exactly her thinking. He believes that American America has been fooled and conned by Donald Trump, that Trump supporters aren't really necessarily malicious or nefarious, they're really just more about being conned. And we drank the Kool-Aid and we fell for it and she knows that. And she understands that, that's why the January 6th select committee existed to prevent Trump from being able to run for reelection. Now,
Fresh update on "the york times" discussed on Rollye James
"From the FBI and or the Department of Justice on former president Trump's claim that his Florida home was rated today. WGN traffic on the up a Kennedy stop and go between nagle and canned the old from the burned interchange to O'Hare this time building a little bit now up to 25 minutes. Former president Trump says the FBI executed a search warrant today at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida. News nation reporting the surge has to do with classified documents, taken to Mar-a-Lago after he left office. News nation's Kelly Meyer. We received this statement from former president Trump, calling this quote dark times for our nation saying that the FBI raided his Mar-a-Lago home. That's in Palm Beach in Florida. He said that his Mar-a-Lago home was, quote, under siege rated and occupied by what he calls a large group of FBI agents. He also said that they broke into his safe. Now, Trump didn't say why the FBI was searching his home. And he wasn't in Florida at this time. Again, the Justice Department isn't commenting on this either. The New York Times reporting tonight that members of the House January 6th committee who have publicly pressed the Justice Department to investigate Trump. Declined to comment citing a need to learn more about the FBI's latest action. CPD says a 17 year old boy was shot in critically heard near a CTA red line station on the city south side earlier today, investigators say the boy was involved in a shootout with another person. It happened outside the 79th street redlined station in chatham at about four 15 this afternoon. Meanwhile, Chicago police have released surveillance video of two suspects in Saturday's deadly shooting of a 29 year old man on the same CTA red line train. WGN's Jenna Barnes. As
Dinesh and Debbie Unpack the Left's Latest Abortion Debate Arguments
"It's very interesting but in the abortion debate, we've seen a kind of shift in the rhetoric of the Democrats and of the left. Suddenly we find that there are talking a lot about a topic pregnancies, they're talking about miscarriages. They're making it seem like the abortion debate is not about abortion. It's not about killing your kid who's in the process of being born. Rather, it is about these other things. Now, we talked, I guess last week it was about the ectopic pregnancy, but you saw an article in The New York Times about miscarriage and abortion, equating the two. Yeah, and you know, I mean, I think I've talked about this before, but I was actually approach choice, I wouldn't say, I wouldn't say I was a pro abortion advocate, but I was a pro choice person in college, you know, high school college, really up until I suffered a miscarriage. In 1994, at the age of 28, I was really excited. I was finally pregnant and I had a miscarriage. At about 7 weeks or so, and so I instinctively became a pro lifer at that at that point because I understood the line between my body and my baby's body. Really more than I ever had before. And so when I saw this article about, why do we talk about miscarriage differently from abortion? I just about flipped over the chair.
Fresh update on "the york times" discussed on Mark Levin
"And honor to have senator Tim Scott on the program. Senator how are you, sir? Mark is always good to be on any set with you. I'm doing well, sir. How are you? I'm okay. Well, not really. I'm pretty angry, actually. What in the hell does the FBI think it's doing? Sending likely scores of agents to Mar-a-Lago to collect 15 boxes of the post in The New York Times. Under the federal records act, I mean, if you're going to send FBI to a former president's home, I mean, you better know what the hell you're doing because I can tell you now senator Scott, this audience is boiling. Absolutely boiling. What do you make this at first flush? Well, Mark, I guess I was stunned and shocked and without any question, there should be a lot of questions and inquiries made of the FBI to figure out what in the world they were thinking. Unprecedented action without doubt. Yeah, I mean, I look at this. I say we got an open border, we got people pouring across with criminal records. We've got all kinds of crimes going on there. People dying of fentanyl all over this country, a 110,000 people. There's just so much for federal law enforcement to do. You have time to send a couple dozen or more an army of FBI agents to Mar-a-Lago and if the if the leaks to the press are correct, starting with The Washington Post in The New York Times, it's over disputes or delays on the federal records act. I mean, are you kidding me? Federal records act? Senator the way this is supposed to work is you get subpoenas and you work it out with your lawyers and if you can't work it out, maybe there's a civil action or I'm just saying, I guess we'll learn more. And I want to learn more. Well, the fact mark that we're using words like the federal records act that no one in the America has ever heard of is incredibly important number one number two. Invading the private residency, they previous president is unprecedented move and frankly, it should raise major questions that we should have the diligence and the tenacity to completely run down that trail until we figure out what in the world prompted this. And you know, we have all this Hunter Biden stuff that was covered up prior to the last election. And his laptop and the stomach got into the bottom of all this and mister big and mister 10% and there's no investigation of that. I think a lot of Americans, particularly Republicans and conservatives, but a lot of independents are losing a lot of faith in the federal government senator. Well, Mark, if you saw the testimony of mister ray before the judiciary committee, his inability to answer basic questions was dumbfounding perplexing and frustrating. There has been a pattern that we've seen evolved and then we've been able to illuminate it through ten pointed questions from Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham and many of the folks on the judiciary committee to try to understand what is the current evolution that's happening. And our Department of Justice, the Biden is dividing our country and the DoJ seems to be reinforcing that division through their action. And that is very dangerous to the everyday person walking on the streets of America that we must have 100% confidence and trust in our justice system. And if it can target a former president, you know, it can target me and you. And look how they targeted parents. He didn't even have jurisdiction the attorney general. How quickly they went after parents? And I mean, the whole bureaucracy, all the offices of the Department of Justice alerted to these, these horrific parents allowed the county, Virginia, and other places, and so forth. I mean, anyway, senator, you've come out with a fantastic book, America, a redemption story choosing hope creating unity. You grew up a very tough life, very poor. You had a wonderful, beautiful mother. Who took good care of you. Did you ever imagine you'd be a United States senator was your thinking at one point? This is America. I'll be whatever I can be. Mark, I had evolved to the place where I thought all things were possible. I had a great mother as you just described that taught me that if you shoot for the moon, even if you miss, you'll be among the stars. And one of the things that's so frustrating with today's Biden administration is it's making opportunities like the one I experienced Mark
The Moronic (and Oxymoronic) 'Inflation Reduction Act'
"I want to address the gobbledy gook that runs through the so called inflation reduction act. This is kind of a scam that Congress does and Democrats in particular do they assign these sort of names or inflation reduction act. The idea here is to give you a goal that they have, even though their actions have nothing to do with the goal. And in fact, far from advancing the goal, subvert the goal. But the underlying premise appears to be the American people are really dumb. The media are on our side and they will continue to trumpet whatever we say however preposterous. We can count on Time Magazine. We can count on The New York Times, these people are not really independent assessors of anything. They're not even honest arbiters words. So let's look at this inflation reduction act to $433 billion. A lot of it going to various kind of climate provisions and. It's government spending. And its government spending that is going to, it would seem by using normal logic, advance, inflation, because this is not a time, in fact, Joe Manchin, who is the man who's making this possible, has even said before that when you have inflation galloping ahead, it's not exactly time to do a big spending bill. But here's Manchin who has admittedly tamed this bill he has brought it down. But this is how Manchin is. He maintains a moderate reputation by saying things like, I'm going to stand up against the Democrats. And he does slow them down. And he doesn't moderate their objectives. But then he gives them.
Fresh update on "the york times" discussed on Mark Levin
"Now, broadcasting them from the underground command post. Deep in the bowels of a hidden bunker somewhere under the brick and steel of a non district building. We have once again made contact with our leader Mike. Love then. It's even more shocking. Leaks to the Washington Post, now The New York Times. If accurate, that the subject of the FBI raid is the national archives and records administration act for the federal records act as we call it. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I have to tell you somebody's watch this. There's not a single presidential administration that hasn't been in one form or another. I won't say in violation of because usually it's without knowledge, but that is not completely complied with the federal records act. And that includes Obama and that includes Clinton and that includes the bushes and that includes Reagan and includes all of them. Because they're not sure. Things are boxed up. You do the transition. You don't have time for the national archives to go over everything. And so the argument seems to be while he was put on notice in February, but that's okay. You still have to go through them and it's not so simple
What's the Connection Between Biden, Ukraine & the Secret Labs?
"Early on, we were told that there were these laboratories that everybody was very concerned about. And there's been a lot of speculation about those laboratories what they were doing and why the United States needed to go into Ukraine to secure those laboratories. Some people are saying it had to do with the China virus and it very well may be. I do not know. But we do know this that the United States is willing to risk American lives and treasure to protect those labs, so something important was happening inside those laboratories. The other part of it go it predates even the Trump administration where you have Joe Biden and his son doing all sorts of very nefarious business transactions with the Ukrainians. We've known for well over a decade that there has been great corruption within the Ukrainian government. But they've all decided to take a blind eye at that. Because there's something else going on here. Now, do we care about Ukraine? I don't think we do. I think Biden wants us involved in a shooting war with the Russians and the question is why. And it's really not Biden. It's whoever is pulling the strings, which would be Susan Rice a Barak Hussein Obama. But I want to go on to the next line here of this very disturbing story out of the New York times. Meanwhile, senior U.S. officials still believe that Putin is quite prepared to consider using a small nuclear weapon against Ukraine if he sees his army facing certain defeat. In short, this Ukraine war is so not over. So not stable, so not without dangerous surprises that can pop out on any given day.
Fresh update on "the york times" discussed on Dennis Prager Podcasts
"If they didn't believe their lies, they would have children. I read to you and I wrote a column on this. Last year, how many New York Times subscribers commented on an article on not having children, how they yearned for their daughter or son to have a child. They want to be a grandparent. But they are proud of their child for deciding not to bring a human being into this world to further pollute it. Children are seen as pollutants. By the environmentalists left. Sick is a proper term for the left. But they're in control by one damn vote. That of a vice president. An impressive woman I might add. Kamala Harris. And half this country votes that way. I don't believe there's any damage the Democrats could do. That would persuade any substantial number of Democrats, not to vote Democrat again..
Despite Biden Admin Not Recognizing Taiwan Indepdence, Pelosi Visits
"A very interesting story in today's New York Times. Thomas Friedman is the author of this opinion piece. And The New York Times very upset that Pelosi is going to Taiwan. I think just about everybody is, because no one quite understands why Pelosi is going to Taiwan. It marks the first time. That a high level government leader from this country has gone to Taiwan since I believe Newt Gingrich, back during the Clinton administration. So a long time ago, somewhat unprecedented, China threatening to blow Pelosi out of the sky. I don't think that's going to happen, but there's a lot of concern that this could spark some sort of an incident. So you've got that going on, you've got the the Biden administration, not very happy that Pelosi is going there as a matter of fact, The White House yesterday during this program actually said that the United States has absolutely zero interest in Taiwan declaring its independence from China. So at that point, I would have, if I was in charge of Taiwan, I would have just told Pelosi to do a UE and a head back home. You're not welcome here. But it just seems to me that the Biden administration is hellbent and maybe this is just me, but it seems to me they are hell bent on getting us involved in some sort of a shooting war with either Russia or China or Iran.
Fresh update on "the york times" discussed on Here and Now
"The U.S. war in Iraq, soldiers burned used equipment to prevent enemies from getting it. Noxious fumes likely led to health problems for veterans, and Iraqi civilians, too. Children report symptoms of dizziness, balance problems that have been in many cases of brain cancer, New York and around birth fits, the toxic legacy of the U.S. war in Iraq. On the next morning edition from NPR news. Tomorrow morning at 5, on 90.1 AVE. From NPR and WB war, I'm Celeste headley in Washington, D.C.. I'm Robin young in Boston, it's here and now. The Senate passed that sweeping climate Bill over the weekend. We covered elsewhere on the show today, but right now, what's happening on the state level where Republicans state treasurers are stopping efforts to fight climate change. More than 10,000 pages of documents and emails reviewed by The New York Times show a coordinated effort to punish companies, block federal appointees and fight regulations. David Gillis, a reporter on the climate desk of The New York Times helmed the report. So David start right off, how are elected state treasurers punishing companies that support climate action or ESG? It's called environmental social and governance priorities. Well, thanks for having me. And what's so remarkable is that after years of sort of talking and ringing their hands around companies increasing involvement in some social and political issues, these Republican treasures have found ways to hit back and specifically what they've done is at least three state treasures have withdrawn upwards of $700 million out of the accounts managed by BlackRock, the world's biggest asset manager, which is very outspoken in its efforts to combat climate change. And then just last week, the treasurer of West Virginia banned 5 major financial institutions from doing business with his state because of their stance on environmental issues. Riley Moore is the state treasurer of West Virginia. Some of those banks that are banned, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo, barred from any government contracts, and then also states withdrawing huge amounts of their investments from BlackRock. What is one of the concerns with them doing that? Well, for BlackRock, this represents a pretty small piece of their business. So it's not as if BlackRock's bottom line is going to suffer because a few states pull out even a $1 billion. The bigger concern is that we're moving ever closer with every episode like this towards a country where Republicans are going to do business with one set of banks and Democrats are going to do business with a different set of banks. And everyone I talk to when they really thought about that, I acknowledge that that's not what we need in this country. That's just going to further polarize and increase the divisions that are already so present in so many aspects of our daily life. Well, not just polarized, but maybe impoverish. I mean, Utah and Idaho, for instance, are criticizing plans by S&P Global. That's the ratings agency. They want to integrate climate risk, S&P does into their ratings. If you cut off companies that are looking honestly at the impact of climate change, what do you do to pensions? At a certain point what we're talking about here, especially when the state treasures are involved, is the financial health of the pension systems. The financial health of the investments that the states manage. Now, the companies managing these investments will say that it is imperative that they address the long-term risk of climate change and that that means gradually weaning away from investments in fossil fuels and rapidly moving away from investments in coal. The states, however, that still have large industries, supporting the fossil fuel business, they say, well, you're essentially boycotting our states. So if you're not going to do business with us, why should we give our business? Why should we give our investments to you to manage? Well, of course others would say, why not move in the direction of these companies? Why not follow their lead, retrain your workers, find other ways to keep them in more sustainable energy, but putting that aside, who's behind this because this is a very coordinated effort, and there's a little known nonprofit called the state financial officers foundation. It's backed by conservative think tanks like the heritage foundation that they help link the foundation to state treasurers, what do you find out about this ecosystem? This is one of the most sort of astonishing things I discovered when I reviewed 10,000 pages of emails and documents was the degree to which conservative think tanks with long-standing ties to groups like the Koch brothers and the oil industry were essentially had a direct line to these state treasures and were giving them talking points about how they ought to think about everything from President Biden's nominations to key financial regulatory posts to new rules being proposed by the Department of Labor and the Securities and Exchange Commission. And then Mary rapidly seen those same talking points appear in letters in memos and public statements, being made by the state treasurers as they opposed climate action around the country in the business world and in the federal government. It's really a quite a bit of reporting. David Gillis at the climate desk at The New York Times will link our listeners at here now dot org. Do you see this though? Growing or just remaining with these hardcore state treasurers who don't believe in climate change. It is the beginning of this effort. I'm afraid to say Tennessee, Oklahoma, Texas and West Virginia have already passed. Some of these laws that I described earlier that allow them to essentially stop doing business with companies that they claim are quote unquote, boycotting fossil fuels. There are dozens of states where these similar bills are making their way through the legislature. I expect many more to be passed in the months to come. And I think we're going to see more and more efforts by state treasures and state attorneys generals to really punish directly. The corporations that they say are placing undue emphasis on the environmental crisis that is impacting every one of us as we all swelter through this summer every single day. David Gillis, thank you so much. Thank you. The abortion map has been redrawn again.
Remember the Elián González Saga?
"Just reminds I love it when there are all these strange political bedfellows. It goes back to ilian Gonzalez in the Clinton administration. Remember the little boy in a little Havana in Miami? His mother drowned bringing him into the country and the father in Cuba wanted the little boy back and Janet Reno's Justice Department broke down the door and they swiped the kid from the arms of the relatives and delivered the boy back to communist Cuba. Remember that? And I remember at the time I was at a conference with a bunch of talk show hosts and all the big mouths on the radio gathered, which is rough. That's not a place I'm not real comfortable because I believe me, I'm mindful that I'm one of those big mouths and no one knew what position to take because it was, I mean, it was Clinton and we don't want to be pro Clinton, but on the other hand, family values, the kids being returned to daddy back in Cuba. Yeah, but it's communist Cuba. It's Phil de Fidel Castro. No one knew what to do. Well, the same thing's happening here. He got Tom Friedman from The New York Times lashing out at Pelosi. You've got Tucker Carlson from Fox News, condemning Pelosi. You've got, I guess, Pelosi supporters loving what she's doing. And you've got the Biden administration letting her go.
Tom Friedman: Nancy Pelosi's Visit to Taiwan Is 'Utterly Reckless'
"The airplane delivering House speaker Nancy Pelosi has landed on the island of Taiwan. Listen to what Tom Friedman from The New York Times wrote today about Pelosi's visit. He calls it utterly reckless. Friedman wrote yesterday, I have a lot of respect for House speaker Nancy Pelosi, but if she does go ahead with the visit to Taiwan this week, against President Biden's wishes, she will be doing something that is utterly reckless, dangerous and irresponsible, nothing good will come of it. The liberal columnist for The New York Times wrote, Taiwan will not be more secure or more prosperous as a result of this purely symbolic visit and a lot of bad things could happen. These include a Chinese military response that could result in the U.S. being plunged into direct conflicts with a nuclear armed Russia and a nuclear armed China at the same time. I wonder how Tom Friedman feels about being on the same side with Tucker Carlson. Over an issue of international global ideology and politics.
Greg Gutfeld and Charlie Discuss the Hilarious Babylon Bee
"For the day. And again, this is why the Babylon bee is so unbelievably brilliant. Because. You can not decipher between the Babylon bee headline and what's happening in The New York Times, I'm just waiting for the fema press release. Hurricane incoming, no need to be urgent. Yes. You're a KKK member. Yes, no rush, no rush. You may die, but you know, you'll be an antiracist. Yes, exactly. I hate the Babylon bee for reasons that they might be funnier than me. And that is a problem. But you know what's interesting going back to the left, what's happening to the left. As the Babylon B gets funny or in funnier, what's less funny, the onion. The onion actually did, they actually now kind of do serious stuff, and I'm like, what happened? And it's like, you know, some things just you just can't joke about. Even the onion, like the roe V wade thing, and we can't even joke about that. You know, and so then they just trash somebody, whatever. Meanwhile, the Babylon bee is, has flipped the script. You know, now the onion is dean wormer, their animal House, and they're really sweet, smart people. I mean, who would have thought that a Christian website is funnier than all the cool atheists?
Thomas Friedman: Nancy Pelosi Should Stay Home, Not Go to Taiwan
"Thomas Friedman is in my view a show for the communist Chinese and why not He's a wealthy man through marriage who lives in Maryland Maryland wants to be very much like the communist Chinese government But there you have it And free men and just so you know the Roberts who is the chief justice may have heard it the couples are very very close Tommy and Johnny And their wives are very very tight I thought you would want to know that In so Freeman is asked you know this Pelosi going to Taiwan and all What do you think about that Cut 14 go So what do you tell Nancy Pelosi then A lot of folks that apparently according to The New York Times our paper saying that inside The White House are very concerned about her going over there Just stay home This whole trip is completely out of context Eyes on the prize The prize is Ukraine defeating Russia China is helping us do that right now Did you know China is helping us defeat Russia right now Just staying home Nancy capitulate
Wikipedia Takes Cue From White House and Redefines 'Recession'
"Wikipedia editors feverishly change article on recessions to match Biden talking points. They're such a perfect example that we now have. Of the left wing nature of the Democratic Party and all of the media New York Times Washington Post, they are proud of the Democrats. They are proved to leftism. Prabhu was a Soviet communist newspaper, a recession, had a definition, not anymore. Because it would have to admit that there is a recession. I'm not sure it means that much, the average American who was suffering economically is not sitting down and saying, gee, I wonder if this is a recession, that I can't afford what I am buying and used to buying that my rent is gone higher and my income has stayed the same and that everything pertaining to energy, which means everything. Is so much more expensive. Gee, I wonder if it's a recession.
Ari Fleischer: If Credibility Was Their Business, the Media Would Be Different
"You know I know we have had you on before and we've kind of touched on this But why do they not care I mean it is still a business You do have to get clicks and some still sell traditional newspapers It's still a business It's not a charity despite the government's efforts to try to make it a government entity Don't they see that people just don't trust them I mean they have to see the polls you and I see where less than 10% of Republicans take these people seriously anymore They've got to understand that credibility is their business and it's just getting flushed down the toilet If credibility was their business the media would be very different The activism unfortunately has become their business Look when I stood at that podium and you were a Secret Service agent it was a different world Back then the media was still liberal We all knew that but they would at least tell you their job was to be objective and be fair Most mainstream media have now thrown that out the window They enjoy being activists They enjoy being retweeted retweeted by a Hollywood star They enjoy the number of followers they have They want to get a contract with MSNBC or CNN Why else would CNN allow its anchors It's reporters to go on the air and just launch opinion after opinion Because journalism is no longer about telling the people what's going on it's become activists for a cause And that cause became figuring out fixing fixing what the American people did in 2016 when they chose Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton the press said that Trump was a threat to the republic and they needed to save the republic to hell with objective journalism And they became activists and I have so many chapters and some of the examples in my book especially at The New York Times where this younger class younger generation of social warriors have taken over newsrooms older reporters really don't know what to do with this But younger reporters don't even believe in objectivity and talent two sides of a story anymore
Miranda Devine: Media Didn't Talk of Hunter to Get Rid of Trump First
"Of Hunter Biden's former business partners referred to Joe Biden as the big guy in a panic message the same day the New York Post broke news of the laptop from hell left behind by the president's son. I got to just start on a personal note with you. Are you mad? Are you angry that outside of the New York Post, the mainstream media is avoiding Joe Biden's relationship with his son hunter and hunter's business dealings like the Bubonic plague? Does that infuriate you? I'm not sure anger is the right emotion, but it certainly baffles me and worries me because I guess it just shows us all how dishonest and in the tank for the Democrats, that section of the media is and these are the pre stage so called publications like The New York Times and The Washington Post and NBC and CBS, they just don't do what they're supposed to do as journalists hold truth to power. They actually hide truth to protect power and that's what they were doing for Joe Biden because I guess they were so desperate to get rid of Donald Trump at the 2020 election that they were going to make sure that any derogatory information that came out about Joe Biden was buried.
EV Tax Credits Are Back
"New York Times reports that the climate and tax deal announced by Senate Democrats would pump hundreds of billions of dollars into programs, programs designed to speed the country's transition away from an economy based largely on fossil fuels. Okay, did you get that? Billions and billions and billions of dollars for electric vehicles. They're going to do a tax credit for electric vehicles, which is going to send the price of electric vehicles up because it's free money. It's going to screw up the used car market again. It's going to screw up everything again. It's way down from build back better. But it's still a nightmare. A still another inflationary nightmare. And it's hard for me to believe. It really is hard for me to believe that they did this.
Newt Gingrich Joins Dinesh to Talk About Biden's America
"Guys, I'm really happy to welcome to the podcast Newt Gingrich. Man who needs no introduction, but he's the chairman of gingrich 360, a multimedia production company, former Speaker of the House of Representatives and architect of the well legendary contract with America in 1994, nude is also a Fox News contributor podcast host newt's world and syndicated columnist and his latest book, which we're going to be talking about defeating big government socialism, saving America's future, newt, welcome to the podcast, great to have you. You've been the architect of some of the pivotal strategies that have been deployed by the Republicans over the last few decades. I'd like your assessment of where we are as a country today because it seems like we're living in a different America. Than the one we lived in, let's just say in the post Reagan era, even in the Clinton era, and that things have become more decayed more debilitated, more divided than ever. Do you agree with that assessment or do you have maybe a more a different take? Well, I think that the easiest analogy is that we've had a cancer of anti American left wingers. Which first really began to show up in the early 1960s with the work of people like marcuse at Berkeley, the student free speech movement of Berkeley. The weatherman, the black Panthers who openly said that they were out to assassinate police and actually killed 13 policemen. The fact that there are something like a 180 cities burning in the late 1960s, there were 2500 bombings in, I think, 1970, 71, and there was a lot of stuff out there. And then the country sort of reacted to it. And Nixon silent majority turned out to be real. But it was captured for me and two of theater whites amazing books on the making of the president. In the 1968 making the president, he has a chapter on the news media, which you could write today. He says, here's the role of The New York Times. Here's the old Washington Post. Here's how far to the left they are, et cetera. So it was already locked in in 68. And in 72, he wrote a sentence, which I thought was amazingly prescient. He said the problem of govern head and the reason he couldn't cut a deal. Was that, in the left, that liberal ideology had become a liberal theology.
The Next Move in the #SueTheView Saga With Kurt Schlichter
"You have some experience in defamation law. What are your thoughts on the view turning point USA being slandered and smeared by the view? Do you think we got a shot? Do we have a case here? You're a lawyer. Well, you may or may not. I will certainly talk to you offline because I don't want to give everything away. I'm looking on my wall, my first plans case was a $3 million defamation win. I also, and it's public knowledge, so I can talk about it, depending on the clock boy lawsuit for defamation in Texas, which we won. And so I know a little about this stuff. You know, that you should be calling people Nazis. And it shouldn't be saying that people are associated with Nazis. And I do know, I think it's cute that after they said that you and your organization were cavorting with Nazis, they came back and read a disclaimer and then promptly said more stuff. So I'm thinking right now there are some lawyers there pointing themselves a very stick great. Yeah, but don't get your hopes up. A huge part of my practice is spelling people. No, you don't have a defamation case. And it's because we have the First Amendment. You pretty much get to say whatever you want with a very strict guideline. They exist. But they're very straight. You can say what you want and no one can see you. And that includes bad things about other people. It's very hard to win a defamation suit. Maybe easier after the Supreme Court revisits something called Sullivan versus New York Times, which would affect you guys because you guys are public figures. And the standards for abuse of public figures are much, but no, no, no. They smeared our students though. Those are not public figures. Miners. That's a good argument.
Darren Beattie Describes the Fascinating Character of Ray Epps
"A little bit about this fascinating character of ray eps. So why does the story just not? I mean, there's massive puff piece to him a week ago in The New York Times saying he's the poor victim that the guy who's not in solitary not being denied his cancer treatment in a stinking prison cell in Washington D.C.. No, the guy at home free with his wife. He's the victim. So what do people need to know about this mysterious figure? Well, again, there's been a lot that's already covered, so I'll try to assume that people know most of the basics. Look, he's the only person caught on camera repeatedly and insistently all the way back to January 5th, urging people to go into the capitol as far as I know, he's the first person basically on video, one of the few people at all on video announcing the intention to go into the capitol or urging others to do so. It's not a one off thing. He follows up on this incessantly on January 6th. And he, as I mentioned, is repositioned very conveniently right at that initial breach point, the right place at the right time, and speaks to people about breaking in. In fact, one of the people who is indicted who has his own story researches as maroon proud boy, he tells him just like a minute before that initial breach. When we go in, leave this here referring to bear spray. And so there's this continuous foreknowledge and intention seemingly of some kind of breech situation into the capitol and amazingly, you know, his behavior was initially so egregious that he made it to the first 20 people on the FBI's most wanted list. All of the sort of left wing vigilante researchers were trying to identify him. The New York Times in its own video documentary on ray eps depicted him as one of the handful of rioters who had a plan to siege the capital in advance, and now it's total damage control mode, where
Darren Beattie of Revolver News on the Curious Ray Epps Timeline
"Very quickly. There's so many questions I've been scribbling down where I'm listening to you because the amazing coverage that you guys have done at revolving news. The timing issue. Just spend a minute on the timing issue. As you said, people, you know, I was there in the front row listening to the president, but you're talking about people who didn't even come to the ellipse, correct? Correct. Or weren't there while Trump was speaking? So this is the thing. In the case of ray eps, of course, I think this is sufficiently seated into people's minds that if they haven't, if they haven't seen it, go look it up on revolver that news, there's that iconic footage of ray eps, the night before on the 5th, saying we need to go into the capitol into the capitol. But on the next day, on January 6th, reya is at the ellipse before Trump starts speaking. And he's there at the lips multiple times telling the crowd spread the word when Trump's done speaking, we're all going to the capitol. That's where our true problems are. It's in that direction. And he's telling people everyone after the speech, we're going to the capitol, that's where our problems are. It's in that direction. But this guy, ray eps, who, according to The New York Times cover up piece on him, traveled on a last minute basis to D.C. because he and his son just wanted to hear Trump speak. Well, Rey ups who traveled from Arizona did not go to the speed. He was there at the ellipse before the speech, telling people where to go going to the capitol because that's where our problems are. But he's not at the speech. Instead, he walks over to the peace monument, which is right by the site of the initial breach, and he's there as Trump is including his speech. And he's there, prepositioned with a number of other highly suspicious individuals who are all there just conveniently at that same place at the same time who all seemingly coordinate to allow this thing to turn into the riotous type of situation. It does. All right,
'What in the World Happened to Elise Stefanik?'
"Got to tell you now. Finally, last story of the morning, New York Times Pete Werner, says, what in the world happened to at least defend it? Whenever you see one of those headlines what in the world happened to. It's a hit piece. I've been the subject of lots of what in the world happened to you here. When someone disagrees with you, they suggest that you've changed. But in fact, they changed. And I said, that's what you got to understand. Pete wehner has changed. Not at least the fan it. A least of fennec is a Republican leader who is leading a different kind of Republican Party that Pete wehner had a big role in pizza friend of mine, but those kinds of pieces are hit pieces. And mostly it's pizza upset about the attack on the one 6 committee.
"the york times" Discussed on Today, Explained
"Stand. She bombed. It was catastrophic in my view. She bombed, I think, at every juncture. You know, she came off as authentic, a family person, someone who believes in her politics, I think that when she was originally being questioned by her friendly counsel, her own attorney, she did pretty well. But once they got into the nitty Gritty of things, it became a complete disaster in my view. There was one point in which her attorney was questioning her about the editorial. And he asked her about her reaction to the editorial, and she starts talking about how everybody in her inner circle realized that she needed to respond again to The New York Times as lies. And so all of a sudden the judge said, well, again, what do you mean by again? Because it was pretty well established that this was a one off, you know? This was a discrete error by The New York Times? Yeah. And then she's like, yeah, well, you know, they did this before. And the judge was like, before the editorial was published, they did this same thing. And they go back and forth and the judge says, what specifics do you have? And she says, well, you know, the link that they established between me and political incitement, and of course I don't have the articles in front of me here. And to anybody who's listening to Sarah Palin for the past decade or so. You know that her broadsides against the media are these generic broad brush mainstream media things. For these lame stream media characters to get all wee weed up about that. First you have to ask yourself, have they ever ever attended a Sunday school class even have they never heard this terminology before? And she's never really pushed to state her tastes or builds her tastes or sight supporting links and evidence. And so they were like, what are you talking about? And then this forced a huge sidebar where they had to leave the courtroom, I think their sidebar is now down the hall because of COVID. But they were in there for a good ten, 15 minutes, trying to figure out this situation because they didn't want to poison the jury, having the jury think that The New York Times did this multiple times. Since Sarah Palin, did she blow it bad enough to blow her case? I mean, jeez, I don't know, I can't put myself in the jury box, but I felt that blue an enormous hole in the credibility of her case. If only because the times put forth people who were real sober detail oriented and they did not jump out of their own brief. You know what I mean? They never once went over the line factually, they never once really got the court to slip up and say, what are you talking about? They were just outstanding, you know? You know, in the context of having made this huge mistake. You could see how they all felt terrible about this mistake. And then Palin comes up there, and she sounds like, you know, she's still on Fox News. The contrast with The New York Times journalist was 100%. Hey folks, I'm Heather Cox Richardson, and I'm Joanne Freeman. We're the hosts of now and then, a weekly podcast that looks to the American past to make sense of our current political and cultural climate. There's been a wave of headlines recently about book bands. School boards and state governments are trying to outlaw the teaching of books that they find objectionable. From art spiegelman's mouse, to Toni Morrison's the bluest eye. This week, on now and then, we're releasing the first episode of a three part series. The series will dive deep into past book panics, explore why public schools so often become ideological battlegrounds and dissect the interplay between book bands and political bullying. Join us as we try to make sense of the role that bands have played in our national culture and explain why we're seeing so many bands today. Listen for free on Apple, cafe dot com or wherever you get your podcasts. Have you ever wondered whether New York City bagels are really better because of the water or why the mafia got its start in Sicily's lemon groves, or if those CBD infused seltzers actually do what they promise. Gastropod is a podcast exploring food through the lens of science and history, each episode journeys into the weird and wonderful as we uncover everything you never knew about your favorite foods. I'm Cynthia graber. And I'm Nikola Tilly. And whether you're obsessed with food or someone who wants to learn more about what's on your plate, we'd love for you to join us. Listen and follow gastropod on apple or wherever you listen to podcasts. Did you enjoy your week in New York City? You know I did, Katie, and I wasn't sure I would at first, New York is, of course, home to the liberal media elite, but Todd and the kids had a great time going to the Central Park and the FAO Schwartz and that goofy evolution museum. Eric, it sounds like in your eyes at least Sarah Palin kind of blew her argument here at this trial. And she might be blowing for her at least a golden opportunity to sue the so called mainstream media for libel and win. Why is it so hard to do that in the first place? In 1964, The New York Times versus Sullivan case, the court decided that we need a robust political marketplace. We need a place where news organizations can feel emboldened to really, really criticize the people who make big decisions about.
"the york times" Discussed on Today, Explained
"Up against a Tea Party favorite. And the times publishes an editorial about these shootings. So what happened in this 2017 editorial was the times was trying to make an argument trying to fasten an argument about how political rhetoric had amped up the possibility that we would see political violence in this country. And they citing that 2011 shooting. Claimed that there was a quote unquote political incitement link between a map that Sarah Palin's political action committee had circulated before the lochner shooting months before the loughner shooting. In fact, as a lot of reporting indicated after that 2011 shooting, there was no link between that Sarah PAC map and the Jared Lee loughner shooting. But the times said there was this political incitement link. What exactly did Palin take issue with in this editorial? We're talking about two or three sentences that are in two paragraphs in this editorial. The main passage is, in 2011, when Jared Lee loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding representative Gabby Giffords and killing 6 people, including a 9 year old girl. The link to political incitement was clear. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin's political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put misses Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized, crosshairs. And then in the next paragraph, they basically compare the two shootings and they say, though there's no sign of incitement as direct as in the Giffords attack. Liberals should, of course, so those are two instances there, where they're really, really, you know, their own factual territory pretty much. Was the times within its sort of editorial guidelines to write this or was this objectively wrong? I think that in today's media age, opinion writers get more and more leeway to do what they do and that's always the commonly cited defense for what Fox News Sean Hannity Tucker Carlson. Their opinion journalist. There are talk show hosts. But in this case, the answer would be no. The times did not have the authority to say what it said because it was directly contradicted by objective facts that had already been reported. And The New York Times itself would acknowledge and does acknowledge that its opinions piece is need to be based on a commonly shared factual basis. And this was not anything close to that. And so they published the editorial and they learned pretty quickly from Twitter that they had problems. Ross doubt that, who was a colleague and a conservative columnist at the times, alerted the editorial page editor James Bennett, via email to this problem. I would be remiss if I didn't express my bafflement at the editorial that we just ran on today's shootings and political violence. James was clearly starting to get unnerved. He later testified he didn't sleep that night and sent an email to his colleagues at 5 O 8 the next morning, saying we need to get to the bottom of this and perhaps run a correction, but we need to learn the truth. He said. How does that go? Well, I don't think it took them that long to figure it out because the editorial itself had linked to a story that debunked it. Right within the editorial itself was a link to an ABC News story, saying, you know, that there is no link between the Sarah pax map and what Jared Lee loughner had done. You know, and this is what made, I think this suit somewhat plausible is that this was really widely debunked. And for them to just insert this and say it was fact, you could possibly think that it was evidence of reckless disregard or knowing falsehood. Yeah. Given that it had been anybody who followed this back then, probably would have known. So the times corrects itself, but Sarah Palin still decides to sue? Yes, a 100%. She says she was harmed and obviously she has been a critic of The New York Times and the mainstream media for a really long time. You're seeing some idiots in the press. In this case, I think that she had a genuine group. And people who have dismissed her suit when her suit initially came out, I put a headline on my piece saying it was a convincing lawsuit. And I took a lot of heat for that. And my response to those people who are upset with my original assessment is, well, you've probably never been accused by The New York Times of inciting a mass murder. So I think it was a pretty serious thing. So heading into this trial, what exactly do Sarah Palin and her lawyers have to prove? What Sarah Palin and her lawyers have to prove is one of two things. Either The New York Times published this falsehood fully knowing that it was false, or they have to prove that the times published it with reckless disregard. As to its truth or falsity, which basically means they have to prove that the times entertained serious doubts about its truthfulness. And that's a real tough thing to do because you can't just document that they define industry standards or industry guidelines or best practices as the wonks might say. They have to prove that James Bennett walked by like informational signposts telling him that this was wrong. This case is pretty close because it's proven that James Bennett didn't click on various things that were writing his vicinity. That would have alerted him to this falsehood. And the trial after being delayed because Sarah Palin herself got the rona started earlier this month, and James Bennett himself takes the stand at trial, right? What was his testimony like? You know, it was many hours. I found it kind of riveting, I think that he was tremendously measured, tremendously responsible and tremendously contrite. I mean, he said, you know, this was my mistake. I own it. One of the lawyers asked him, did you send the editorial back to Elizabeth Williams and after you finished your revisions? And he said, yes. And I think he sensed that answering the question might shift blame onto Elizabeth because maybe she didn't review it enough after he finished his edits. And he was like, I just want to be clear on something here. This was my fault. But it is true that after he put these edits in the story that his other colleagues did not really scrutinize those edits. One of the dynamics there is that James Bennett was a revered editor. He was the top editor here. It was kind of a forceful editor. And I don't think that people were inclined necessarily the challenge his edits, the way they would be inclined to challenge someone lower down on the organizational hierarchy if you understand what I'm saying. Sure. Was Sarah Palin in the room for all of this? Sarah Palin was in the room I believe every day for the trial. Yeah. And she eventually takes the stand too. She eventually take the.
"the york times" Discussed on Today, Explained
"Senator John McCain and more recently she wrapped baby got back on The Masked Singer in costume as some kind of like Technicolor teddy bear. Tell the shake it. Shake it. Shake your healthy butt. Baby got back. A lot of people like to credit Sarah Palin as being some kind of pre trumpy Trump. They share a lot of ticks, including a real, love hate thing with the media. Social media and activists like both your scene today. They help render the lame stream media powerless and the people then are empowered. They can do their own homework. And now she is suing the mainstream media for libel, she's saying the mainstream media made stuff up about her and not just any mainstream media Sarah Palin is going after The New York Times. Trials of the sort almost never make it to a jury. Eric wemple has been covering the trial for The Washington Post. This is a trial that involves the most storied landmark media protection in American history. It's the 1964 actual malice test, which requires a public figure like Palin to prove a hell of a lot if they're going to prevail in a lawsuit against any media organization. So this is an enormous enormous case in the sense that we don't often see this standard tested before a jury. And if she wins, what kind of precedent could that set? If Palin were to win this case, I think it would probably encourage a lot of public figures, public officials, celebrities to come forth with suits, perhaps, because, you know, if she can do it, they can do it. I think if she loses, there is a chance for significant ramifications as well. And that is that they could possibly appeal the case and try to overturn or upend actual malice. That's something that the lawyers for Palin have signaled that they might do if they lose the case. Before digging into this actual malice test, we figured we should dial it back to the beginning of the story with Palin and the NYT. This story begins on June 14th, 2017. That was the day that James hodgkinson, who was a leftist Trump hater. Open fired on a baseball field in Alexandria where a number of Republican lawmakers were practicing for an upcoming baseball game. And all out gun battle as Capitol Hill police and Alexandria officers engaged a lone gunman among the first to be hit, Republican whip, Steve scalise. It was the second attack on a congressional lawmaker in about 6 years, because in 2011, Jared Lee loughner attacked a bunch of people in the Tucson parking lot where Gabby Giffords then congressional represented was holding an event. Witnesses are reporting that they heard 15 to 20 gunshots and an event being held outside that supermarket, of course we do not know if any of the emotions that might have flooded over from the political midterms took any sort of play in this event. We do know that that race was a very hotly contested race. She won.
"the york times" Discussed on On The Media
"Inc for denying them access to Amazon's smile where organizations can collect donations from sales, because of that hate group designation. SPLC in Amazon as the district court to dismiss the case on the grounds that coral ridge ministries hadn't alleged enough facts to show that SPLC acted with actual malice as required by New York Times be Sullivan. The district court agreed and dismissed the case. The dismissal was affirmed by a unanimous panel of the 11th circuit Court of Appeals and will get to that in a moment. But why is this coming up now? Well, having failed to prove its case in the lower courts, the ministry is now asking the Supreme Court to step in and change the rules. Specifically, they're asking the court to overrule nearly 60 years worth of president built on New York Times be Sullivan and to do away with the actual malice standard entirely. Of course, people and organizations filed petitions asking the high court to review lower court decisions every day, and very few of them are granted, but what makes this case worth paying attention to is that this week we got a small sign that at least some of the justices may be interested in granting the case when the court requested that SPLC and Amazon submit briefs explaining why the court shouldn't take it. Court watchers don't know for sure who issued the CFR. It only takes one justice to do it, but the names of clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch have both been floated. They both dissented from the court's declining to hear a similar petition this past July. And justice Thomas has long been vocal about his opposition to Sullivan. It remains unclear if these two can convince two more of their colleagues to hear the case as four justices are necessary to grant a review. Since it seems that this crucial piece of case law might be on the chopping block, we thought it would be a perfect time to revisit an interview we aired first in 2014 about the history of Sullivan. The case was heard just months before the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Though the First Amendment had already been around for nearly 200 years, it was narrowly focused. News outlets could be shuddered if sued by public officials over minor inaccuracies. The stakes were thus very high in New York Times be Sullivan. This was a story about the civil rights movement. It was a story about The New York Times covering the civil rights movement. And it was the story of local officials in this case in Alabama, trying to use state libel laws to essentially chill the press. Andrew Cohen is a fellow at the Brennan center for justice and senior editor at the Marshall project. To force reporters, either not to cover stories in the state or to cover civil rights stories in a way that was not true and more favorable to a local officials than it was to the civil rights movement. It begins as you know it in your piece in March of 1960 and it wasn't about coverage. It was about a political ad that appeared in The New York Times. Broadly criticizing southern officials for their aggressive response to civil rights protests. Right. It's a full page ad, which essentially decries the actions of local officials in Alabama. It was signed by Martin Luther King. It was signed by Harry Belafonte and other notable civil rights leaders. The New York Times accepted the ad, and it turned out that there were certain minor inaccuracies in the text of the full page ad. Like what? Well, there was one sentence about the number of times that Martin Luther King had been arrested. The figure was off by two. That's the kind of stuff that was cited by the public safety commissioner in Montgomery, Alabama, a man named Sullivan, who, although he was not identified in the ad, said that the times had liable him by publishing false material about him. And the only protection against libel at the time was it had to be true. And in this case, because there were a couple of minor inaccuracies, the times couldn't argue that. That's exactly right. At the time, the First Amendment and libel laws were essentially separate. No court had really firmly linked the two in the context of public officials. So you had this First Amendment that says Congress shall make no law abridging free speech and of the press. And then you had these libel laws, which were essentially doing just that. How did Sullivan argue for defamation if he wasn't even mentioned? So what he was able to do in Alabama in the state courts, which, of course, were very favorable to him, is to say the mere mention of the police, the word police, linked him in the minds of readers. And that was one of the main contentions that The New York Times asserted as the case got to the U.S. Supreme Court that creating a libel liability in the context where you don't identify the person specifically who is liable would generally preclude any criticism of any government action anywhere by any person working within that government. So the Alabama state court decided in favor of Sullivan and then the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the decision. Let me play you some C-SPAN tape from 1991 of the late great Tony Lewis, who had covered the case for the times. Mister Sullivan asked for $500,000 in damages and a white jury all white jury awarded him every penny of the 500,000. And others sued over the ad, including the governor of Alabama, totaled some demanded $3 million and it was quite clear that if it were up to the Alabama juries, breed be $3 million in the whole of paper. And The New York Times could not afford that kind of money then it was a barely profitable newspaper. It wasn't just intimidating to The New York Times. It was an offensive weapon, if you will, by southern politicians in southern officials to try to financially freeze out the reporting that was occurring in the south at that time. There had been circumstances where reporters were basically not sent on assignments in the south because of the fear of these sorts of libel lawsuits. Had this ruling stood, coverage of the civil rights movement going forward would have been far, far less aggressive, and of course that may have made a difference in the way that public perceptions were altered as a result of that coverage. So the Supreme Court took the case, heard arguments that you call more intense and passionate than most. We have some tape of Herbert Wexler, who.
"the york times" Discussed on Feminist Utopia
"The old grey lady also known as the old grey karen in my house. So i've never really believed that the new york times was a bastion of liberal thought. I'm to open with that. It's always been status quo in my time that i've been reading at the thirty so years i've been reading it. It has never been pro progressive. It has never been anti-capitalist. It has never been anti corporate or anti-racism or anti-racism. Oh my gosh. They go way back being stupid. Not only racism but anti-semitism as well or is that racism. Do you consider antisemitism racism Okay i think you can classify that. I think a lot of black activists would take umbrage at that and i understand why but then i've also had to take umbrage with black antecedents is one who shall remain nameless in texas was talking about the white supremacists at charlottesville. They weren't chancing chanting. The blacks will not replace us. They were chanting. Jews will not replace us when someone referred i referred to them specifically as antisemitic. And and i'm like. I love you dude but step off on this one right. So it's i. It is a form of of racism. I think the new york times made a huge error and labeling racism as human bias. Isn't that a wave thing. It's like unicorns and butterflies. The context was they had an article. About how black business owners were more likely to get paycheck protection program loans from online lenders than from smaller banks so if they went online they were approved if they went in person not so much and the new york times asserted that human bias appeared to be. The main reason. Couldn't say the word. It's a new our word. There's so many human. By as i think that it should be correctly labelled as racism and they did get a little bit of pushback on it. But i don't think enough. Had you heard about that. No for no. It's interesting though. My husband's involved with them. Some machine learning things with that have been encoded with human bias. And so there's there's like a whole episode there about sexist and racist and such huge amounts of bicycle into.
"the york times" Discussed on Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates
"Bhatia i wanted to take the question to see. Just how how sweepingly you mean the statement that the new york times has lost. its way. so you've talked about the the the the infelicitous events that you've talked about particularly around american politics aditorial page cetera. But frank talked about how you know. The new york times is covering wars around the world disasters around the world. They're doing business reporting. They're doing cultural reporting are. Are you suggesting that all of this is infected. By the problem that you're talking about happening in the editorial page in the op-ed page or are you limiting your argument in or should we be thinking that you're limiting your argument at different way so as i tried to explain in my opening statement to me it seems like a business model has made the times so financially successful in all the ways that frank laid out is corrosive to journalistic values. And what we're seeing right now. Is those two things sort of coming to ahead. The problem is is that the business model precludes them from delivering the news when it contravenes what its readers wanted here and not just what his readers want to hear it but what. Its most extreme readers here because it has ceded the measure of success to digital engagement and the most extreme people are always the most engaged. That's my argument will. I just wanted to save. I trust the new york times the mall the southern away from important todd in questions in the united states reporting will be opinion so yes. I completely trust virginia. The obituary on mary. Tyler moore. Because i don't think Issue today the closer it comes to the issues that are actually driving today. Paul close it comes to issues on which recall leadership of in your times as very very strong view the less attractive to deal the new york times and that is a real concern for or worse. Festive thing but we need to use tape record but we need a newspaper will tell the truth even when it's uncomfortable but we need one institution in american life that enjoys respect from across board. I love the guardian newspaper in the united kingdom. It's a good progressive voice. As many things. I agree with that that we have the the guardian in the united states. Ready and when the newspaper of record Until the guardian or lose something very very important. Virginia i ask virginia. Quick question should the new york times have run an op. Ed by a trump voter in the lead in the six months before the election. And if they if if yes. Why do you think they did not. I'm not sure that you know the op. Ed page though. It has three conservative writers and and some of the ones that have been fired and clara have been resigned. Including barry weiss and james bennett are not themselves trump voters either but the the the the not sure that they should have given that it is center-left although center left op ed page. The wall street journal did not make the case for bernie sanders. They didn't have introduced. An you. know an op-ed writer about bernie sanders. Because that page is known to be on the right the op. Ed page as you know is quite distinct the rest of the coverage and i think we've agreed that we're talking about as yasha made clear is an inflection that he thinks determines news is reported. Not how the feds come across. And i do think that we. I've pointed out to you that that that the page has been filled with accounts of why people did vote for trump. If not making a robust argument in favor of trump. I would be hard pressed to say that there was a case for this twice. Impeached historically unpopular president but was only once impeached at the time. Maybe they could have found someone we're hearing from but Yasha your partner has argued that he doesn't think there is a good case. The trump should it be given a second term and that the new york times had no obligation to publish one. You i would. I would take your question. I would agree with you. I would say yes absolutely. The new york times should have found somebody in the universe. They're they're there who could of made a case. For why trump y disruptor why someone who was so sacrilegious to american politics had appealed so many so frank. What does it say to you in terms of the argument were having that the paper did not mistake. Well yes it was a mistake but did it lose its way. What a dean by come back the executive editor say later what they're then editor of opinion. Say we need more and that was the thousand the second election. That was okay. They said that after the first election after the second.
"the york times" Discussed on Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates
"The most brilliant journalists of color from dot that same class and so there's no ideological diversity and they don't even reflect the minority communities. They come from. This is my point right when you when you you say that this kind of like. Whoa kness is the result of having a diverse workforce. It is not because they are not reflecting the communities that they come from eighty one percent of black people oppose defunding police right but you will not see that opposition in the new york times owner. Bring in your show josh go. Why does this matter by the way you might be able to find the police. That's fine why is it important About in the new york times because y- of the new york times lose touch with reality when the done seat represented ghost of appoint about diversity that yesterday times is a diverse staff of people from different if misty's who went to harvard university since that he's a knocked representative off. The valley does us city in. Which is not kate. I think i was one of the voices of resistance. I am very proud to have warned about the dangers of donald trump and a four-time populism ron world earlier than most but in use paper needs to hold on facts. The new york times. It was the only news outlet to take seriously the sexual abuse charges the sexual assault rape charges levelled by one terror against joe biden You know the biden campaign was appalled. They walked through every part of these charges which turned out to be false now. A lot of writers on the left had already said they seemed false on their face and certainly they could be away would have been an obstacle to buy the presidency. But the new york times did not primarily she did not dismiss them out of and they instead investigated them and found those charges wanting. I think we can all agree that the charges were quick to rest by the new york. Times all right. So your point made in. Virginia ticket to baccio bochu. Virginia's pushing back against your partners argument that the paper is showing a A pro-democratic bias in the way that it is covering the news not just on the bed page but you can jump into this conversation. We're be like now in terms of trump and biden. I just don't believe that the two of you think biden is getting the same treatment from the near times. That trump did. I just don't believe that you actually think that. I don't think anybody who can read could possibly think that and have a little. Let me just clarify. Do think that trump and biden journalistically merit the same coverage or the same kind of coverage. I think that question is a partisan question. I mean that that is exactly the What we're getting at here so so so so. Donald trump of course was outrageous but that outrageousness was in a very symbiotic relationship with the news media. That was covering him was getting rich off of covering his outrageousness. Now the new york times in twenty seventeen printed trump's name ninety thousand times which means that it appeared the equivalent of every two hundred fifty words. Okay that's like four times per article and you can compare how many times president obama's name appeared. Maybe are thinking. Oh well that's just normal for president. We know how many times president obama's name appeared in his second year in office and it was forty thousand times. Okay so i don't understand your argument. Is that the omnipresence of trump's name and coverage of trump was the paper feeding its audience. Negative coverage of trump wanted. To hear is for financial reasons is out what your argument is doing. Exactly what i said about the new dna of the times where does is success measure. It is measured in terms of engagement and there is nothing that gets the heartbeat of liberal elites going like the word trump bucket. If i man. I think it's very important to recognize. John got to this in his question. Donald trump was not just another president. He came to washington intending to be a disruptor. He was an anti 'institutionalised. He attacked not just as a political rivals but his political allies. If they didn't toe the line much of what he was doing and we have seen this in very thoughtful writing from people who are inside the administration working for him was a challenge to democracy itself. Let us just say to. John's question covering donald trump was not like covering any other president. He was unlike any president. We have had in this country's yasha your jonathan excellent question which is weather. Joe biden maritza seem kind of coverage on slump. What would say is that. They should be covered by the same standards. And if you play the same standards to july donald trump and in my opinion will come up with many more critical stories about donald trump and joe biden and that is absolutely fine. Bad is what journalism is the problem in. The last years has become that the media including the new york times has reflexively stocked to anything. Donald trump who has allies said even in cases where it might be that they turned out to be light. One of those times spent the toll misinformation. Disinformation which your times though thinks of itself as combating has been used was when a few people suggested visit possibility that kodak nineteen escaped a lab in china. This was labeled by the new times in fact checks and other newspapers as conspiracy. Few it was put beyond the balance of respectable At nobel prize winners in virology banda facebook youtube for discussing those few weeks for fourteen fifteen minutes. The only mentions of his furious in new york. Times was as obvious lewis. Well today i don't know what the truth is you know yet today at the white house is taking this very seriously and finally osama mainstream media is taking it seriously as well but there plenty of times. Ufo's were considered far and wide to be a preoccupation of crazy people. Now they're taken seriously by the guards so these things evolve in the new york times ever since you know people on the center left center right. Started to say oh. We've decided that the loudly rapidly hypothesis is ban. So that's the whole reason that we have to talk about it and use it as an opportunity to worry that liberals band speech people have talked about the lab theory to death. And as far as i know it's being investigated on the investigation into being closely watched by the new york giants. You jump in. Frank showed the the observation. You made Also carry something that goes way beyond the new york times but unfortunately so many of things that the former president donald trump said route the coveted crisis. It's ho- sore it's Gonna mirror miraculously disappear or hydroxy. Chloroquine will cure or whatever it is proved to be fundamentally incorrect if not outright fabrications the president's credibility sunk to a level that we've not seen before and whether it's the new york times or any place else they had to take that into consideration in reporting whatever he said the lab league theory which i don't think was banned but was viewed skeptically and covered in ways that the by all news organizations most anyway very carefully and reflected that credibility problem and it reflected the flood of disinformation that we now confront so. I think it's wrong to say that the new york times by itself and some egregious degree banned the.
"the york times" Discussed on Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates
"Nor vpn dot com slash intelligence. Welcome back to intelligence squared us. I'm your host john donvan. Let's return to our discussion. Thank you for that wrap up. Frank says no. You've now heard the first opening remarks. Then let's move onto the screen next arguing for the resolution of the new york. Times has lost its way among yasha screen is yours. Thanks so much. I'm really looking forward to this debate. And a couple of important things in which we agree. We all agree the new york times as one of the most important institutions in the united states. We all want the new york times to succeed. We also all agree. That new york times is not donald. Trump would put it the failing new of times. The idea that the paper is in financial trouble. Ovitz about to go bankrupt. Fed is about to fail in. That kind of way is really raw. My interest in this between need a newspaper of record. She's luffing your times It's we need an institution. Envy nited states that people from different hats of a political spectrum can look to recognize even if it is beautiful often that it represents the truth that it represents reality in a way that vein can trust and the thing. I'm worried about a central three main changes times implemented over the last year's detract from its standing as the newspaper of record. The i is a very clear narrowing opinion envy up and you didn't have to take my impression as read on that. You can take what that columnists within the new york. Times are saying when he talked Multiple figures within at world f told me over the last years that even quite uncontroversial criticisms of progressive orthodoxy chand by the editors assad things that you simply cannot same time even if ninety percent of a population in america might agree with them. One example of this is very hard within the new york times. Criticize the idea of defending the police and yet we have seen just now in the mail race in new york city that the top candidates chosen by people of color in a progressive city in the united states. Very much in disagreement with that. Slow the second thing i worry about. Is that this is not on just about your opinion pages. It is also a bad news coverage yet increasing seeing an attempt to get away from the old form of the tippety which could be devolve into two ciders abba. Climate change should get scientists who believes in climate change. One denies it. Good when visit consensus. Which would be reflected in the pages of terms the new moral clarity as journalists. Hold it often goes in the opposite direction. The news pages of coming away of managing benard of trying to make clear a which side is right even when that side is making a mistake so the question about future of new york times is not whether it will succeed financially. I'm confident that it will. It's about the role that it's likely to play in american and as has argued at the moment in your times is running after its subscriber base tries to maximize the revenue dollars from the people who most agree with the world of new york times. It is entrusted turning into an american version of guiding stokes. Piece full the most progressive voices in the country. What we need is to preserve the road of the newspaper of record that can actually be a basis of reality for automatic. That is what your time. Losing that is wi fi but is losing. Its thank you again. Our final opening statement will be against the resolution. It comes from virginia heffernan. Virginia your moment. So i started writing for the new york times almost exactly twenty years ago and i was on staff for eight of those years. i should say about the liberal elite according to pew center last year the numbers are very different from what baccio adjust represented to us thirty eight percent of the times readers earn more than seventy five thousand dollars a year but twenty five percent earn between thirty and seventy five thousand dollars and twenty six percent have a household income under thirty thousand dollars in the midst of this debate. I wanna tell you about. Just one article. The obituary of mary. Tyler moore not exactly world's historical piece in two thousand six when moore was still alive..
"the york times" Discussed on Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates
"Hard way that if they ran beds that their own colleagues disapproved of those colleagues take to twitter very publicly denounce them and their bosses at the near times. Would listen to that. Twitter bob again and again. We have seen the times as leadership caving to social media. Mobs and what i want to argue. Is that. This is not a glitch in a hallowed institution. This is actually a feature a nana bug of the times is current iteration of its current. Dna now this new iteration began in two thousand fourteen. When the the now publisher ag salzburger was tasked with helping the times of all into a digital first publication and he came up with the times ovation report and that report was leaked to the media. So we know it's in it and he found that there were a number of things. The times was not doing well enough the first thing. He blamed the wall separating. The business side of journalism audience development from the newsreel. Eiji felt that the the task of growing the audience fell squarely on the newsroom. And the second thing was he felt underwhelmed by the degree to which times reporters where selling their stories or promoting themselves or really becoming social media. Influencers leadership must identify rising digital stars. And ask them how the times can do better. That's a quote from the time ovation report. So this actually reflected a larger shift towards measuring success in terms of engagement online. And of course what that means is you're allowing the most extreme readers to determine what success looks like because the most engaged readers are always the most extreme ones the new dna of the near times explicitly called for seating moral journalistic authority to the worst place on the planet. Which is the internet and the worst place on the internet. Which is twitter now. Ag was right that this was good business. Times is making a lot of money pursuing this but it is bad journalism now. I think that my colleagues on the other side arguing against the proposal are gonna argue that. This was a democratizing force. This was the new york times allowing the readers the masses to speak back to them. Nothing could be further from the truth. The median income of a new york times reader is one hundred ninety one thousand dollars. The new york times always was and remains a reflection of ruling class in worms. Now the ruling class does like good journalism about its enemies. But that's all you're ever gonna find at the new york times which has really lost. Its way very much about younger sergeant. Our next speaker will be arguing against the resolution against the idea that the new york times has lost. Its way here is. Frank says no frank. The screen is yours. Thank you very much. And i look forward to the debate in the conversation here. Let me say the outset. I'm not gonna argue that. The new york times is perfect. I'm not gonna argue that. The new york times hasn't made missteps misjudgements errors and that hasn't got things that he can improve. I don't think anybody looks at any news organization and doesn't bring their point of view their worldview to that experience but i do think we need to be first and foremost precise and in considering what this resolution is all about that. The new york times has lost. Its way that somehow fundamentally forgotten how to do. Journalism is doing journalism anymore. Losing its way is not about getting better. Losing its ways being fundamentally a disoriented and in the wrong place. The new york times must navigate several things and these are the things we need to keep in mind as we define whether it has lost. Its way i it's journalism is it good is it fair is it inclusive is a professional is accountable when it is right wrong and needs adjusting the storytelling is that storytelling creative bold imaginative. Does it make use of the various platforms. The technologies to inform engage news consumers and finally the business model can generate the revenue needed to maintain seventeen hundred journalists around the world on a daily basis. And all the support system that's needed. I the journalists every day. The new york times still does despite what you just heard. Some of the most remarkable journalism in the world breaking news coverage of the assassination of haiti's president within the first twenty four hours fifteen separate stories from reporting on what happened so far as it is known to the implications on the street in the politics. Secular peace stutters in israel Another headline diamond rush in south africa. Another red cradles nurtured china's next generation of communist leaders a breathtaking reach around the planet and coverage from across the country detailed coverage of the collapse of the condo in surf site a remarkable coverage of heat drought wildfires What to know about the latest corona virus and the delta variant arts culture science. These are areas that most news organisations. Don't even touch anymore. And yet the new york times does it in detail and depth on a daily basis from inc. Mommy's linking tattoo artists with their ancestors to The last ice area in the arctic which may be very vulnerable to rapid.
"the york times" Discussed on No Meat Athlete Radio
"Qualified for boston running my first hundred mile. You probably know these same feelings where after that. It's just like you just kinda on a cloud the rest of the week and it's Doesn't seem real and all that so it's been that combined with a ton of business that came as soon as it happened which is different from the running with running. It was like you get done your thing. And then now they semi case or had dues rate of blog posts about it and that was sort relaxed a little while but just let right into the need to keep going So it's been crazy. And then the time before the announcement came out of course was itself. A huge sprint. For two weeks of instagram. Lives and social media and being on people's podcasts. And all this stuff so it's just like i have no idea what we said in the last. I wonder what we did what we said in the last week's podcast. I don't say the exact same things again but i have no idea what we said. I don't remember if we talked about the spartan race thing the book i mentioned it. Just don't no idea well. It was an episode that everyone else remembers very very well so let. Let's make sure we don't repeat anything. No well i guess now would be a good time to announce what has happened last week and it is had another baby just getting to what happened what happened. We book is like a baby right. Heard people use yes not of course of course not as important as my real children but yes. We have the book. The book came out. And then we've had a podcast right. Yes yes. The book came out last early last week and we had record episode after that. And i'm right saying you. Some dora the explorer songs. Okay this coma. And i just woke up and i'm just remembering the reintroduced to the world. Yes that's right so anyway. The big news of course was that on wednesday. Two days ago we found out that the book we made it onto the new york. Times bestseller list Number four is debut position which actually pretty high because there are ten in this category. Which is the advice. How to and miscellaneous category. So you can go there right now. Go to new york times. I guess it's ny times dot com. Click on the bestsellers and find that category. And you will see right there number. Four my name. Roberts name in our book picture of a book. And it's something that i have imagined in my head many many many times. What that list would look like with my name on it. Just you know visualization sort of thing. So it's really cool to see that happening. And i mean i don't i like obviously we'll talk about that sort of thing in this episode but like i said it's been crazy and just a long long time wanting that i've had two books before this and both of those one of them was four years ago. Twenty seventeen and one of them was twenty thirteen. And both of those. You know my kind of naive mind. I thought they thought they could be bestsellers. New york times bestsellers. And when i say everyone's bestseller these days and usually they mean amazon bestseller which is not to take anything away from that because that itself isn't accomplishment. I mean writing a book accomplishment for anyone amazon's not hard to get because the list is so quick updating so if you sell a ton of books in an hour you can become a bestseller yes exactly and then you know in theory or technically you forever our amazon bestselling author after that but anyway but new york times bestseller is for me. I've always thought of it as the pinnacle and it's it's amazing so yeah i thought those books would. I wanted them to become this that that was the goal of course for those. The first book really had no chance. I didn't know enough to know that Got it because it made me made me wanna you know promote it like crazy and that was very proud of it and all that The second book probably did have a chance. But i was one of few people who who realized that and so it was. My co author stephanie. By the way And so that book ran out of copies of the day before it went on sale. And who knows if it hadn't maybe it would have. But but i view this is a good example is because i always i always tell we have the belief of like you should take responsibility for stuff. You should not blame other situations or circumstances for your issues. I think generally if you can take some sort of responsible if you can find a way to take responsibility yourself in a way. That's empowering not a damaging way. Because i know there are some things where taking responsibility might be damaging. But i've worked hard. At first i did. I did for that. But then i that's my mistake for not from the beginning from forgetting into situation where someone else didn't have the same vision i did and i should have making sure enough. Copies are printed and in stock Part of the part of the deal. And i can't just assume someone else has got that handled so that as my mistake and a big lesson learned and this time we didn't make that mistake in this time it. It takes a whole lot of things to come together. I've realized like you have to have some luck. You gotta get all the things working in very few things can miss or not not happen not materialize. And that's what happened this time so It was incredible. I mean the support that our community first of all individuals buying the book was was massive the residents that it had. It's one of like. I think of a couple of projects in the history of that. Have that have you know. Hit like that and just felt like when it's happening like you just can't believe how fast people are half as you're seeing the sales command and whatever and or just the response of the number of comments on something like it just it just felt like one of those things where something about it was the right thing at the right time and it just happened and then and then the number of like other people who have platforms. We're willing to share them with us with instagram lives. Of course ritual having us on his podcast and releasing it at the right time for us.
"the york times" Discussed on Max & Murphy on Politics
"I mean that really i think for me personally may have kind of been of the things that put me over over the top and For him. But so. I'm i don't know what What's the first thing he'll do it. But i'm certainly. I'm certainly excited to see him. Bring that energy at back city hall in a new rule and in and in terms of what you you know in a lower information race like that. I mean you know. The mayor race mayor's race obviously dominated so much of the news and people's van with if they were paying attention to the election cycle. What do you think you know. The seal of approval from the times did for him. You know my hope is that Readers and new yorkers now that even if you don't agree with our endorsement which is totally fine we are thinking about What is good for new york good for the city. Especially you know with an eye toward the most vulnerable new yorkers and those who need the most help I i hope that if queer that we You know we take this role very seriously. I certainly do. I mean It's not just enough to agree with the candidate We want to know that they can get the job done with their serious And that they are ethical. And that's not to say that other candidates we endorse this. Cycle are not are not those. But that's what we're looking for in kansas and You know a hope that we can serve as a guide. And i think with brad lander You know there's a lotta progressive energy in the city right now so My hope is that we can kind of help. Guide voters to. Hey we've done some of this work for you and here's what we think is really impressive. Work can really get this job done Or is really a star and somebody who's going to be a great public servant So i see this as public service journalism and You know we are. I'm always learning. I'm still learning About how this works It's a huge responsibility obviously And before i let you go unfortunately. Just have one more minute. But alvin brag is leading the manhattan district attorney race immensely important race Like almost all these races across the city of the democratic primary winner is almost assured to win the general. What you know understanding. We have absentee ballots to count what What excites you about the possibility of album. Braga's the next manhattan district attorney. I mean this is just exciting. It's obviously if if brad does win the race he'll become need for lack prosecutor in manhattan It's historic but not only is he Simply african-american as i am right. But he is just extremely qualified to do the job and keep new yorkers space but also to be to bring real reform to this office and You know..
"the york times" Discussed on Max & Murphy on Politics
"The race gave her a really big jolt at the time really catapulted her from someone that a lot of people who pay close attention to this stuff were impressed by an interested in but thought she might have a really hard path to victory and then once the time aditorial board got behind her she really shot into the top tier of the top tier conversation had a huge fundraising response to that. And then all of a sudden she was really catapulted in in the polls she seems to have been Doing very well in manhattan especially but to your prior point seems to not have really broken through at least in the first place votes. I rank votes with in communities of color. Talk a little bit about what you saw. You know saw from her candidacy in response to her and the role. You the role you think. The times editorial board played in in catapulting her candidacy. Sure that time that israel board is a proudly aggressive and openly progressive editorial board Certainly maybe not as progressive as some in the city might want but we are progressive You know we saw katherine garcia as The best person to execute on and The things the city needs through that prism She may not be as far to the left as we are uncertain issues but we felt strongly that she could be pushed And that she was a really good manager who could kind of get the job done as she sent her campaign. I'm obviously you know. The voters felt differently. And so i. I think i'm very proud of artists i mean. I think that she was the best candidate and she was the right candidate for for us At but at the same time. I think there's a lot of talent in the race and i think You know maya wiley is proof. Positive that there's a lot of progressive energy. I also suspect that. A lot of garcia voters may have put wiley second. I don't think they're that far apart ways And then you know on top of that. You know eric adam for me as the editorial board my only regret is that Our endorsement doesn't hold the same sway in east flatbush that holds in park slope. Both for on park avenue and so to me that says There's more work to do and I really believe strongly that we should be as much as possible for the entire city. And so i won't until until we make some headway there and is that is that a reflection of the fact that would impresses a newspaper editorial board from someone's career and from someone's interviews with you and all the vetting you do is very different from the fact that eric adams has been working and developing relationships in these communities for decades Is how do you sort of. Think about the disconnect there is it. Is it understanding Better sort of y. Many communities responded the way they did to eric adams or is it trying to figure out a way for the boards opinions to really get in front of more voters and have more weight in different communities. I mean i think it's all of the above right now. I think in order to make them more persuasive arguments. We need to better understand Voters and communities that we didn't reach As as effectively And so you know. I i mean i'm feeling good today right i really am but i also think there's always room for self reflection and i think there's an opportunity here Listen black americans. In general i think specifically have had such a traumatic and disappointing history with mainstream newspapers..
"the york times" Discussed on Max & Murphy on Politics
"It does welcome to max politics. This max from gotham gazette coming to you the day after primary day. Well we know some things and we don't know a lot because in part because The primaries were crowded and competitive the so much on the ballot in part because of the expansion of absentee balloting in part because of the start of the use of ranked choice voting. So there are a lot of layers to these elections There are some things we know. There's some things we don't know we're digging into both of those some of the things that we can take away from primary day in the election thus far and some of what to watch for going forward we have a great show for you today. In just a couple minutes. I'm going to be joined by mara. Gay of the new york times editorial board the times editorial board endorsed in the three big races that were on the ballot in the primary the democratic primaries for mayor city controller and manhattan district attorney and all three of the candidates that the times editorial board endorsed got a seemingly enormous boost from those endorsements of times. Detoro board will join me shortly to discuss the choices they made in those three races. How those candidates are doing and what comes next. Those candidates of course were kathryn garcia in the mayoral primary. Now she's in third place but she has far outpaced expectations in this race so far and she's one of the three candidates in the mayoral primary that have a shot to win of any kind. The favourite there of course is eric adams who has a roughly eighty thousand vote lead. Roughly nine percentage points over mile wildly. Who's a little bit ahead of kathryn garcia and those are the three candidates in the running as we wait to count absentee ballots and do the ranked choice run off in another race that the times endorsed in the democratic primary for comptroller brad lander city council member from brooklyn is surprising. Some people by outpacing city council speaker cory johnson by Also about sixty seventy thousand. Votes and nine percentage points in the controller. Primary brad lander looking like. He's in very good shape. They're going into absentees ranked choice. Run off again. These races are knock called and they won't be for weeks and then in the third race that the times editorial board weighed in on alvin brag for manhattan district attorney in the democratic primary. He is leading tally for weinstein. By seven thousand or.
"the york times" Discussed on Off The Meatrack Chainz New York Podcast
"Not all white women the free and you still dad dad not all man as long so what. What did i say now. Old black women. Oh sexy whoa. I'm i'm i'm a hater over saying this old man holding score he may restoring is in the way women on the hell's going on his phone. He got be boy he cancels any kansas. You know everybody sexy in your own skin. Okay all right i'll be. I hoping get disconnected. You remember told not to go live now. He lives is managed as you just said to be lives right now. I il gross next. What's the next Next tabby that. Yeah hold on hold on this No it's the grand came away an idea to instagram live. You get to add light. You know like to three more people. I was actually. I was actually the main person to actually be a part of that. Actually though we add two or three more people to instagram love was part of the test. Man no man. Homey homey fights are ban actually Had had to go live with him because he had to people and everything and i was like it was like three people who i was like i was like. Now's like damn abud tom. They added like three or four people to this shit man she each about so long it was lie. It was like rain stories. Shit though man as i got some stories as though though i gotta deal instagram. More often sound using like that. That's my main plus. That's that's what is my get whatever zone among. That's how i found out about aggrement remedying being on instagram live weddings thursdays. Yeah i i see this. I haven't watched the say one of his videos. He actually had a whole if you can do if you. If you're on all school it was like all old school also saw. He was playing and everything. That's his show like this is so if you're mostly update like he posted it on this page. As a matter of fact game on his twitter or orange is you ram. He posted on his instagram. Page i sophia listened. I'll give new yorkers who grew up watching Rocky daniels eight. You gotta watch like watching. This live to watch the video music box for me. I'll watch i'll watch. I was reason on instagram on his instagram live on wednesdays and thursdays at the after he is finished being alive is stone is pro robot. Whatever is the same as profiles. What i'm saying. I think he saves the video on his own. It tv's a feature that instagram put on there. What how does how long the last video is that. He doesn't know win saving. We say the video on tv. It doesn't it doesn't get deleted doesn't get deleted because we know garage sales video to id tv. He doesn't put it in as two stories anymore. Every my put the shit in this story because it deletes in twenty four hours in that thing. That whites checking lose again. They're gonna go undefeated for the rest of the season oh tell me solo.
"the york times" Discussed on Off The Meatrack Chainz New York Podcast
"Not related to fucking dj supreme. So what joe. Someone actually named listening to a podcast. Is someone actually named at kids supreme. We sells like dj serene. By what the hell of gotta respect it is. I hope you're not named after the nine. Your child fucking apple bottoms. Shit man owner not even to okay. All right no high school when my hastening no owned values like phone by the simple corona in hollywood roller and own dinner mouse girl gang sawyer. He gotten heavyset. You understand so own. You know iraq tragic. That's that's his name is rocky. It'd be like yo i seen. Toya's he acts before i said. Are you serious you know. I think you know tragedy qaddafi own. What worst somebody who named themselves problem name problems wrapping it there. S no stays me problem when you you think the most outlandish name be scariest like marketing. That's the first the marketing you don't wanna be deaf killer kill you kill you three times but just between a man who wasn't over enough. I hurt when i first heard this guy named problem late. Wait a minute. I merely about the song ninety nine problems stuff that the problem out like it. When you're mad at me west zone with fred on. Freddie gibbs came out with the album until recently you specify gibbs is straight up man. Shot does gardening joyce rice was roadway underground because i was subscribed for many when i five hundred subscribers. But she she. She got us track. But freddie gibbs and her got track. Your freddie gibson speak is your Fuck out yo. When i heard the story. 'cause i i didn't i heard of. I never listened to his music number. We got accused of rape or some shit. When i learn was way accused some share and he was he was even in states so when i heard another rapid loosen dempsey. I said that god is not a lot nicer medical on spotify. I'll listen to all his albums. Not mainly he did it. He did a lot of work with outlays. And i'm telling love to work out concern. I'm telling albums can make almost anybody sound. Good altemus in a static selected in my personality correctly. Get get a big from. Dj game scratching on ships on. I i think i could do not easy though. So that's why you going youtube But twenty ships. Ms another be so people. Don't get familiar respect. He deserved click. Way isn't it. where isn't it. I gifts from arm pup group.
"the york times" Discussed on Off The Meatrack Chainz New York Podcast
"Their time with the. I made cities incorrectly. But if it was chinese in china right african americans who had some kind of some kind of Home the airplane pay rent and their landlords chinese asian center where it will kick them out. That was going on for a good two months shea. During during the pandemic like members meme hours on like that. I'm sure i will. It was during the pandemic though like they was getting it was fucking up in that. I think that's what. I kinda animosity came for african year. Exactly some and again the whole story correctly but that it was going on crazy so he was. He was looking at and videos. I remember they out a couple of videos out of discrimination and receiving was yoke is funding. You look at his main cause a yoga work. They hope they hope us some. You know how much money and it was. The number was up. There wasn't a it wasn't a five. Five mil may be hiding that but how much money the african community give people who know how much how much how much women alone spin fucking at at. We can't explain to investors and after africa. Chinese has lot avon actually said that nobody knows. Group of people are contributed as much as china china. I mean china has has a motive meter dating and they could be on you know when he gets catch them. All was exactly well if you look at it on my article about war that america is having with china when it comes to like the five g. Technology is five years next technology of the world but china they have investments in so many different countries understand. Really come up once arm technology. Get the going you know in We have we have a wall with a silent warwick the economy you know china is going to be probably the largest economy and i think we neck and neck now with you know they're trying to take over will be the population may be like six billion people in china crazy shit over there. I am but that's crazy. Oh man she making a crazy arrose organised solon chinese food. I will say that. Yeah yup i was talking to so a lot about this this this this this this lady who is a food critic food. You're at times. Who said an article right there who base from the neons basically basically the thing that really struck me is when she was talking about. How cow on your. He said. The best bagels are in california not new york. I argued i want to read to you right now so so it goes like this. Let's call bakers are driving a great bego boom producing some of the most delicious virgins around and finding ways to expand during the pandemic which i call it the slam gimmick trademark so so so in berkeley california the bagels. At boy she bagels. Have to look on. I think you meant to say butch whatever could give me man. I won't so they have. They have the look of lab. Labrador puppies curled up for afternoon. Naps pudgy golden roly poly. The bread has a comforting squish dick but yielding shui but not densely so way gooey and older. He's ashamed man say gooey. Guys who've nasty words gooey. But that's but that's what happens. That's what happens when he tried to marshmallows and everything when you try to split it apart. That's what that is is. It's gooey just like your favorite candy bar that has like peanut butter caramel and stuff going is doing if you're on the air side louis. Let the economists. You nuts gooey. Moving on okay now. You losing nineties. Are you losing cool. Brownie points nasdaq may never to the condom of some random house with bacon salt to bagels liver kind of messy man. A women's bathroom. No you take the night low income so you just wipe you take across this on this one man. Asthma know my share with me today. I'm thankful so when you think about google about moon rocks into we talking drugs more was legalized yesterday and eighty alright. But that was that was part of the topic though scoring segue. I understand that. But i would hope they knew where all my gaza wait. Wait you guys. That's the we correct virgin. Ary equal mute move. They got some of the you know. The nuggets is like this in bulls. You cut them.
"the york times" Discussed on Switch4Good
"Yeah we had it downgrade just like every other mammal right there. Fifty four hundred other mammals and they all seem to be just fine but if you look at humans we all have these diseases and so many of them respiratory diseases that other animals don't have met our ancestors didn't have so. This was the first question. I tried to answer is. Why are we breathing so improperly. Why do asthma rates. Continue to go up year. After year after year and allergies and chronic sinusitis in sleep apnea and it turns out that so much of this is tied to this. Anatomical change that has occurred in our faces over the last three hundred years so if you were to look at an ancient skull perfectly straight thi this vary forward growing phase. This huge jaw modern schools about ninety percent of us. I'm a great example have crooked teeth. Our mouths have grown so small that they no longer have partito grow straight. So they grow crooked and this means that we al-sabah smaller airway small mouth smaller airway breathing problems. And no one's refuting. Any of the science is very clear. You can look up a zillion ancient skulls and you can see their faces and then you can look at modern skulls and see what's happened. It's just. there was so little awareness of it. That really shocked me. It doesn't make sense biologically that we would do something so bad for us. What are we doing wrong than that has caused our face to change so that we're not reading what came first are our face changed and then we didn't breathe properly or we weren't reading properly so our face changed well. Life is always changing is always evolving. The so if you look at a skull from thousand are several hundred thousand years ago to one. Today it's very different but that change happens at a very slow pace so animals are able to adopt to it and adapt and we were just fine. Our ancestors were just fine but the changes that happened in the last few hundred years happened so quickly and so suddenly that we haven't been able to adapt and so that's why we're breathing so poorly so the main culprit here is lack of chewing because of a highly processed diet of industrialized foods. So teeth can grow crooked within a single generation of eating industrialized foods and we saw that in the eighteen hundreds when all of the process flour and process rise and baked goods and soft stuff bottled stuff and can stuff really started spreading throughout europe. And then we saw very quickly in the us as well so again. There isn't too much controversy about this even though the sounds like some crazy hypothesis. It's not there's there's very clear science but a lot of people haven't looked at how those changes have affected our ability to breathe. And that's what. I really tried to dive into on this book. It makes sense that it would. That are are not a practicing in using our. Musk kill moscow blah. you know what. I'm saying muscular structure and our bone structure of our face by chewing harder. Denser foods chris cruciferous vegetables and nuts and seeds. That are harder that it would just waste away..