Open Thread: The NYTimes Is Not to Be Trusted on HRClinton

You knew that, and I knew that, and now the entire news-reading public (such as it is) begins to catch on. Margaret Sullivan, the NYTimes‘ “Public Editor”, got stuck with trying to mealy-mouth some kind of figleaf for “A Clinton Story Fraught With Inaccuracies“:

The story certainly seemed like a blockbuster: A criminal investigation of Hillary Rodham Clinton by the Justice Department was being sought by two federal inspectors general over her email practices while secretary of state…

But aspects of it began to unravel soon after it first went online. The first major change was this: It wasn’t really Mrs. Clinton directly who was the focus of the request for an investigation. It was more general: whether government information was handled improperly in connection with her use of a personal email account.

Much later, The Times backed off the startling characterization of a “criminal inquiry,” instead calling it something far tamer sounding: it was a “security” referral.

From Thursday night to Sunday morning – when a final correction appeared in print – the inaccuracies and changes in the story were handled as they came along, with little explanation to readers, other than routine corrections. The first change I mentioned above was written into the story for hours without a correction or any notice of the change, which was substantive….

Reporting a less sensational version of the story, with a headline that did not include the word “criminal,” and continuing to develop it the next day would have been a wise play. Better yet: Waiting until the next day to publish anything at all…

Eric Wemple, at the Washington Post, catalogs the Wingnut Wurlitzer backlash:

Politico’s Dylan Byers secured a quote from [NYT reporter] Schmidt on why the newspaper had changed the language: “It was a response to complaints we received from the Clinton camp that we thought were reasonable, and we made them,” Schmidt said.

Or, as Cupp said, “Hillary asked them to” change the story. And that, conservatives argued, was the scandal. NewsBusters, the conservative watchdog of mainstream media, scolded the newspaper for caving: “[T]he Hillary team had complained to the Times about the initial Thursday night story, and the paper (surprise) complied.” Breitbart sniffed, “New York Times Stealth-Edits Clinton Email Story at Her Command.” …

As a piece of media criticism, this outburst was a two-story flophouse with termites running amok in the joists. On one level, habitual critics of the New York Times were so blinded by their bias against the newspaper that they couldn’t stand still and appreciate what the paper had done: “Break” a “story” about a criminal probe into Hillary Clinton over her e-mails. It had put its good name on the line for a towering scoop that — if true! — could have seriously hurt her 2016 presidential hopes. It moved aggressively on the story, as well — way too aggressively, as a matter of fact…

On another level, the critique was leaving out something that once mattered in political dialogue: the truth. In response to the Clinton camp’s complaints, the New York Times adjusted its story to squelch the notion that Clinton herself was at the center of a request for a criminal probe. Those alterations brought the story closer to the facts. Not quite close enough, however. Even after eliminating the statement that the request for criminal investigation was directed at Clinton herself, the story was still considerably wrong…

So, good job, Grey Lady — you left your fingerprints all over a sloppy hit piece, and the RW nutjobs you were hoping to placate still don’t trust you. And yet the most highly compensated members of the MSM wonder why their institution gets so little respect.

111 replies
  1. 1
    David Koch says:

    To continue down this path of progress, it will be vital for Kenya to recognize that no country can achieve its full potential unless it draws on the talents of all its people — and that must include the half of Kenyans — maybe a little more than half –who are women and girls. (Applause.) Now, I’m going to spend a little time on this just for a second. Every country and every culture has traditions that are unique and help make that country what it is. But just because something is a part of your past doesn’t make it right. It doesn’t mean that it defines your future.

    Look at us in the United States. Recently, we’ve been having a debate about the Confederate flag. Some of you may be familiar with this. This was a symbol for those states who fought against the Union to preserve slavery. Now, as a historical artifact, it’s important. But some have argued that it’s just a symbol of heritage that should fly in public spaces. The fact is it was a flag that flew over an army that fought to maintain a system of slavery and racial subjugation. So we should understand our history, but we should also recognize that it sends a bad message to those who were liberated from slavery and oppression.

    And in part because of an unspeakable tragedy that took place recently, where a young man who was a fan of the Confederate flag and racial superiority shot helpless people in a church, more and more Americans of all races are realizing now that that flag should come down. (Applause.) Just because something is a tradition doesn’t make it right.

    Well, so around the world, there is a tradition of repressing women and treating them differently, and not giving them the same opportunities, and husbands beating their wives, and children not being sent to school. Those are traditions. Treating women and girls as second-class citizens, those are bad traditions. They need to change. (Applause.) They’re holding you back.

    Treating women as second-class citizens is a bad tradition. It holds you back. (Applause.) There’s no excuse for sexual assault or domestic violence. There’s no reason that young girls should suffer genital mutilation. There’s no place in civilized society for the early or forced marriage of children. These traditions may date back centuries; they have no place in the 21st century. (Applause.)

    These are issues of right and wrong — in any culture. But they’re also issues of success and failure. Any nation that fails to educate its girls or employ its women and allowing them to maximize their potential is doomed to fall behind in a global economy. (Applause.)

    You know, we’re in a sports center. Imagine if you have a team and you don’t let half of the team play. (Laughter.) That’s stupid. (Laughter and applause.) That makes no sense. And the evidence shows that communities that give their daughters the same opportunities as their sons, they are more peaceful, they are more prosperous, they develop faster, they are more likely to succeed. (Applause.) That’s true in America. That’s true here in Kenya. It doesn’t matter.

    And that’s why one of the most successful development policies you can pursue is giving girls and education, and removing the obstacles that stand between them and their dreams. And by the way, if you educate girls — they grow up to be moms — and they, because they’re educated, are more likely to produce educated children. (Applause.) So Kenya will not succeed if it treats women and girls as second-class citizens. I want to be very clear about that. (Applause.)

    President Obama

  2. 2
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    If when you look around the table you can’t spot the sucker, the sucker is you.

  3. 3
    David Koch says:

    * The Obama administration plans to restore federal funding for prison inmates to take college courses, overturning one the ugliest aspects of the 1994 mass incarceration-prison industrial complex bill. (

    * The National Security Agency will destroy the telephone records of millions of Americans it has collected over almost 10 years once it has resolved pending litigation and implemented a new surveillance law. (

    * New NH poll: Monmouth University Poll (July 23 to 26, 2015)

    Trump (24%)
    ¡Bush! (12%)
    Kasich (7%)
    Walker (7%)
    Rubio (6%)
    Carson (5%)
    Paul (5%)
    Christie (4%)
    Fiorina (3%)
    Cruz (3%)
    Huckabee (2%)
    Jindal (2%)
    Pataki (2%)
    Perry (1%)
    Santorum (1%)
    Graham (1%)
    Gilmore (1%)

    This is Great News for McCain. Trump dumped on him in the most personal and vicious way and no one in his party cares.

  4. 4
    bago says:

    An above the fold story — We changed the headline because we were wrong would restore some credibility.

  5. 5
    Tommy says:

    So, good job, Grey Lady — you left your fingerprints all over a sloppy hit piece, and the RW nutjobs you were hoping to placate still don’t trust you. And yet the most highly compensated members of the MSM wonder why their institution gets so little respect.

    Well said. If somebody like Ballon Juice, TPM, or Daily Kos makes a mistake on a story I can let it pass if it is rare. They don’t have the resources of a NYT. Plus I bet if somebody calls an person to ask for a quote or input and say “I am calling from the NYT” pretty sure they return the call. Quickly.

    But the NYT has been making a lot of pretty big mistakes the last few years. This mistake here was a simple reading comprehension problem, like they the reporters and editors couldn’t read.

  6. 6
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @David Koch: You can not rape your wife.

    – Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s pit bull

  7. 7
    xenos says:

    Can they m as ke a rule that if they get burned by a source., as in truly and unambiguously lied to, they can reveal that source?

    If Gowdy is behind this story they really should reveal that. The paper has an ethical obligation to its readers to reveal liars.

  8. 8

    Reporting a less sensational version of the story, with a headline that did not include the word “criminal,” and continuing to develop it the next day would have been a wise play. Better yet: Waiting until the next day to publish anything at all.

    Losing the story to another news outlet would have been a far, far better outcome than publishing an unfair story and damaging The Times’s reputation for accuracy.

    What’s more, when mistakes inevitably happen, The Times needs to be much more transparent with readers about what is going on. Just revising the story, and figuring out the corrections later, doesn’t cut it.

    That’s all well and good (although opening a vein would have been better), but the lie has already made it halfway around the world. You can bet that we’re going to see GOP attack ads on Hillary Clinton that include the words “criminal investigation” before the end of the week.

  9. 9
    Tommy says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: If you read the Daily Beast story he says it like 4-5 times. It wasn’t a gafe on his part, it was his freaking defense of Trump.

  10. 10
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @xenos: A # of news organizations do that. Tell us the truth and we will die in jail for you. Tell us a lie and we will out you to the world. If the NYT had the memo in their hot little hands and read it with the spin provided by their source, that is entirely on them.

    Reading is fundamental.

  11. 11
    Tommy says:


    Reading is fundamental.

    That is why I said the NYT showed a lack of reading comprehension. I often will quickly scan a headline and think it said this or that. Then I take like 5 seconds to read it and think for a few and realize I totally miss understood it.

    I don’t know how a journalist and an editor at the NYT makes that mistake. Because if it wasn’t a mistake then it was on purpose that they totally mislead their audience with a story clearly not accurate.

  12. 12
    bystander says:

    Yet, somehow, on Moanin’ Joe, they are still discussing the Times story as if it had not been effectively eviscerated. Now, all they need to do is make vague allusions to “email scandal” and “can’t be trusted”. The Times is after all the newspaper of Judith Miller. No accident.

  13. 13
    Tommy says:

    @bystander: I will let you watch Morning Joe for me :). The best thing I did, getting rid of cable, was I no longer watch MSNBC. I work out of my house and used to have the channel on, like listening to radio, for 12+ hours a day. I swear it is adding years to my life and the world seems to be a happier place.

  14. 14
    JPL says:

    CBS Morning News is covering the Trump story.

  15. 15
    TS says:


    The paper has an ethical obligation to its readers to reveal liars

    Hahahahaha – US media gave up any idea of “ethical obligations” some time in the 1970s. Nov 2008 they lost all remaining sense of lies vs truth.

  16. 16
    Kay says:


    That’s really the infuriating part. The retraction doesn’t matter. Since they know the retraction doesn’t matter, they have to be more careful in the first place.

    The emails story is complicated. At the end of this there will be very few people who bother to actually understand it and none of them will appear on television or be quoted. This is only the second step, too, the retraction. Once we’re done with that we have to move to “why didn’t Hillary Clinton do a better job responding to the story we made up?”

  17. 17
    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet says:

    @xenos: They could also, I dunno, maybe mention the writers and the editor by name before paragraph 9 when presenting a story to readers about what happened.

    The Times didn’t write this story and edit it, specific people did. Readers have a right to know and understand who those people were, and to keep that information in mind when reading other articles by them in the future.

    With all that said, this is just another bit of straw that Hillary has had dumped on her over the years. It’s not a big deal. If it causes these writers and this editor to be more circumspect about their stories, then it’s a good thing. If it causes more readers to be more critical and questioning in their reading, well that’s a good thing too.

    The RWNM (noise machine) will make noise about anything. Hillary should have and could have foreseen that there would be screaming and (leading) questions about her using her own server for State e-mails. I still think it was a bone-headed move on her part. But it’s just noise. She is still a compelling candidate facing a bunch of pandering idiots advocating policies that would destroy much of what we, our parents, grandparents, and neighbors have tried to build in this country and the world. She’ll survive this.


  18. 18
    raven says:

    @Tommy: This blog is a non-stop bitch fest about news and politics. I don’t quite see how you insulate yourself from that just because you don’t watch the news? It’s the same shit.

  19. 19
    Tommy says:

    @Kay: I do web sites for a living. I’ve set-up countless hosting and email accounts. Hillary did a very dumb thing at the core, hosting the shit in her house.

    Given I am not a US Senator. My clients are not either. I am also not super rich and neither are my clients. So I get the appeal for “control” and hosting your stuff in your house. But NOBODY does that anymore.

    Hosting accounts can start as low as $4.95/month. People used to, but they don’t anymore if for no other reason then a third party is faster, has better security, and well tech support. Oh and this wasn’t a business or personal account, it was used for Federal government work.

    Whomever told her to host her email in a server in her own house was shit all stupid and honestly not even sure if it is legal. Well maybe not illegal but a gray area for government records/regulations.

  20. 20
    Tommy says:

    @raven: LOL. I can skip over stuff I don’t want to read.

  21. 21
  22. 22
    raven says:

    @Kay: It doesn’t mean shit. No one moved in either direction, to or away, from Hillary because of this bullshit.

  23. 23
    JGabriel says:

    Bob Schooley (via John Cole @ Top):

    I think the media could use a 3 day waiting period before they run with a Clinton scandal story, given the caliber of oppos feeding the tips

    Which raises another point: it seems like the Republitards are benefiting from having 15 – 20 candidates running for the nomination, leaving the Dems no clear leader to target for oppo research.

    On the other hand, I suppose the current melange of assorted assholes and assholes and assholes
    running for the GOP nom are doing a competent enough job of ratfucking each other to spare us the necessity of joining their shit-slinging Bombardment tournament … for the time being.

  24. 24
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    Meanwhile, in baseball news: “Los Angeles Angels outfielder Mike Trout has tested positive for PEDs, putting a cloud over the sport’s brightest young star.”


    Sources say Trout tested positive for Mike Trout, which was banned before this season due to the unfair advantage being Mike Trout gives a player.

    “We had realized over the past three years that Mike Trout enables great speed, power and athleticism and hand-eye coordination,” said Manfred. “It made baseball almost laughably easy.”

    Yet despite the ban, Trout tested positive for “massive amounts” of Mike Trout in a random test last week.

    “He had Mike Trout blood, Mike Trout muscles, everything,” said a MLB source. “He had Mike Trout in his bones.”

    Just another cheater.

  25. 25
    Tommy says:

    @raven: I should be more clear. What got me wasn’t the endless stories about Hillary’s emails or this or that. It was the endless coverage of shark attacks. A deck collapsing during a party. Lost airliner. More than anything that was what pissed me off cause I always thought to myself, I bet something more important might be happening someplace in the world, could you maybe cover that?

  26. 26
    MattF says:


    I haven’t seen a literal “We retract the story”– and the NYT is, apparently, not gonna do that. As long as there’s no unambiguous and specific retraction, the Wurlitzer will play on.

    ETA: I should say, everyone makes mistakes. It’s the refusal to take appropriate steps afterwards that’s the huge problem here.

  27. 27
    Lee says:


    I’ve read this in several places & I think it is an excellent idea. If they got burned by the source, then they should out the source.

    If they screwed it up or misrepresented the information on purpose then they should just take their lumps.

    To be honest, I think we should just go with the rule, if the news organization does not out the source that mislead them, then the news organization either screwed it up themselves or tried to purposefully mislead their readers.

  28. 28
    Cervantes says:


    The paper has an ethical obligation to its readers to reveal liars.

    You might think so, but if they took such an obligation seriously they might have no time or space left to do anything else.

  29. 29
    Zinsky says:

    Jeff Gerths front page story in the NYT in 1992 about the Whitewater mock “scandal”, riddled with inaccuracies, innuendo and half-truths was flogged by the GOP for decades. The paper’s news department sucks!

  30. 30
    Lee says:

    @Tommy: Watch Al Jazeera. Outstanding news program that really covers the world as well as the US.

  31. 31
    Kay says:


    I don’t always agree with that – I think national media influences how candidates are presented in a way that extends beyond “people who read the NYTimes” – but I agree with you on the emails generally. It doesn’t work as damaging unless everyone accepts what to me is the backstory- “the Clintons lie all the time and are generally hiding something”. I don’t believe everyone accepts that. I thought Whitewater was absolute bullshit, for example. A hit job based on almost nothing, and that’s where the narrative on her originates.

    I think she’s a strong candidate who will be very competitive against any of the Republicans. I always have, even when she lost the 2008 primary.

  32. 32
    Germy Shoemangler says:

    Okay, what’s all this then?

    Ivana Trump accused her husband of sexually violating her, and his lawyer has issued a series of insane threats to Daily Beast reporters, which they have published.

    “It is true,” Cohen added. “You cannot rape your spouse. And there’s very clear case law.” … Cohen added that there is no such thing, legally, as a man raping his wife. “You cannot rape your spouse,” he said. There’s very clear case law.” …

    “I will make sure that you and I meet one day while we’re in the courthouse. And I will take you for every penny you still don’t have. And I will come after your Daily Beast and everybody else that you possibly know,” Cohen said. “So I’m warning you, tread very fucking lightly, because what I’m going to do to you is going to be fucking disgusting. You understand me?”

    “You write a story that has Mr. Trump’s name in it, with the word ‘rape,’ and I’m going to mess your life up…for as long as you’re on this frickin’ planet…you’re going to have judgments against you, so much money, you’ll never know how to get out from underneath it,” he added.

    Will the base love him even more for this?

    EDIT: whoops, I see Ozark posted this earlier.

  33. 33
    Tommy says:

    @Lee: That is exactly what I watch now. Dad was over months ago after I got rid of cable. Somehow he is this pretty rare moderate Republican. Watches CNN but bitches about how bad the news is all the time.

    I was watching Al Jazeera. He didn’t seem interested. I guess he assumed it was a Middle Eastern station and they’d be all pro-terrorist or something.

    After watching it for a few hours he was like, this is pretty good. I said “yes, they are practicing this rare thing called Journalism.”

  34. 34
    MattF says:

    @Germy Shoemangler: Big money can buy a rabid-dog lawyer. What’s not to like?

  35. 35
    NorthLeft12 says:

    What is pissing me off now is reporter Schmidt’s comment to Politico, which basically changes the narrative on the corrections from sloppy and incompetent reporting to political pressure from Clinton.

    Frankly, the guy should be fired if only because he still can’t seem to understand that he and his co-reporter and his editor were played by his “very good” source and rushed a false and misleading story into the echo chamber. Shameful.

    Outside of Krugman, I could care less for the NYT.

  36. 36
    Kay says:


    No, you’re right, I probably shouldn’t use that word unless they retract. The story is so gutted though there’s not much left to defend. There will be some kind of administrative inquiry into whether her office inadvertently revealed classified information in 2 of the emails she released/ or were released? That seems like the nut of it.

  37. 37
    debbie says:

    How is it possible for a group to run a political ad on tv, yet they can’t be found on Google?

    I watched an ad last night for the GOP, all soft and fuzzy with a narrator’s voice similar to Sarah McLachlan’s, full of shots of “normal” people, and a message that we are you, your values are ours, we want the same things.

    The name is Opportunity News Media. This is the first time I haven’t been able to find them somewhere on the Internet.

  38. 38
    Germy Shoemangler says:

    @MattF: Imagine if Hillary had Cohen on her team! He’d immediately contact the NYTimes:

    “You write a story that has Ms. Clinton’s name in it, with the word ‘criminal investigation,’ and I’m going to mess your life up…for as long as you’re on this frickin’ planet…you’re going to have judgments against you, so much money, you’ll never know how to get out from underneath it,” he added.

  39. 39
    debbie says:


    Typical Republicans, reiterating only part of the story as if it were the whole thing. Just like their claim that the Democrats are the party of Jim Crow.

  40. 40
    Germy Shoemangler says:

    Did someone on Jeb’s team contact the Daily Beast with some “interesting” information on Trump and his ex?

  41. 41
    Tommy says:

    @NorthLeft12: Look I try to stay out of the mud and muck of some of these stories. So I will openly admit I’ve only read a little about this. But it seemed pretty clear to me not only wasn’t the story accurate, it was kind of worse. It was the exact opposite of what they wrote. Not only were feds not looking into Hillary and her emails, they were looking at the people her staff handed them over to. I guess that could include Republicans and their staffers couldn’t it?

  42. 42
    Kay says:


    I think they do great work a lot.

    This yesterday was very, very good. I found myself wondering how they got it- who let them on the ships, why did the captains speak to them at all.

  43. 43
    Tommy says:

    @Germy Shoemangler: Nope. Daily Beast got it out of a book written about Trump by an author I think it could be safe to say wasn’t a raving fan.

  44. 44
    Lee says:


    I found this but that is not really helpful at all.

  45. 45
  46. 46
    MattF says:

    @NorthLeft12: @Kay:

    I think there’s a lot of good stuff in the Times. Like today’s Op-Ed piece on how the Greek deal poisons the relationship between France and Germany. But anything about HRC should be viewed with suspicion and may be quietly edited without notice or regrets.

  47. 47
    Tommy says:

    @debbie: I got an assumption you are not a fan of Trump. But as a lady I beg you to read the Daily Beast story if you have not. Well I beg everybody to read it. His lawyer says like 4-5 times in a statement to the Beast you can’t rape your wife. WTF. This is 2015 isn’t it and not 1940?

  48. 48
    debbie says:


    Won’t Hillary be testifying before the Senate about this soon? She’s pugnacious enough she’ll set the record straight for those open-minded enough to listen. She’ll never convince those, like Joe, who aren’t interested in the truth, so hopefully, she won’t even try.

  49. 49
    debbie says:


    Yeah, living in NYC in the 1980s and 1990s earned me a ticket to Hate Trump. Leave it to Trump, though, to be represented by a Bottom of the Slime Bucket attorney.

  50. 50
    Tommy says:

    @debbie: Oh I hate the guy so that comment of mine wasn’t a dig at you. I just have no idea how in 2015 you can have somebody speak on your behalf, and a freaking lawyer for that matter, and say you can’t rape your wife. I’ve never been married. Clearly never raped anybody. But pretty sure you can rape your wife and it happens far too often!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  51. 51
    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet says:

    @debbie: Opportunity News Media is listed here as buying a bunch of ads. A PDF filed there says the responsible party is:

    John Hart, Editor in Chief, with an address on Wilson Boulevard in Arlington VA. He apparently was formerly communications director for Sen. Coburn.

    There’s an AboutUs link at their web site, but you’ll have to do some digging if you want to figure out if they’re funded by the Koch Brothers, etc., or whether it’s just another generic Republican front.



  52. 52
    Kay says:


    IMO, political media have to admit that a lot of the reason they went after Hillary Clinton when she was First Lady was because she was a different kind of First Lady- she had a career before the White House so there was an opening. It wouldn’t happen now not because spouses of powerful people have fewer real or invented conflicts but because there are lots and lots of DC couples where both spouses are involved in work that might intersect. It’s in no one’s interest to make a big deal out of it now. In fact, they often specifically wall off questions on the prior or current work of spouses as irrelevant, unfair and old-fashioned. They’d hit too may people with that broad brush now (and many of them are in media!) so they don’t use it anymore.

  53. 53


    ETA: I should say, everyone makes mistakes. It’s the refusal to take appropriate steps afterwards that’s the huge problem here.

    Even that is letting them off too easily. Everyone makes mistakes, which is why news reporters have rules about double and triple checking important stories before they run. The Times ran this story without doing their due diligence, and they’ve been burned as a result. The way they got it wrong in the first place is at least as big a problem as their failure to admit and properly correct their mistake afterward.

  54. 54
    debbie says:


    Thanks. Pity that John Hart is not a distinctive name. I’ll have to keep looking.

  55. 55
    Tommy says:


    I watched an ad last night for the GOP, all soft and fuzzy with a narrator’s voice similar to Sarah McLachlan’s, full of shots of “normal” people, and a message that we are you, your values are ours, we want the same things.

    I think the same ad just started running on Hulu. Sounds just like it but I didn’t pay attention to how ran it. Will have to watch for it and see if it is the same outfit.

    I worked in advertising for almost 20 years. This was a very slick, professional ad. It wasn’t done on the cheap. There is funding, a lot of funding behind it.

  56. 56
    Tom says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: The thing is, if they get the right (Republican) judge, he might get out of this.

    I’m assuming the GOP is responsible for this piece. I’m not defending Trump, but it’s pretty rich that the party that has made the phrase “legitimate rape” practically part of their platform is pulling something like this.

  57. 57
    White Trash Liberal says:


    What is dumb about hosting and securing a server at your home as opposed to anywhere else?

    What’s dumb is keeping records with the feds, given that the State, VA and DHS networks have been hacked repeatedly.

    I personally think Clinton made a wise and legal decision. Now that the law has changed, insinuating ex post fact judgments is both absurd and reading from the GOP playbook.

    And as far as FOIA regs go, adjust them legislatively to include federal business over private servers and incorporate a third party back up server with mandatory uploads every 6 days.

    This is and will continue to be a first rate nothing burger. The only scandal ammunition is from people like you who insinuate finger wags into the dialogue. Because Clinton.

  58. 58


    I found this but that is not really helpful at all.

    It’s interesting that it lists them as a foreign company, who I thought weren’t supposed to be making political ads in the US. I guess that probably means it’s owned by a Cayman Islands holding company or something similar.

  59. 59
    Tommy says:

    @Tom: I don’t think it is the GOP. The story was based off something in a book written not long after Trump got his second divorce. This has been out in the public for ages.

  60. 60
    Kay says:


    I liked “what difference does it make?” when she said it. I still do. I completely sympathize with that frustration.

    She was right. The Benghazi story was “about” whether or not there was political spin after it happened. I actually think that was a mistake by media, and Jake Tapper is responsible for the mistake. He jumped the gun. Why did they chase that aspect? If someone actually fucked up in Benghazi that person or persons must have been thrilled media decided to chase Susan Rice for 6 months. I still don’t know what happened. I know they think the WH and/or Clinton tried to spin what happened, but why is that the focus? That’s nuts. They’re supposed to start with “what happened”.

  61. 61
    Tom says:

    @I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: Those ads are running out here (Colorado) as well.

    Lies, from beginning to end.

  62. 62
    Patrick says:


    I think there’s a lot of good stuff in the Times. Like today’s Op-Ed piece on how the Greek deal poisons the relationship between France and Germany. But anything about HRC should be viewed with suspicion and may be quietly edited without notice or regrets.

    And considering they had so many errors and bias in their reporting in the run-up to the Iraq war, anything they write about the run-up to the next war should also be viewed with suspicion.

  63. 63
    rikyrah says:

    It really is the end of an era.
    Luke and Laura saved the friggin’ WORLD!


    Anthony Geary Leaves General Hospital: Say Goodbye With Luke Spencer’s 6 Most Memorable Moments

    Soap fans, grab extra tissues! July 27 marked the final appearance of Anthony Geary as Luke Spencer on General Hospital. The actor, 68, debuted on the show way back on Nov. 20, 1978 as wicked Bobbie’s bad boy big brother. Originally, Luke was set to be killed off, but reaction to Geary’s portrayal was so strong the character was given a reprieve!

    Read more:
    Follow us: @usweekly on Twitter | usweekly on Facebook

  64. 64
    Tommy says:

    @White Trash Liberal:

    This is and will continue to be a first rate nothing burger.

    I agree, you just won’t get me to change my mind that hosting your own server is a good idea. I was nitpicking here. I also hear you on the government networks getting hacked. Fine go to a third party service like Rackspace (who I use often). Or Dreamhost. Heck use Amazon Web Services.

    With all of these firms you can buy your own server and have it installed at their location and not use a co-hosted account. Everything on your server is your info and not mine.

    This was a common thing Hillary did ages ago. It is no longer because it doesn’t make sense.

  65. 65
    Betty Cracker says:

    @rikyrah: We watched the ABC soaps when I was a kid. My mom called in sick at work and let my sister and me skip school so we could watch Luke and Laura’s wedding live, LOL!

  66. 66

    So this is the kind of sophistry we should expect from the Hillary! left. The NY Times got it “wrong” because they reported that Hillary mishandled classified information on her personal email server. The FACT is that classified information was mishandled on Hillary’s person email server.

    Also, two Inspector Generals made a referral to the Department of Justice but this has nothing to do with a potential crime, because that’s not what the DOJ does. I think they’re a quilting club.

    Get your act together, NYT!

  67. 67
    Lee says:

    @Tommy: I’ve never heard where her servers were. Did she have them in her house or was it a Rackspace type thing?

    The story has always gotten a solid ‘meh’ from me so I have not followed it much at all.

  68. 68
    Tommy says:

    @Kay: Shit I can’t find the article now. It was a longform article about what happened in Benghazi. I thought it was in the New Yorker but can’t seem to locate it.

    Three people on the security detail lived. One was with Stevens to almost the end when as the smoke filled a room and he was trying to break through the bars of a window they got separated.

    They used code names for these people in the article, but they all made it clear the attack was something they didn’t know would happen. They tried to get the CIA field office to help, but they didn’t get there in time.

    The article was pretty clear the downfall was two-fold. First the Libyan men they paid for security fled or were paid to leave. Two, overwhelming force. Nothing they could do.

    At least to me the story is crystal clear what happened. I can’t believe we are still talking about it.

  69. 69
    debbie says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    You’re probably too young to remember Jessie and Phil Brewer, the first special couple on General Hospital. Every man in the valley wanted Jessie, a simple nurse. When Phil finally knocked her up, she was in labor in the OR for at least a couple weeks.

  70. 70
    Tommy says:

    @Lee: In the basement of her upstate NY house.

  71. 71
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Tommy: Hillary did a very dumb thing at the core, hosting the shit in her house.

    Don’t be an idiot. She didn’t have an e-mail server in her home and you know it.

  72. 72
    debbie says:


    Yes, I liked her response, but I wish she’d gone even further and question why Congress was holding more hearings on an incident with 4 deaths than they did for an incident with 2,900. If you’re going to be direct, be really direct.

  73. 73
    Tommy says:

    @Gin & Tonic: Well then every story I’ve read is false then. I got no desire to smear or slam Hillary. But that is what I have read time and time again.

  74. 74
    Tommy says:

    @Gin & Tonic: I will admit when I am wrong and I just Googled this and I am in fact wrong. I swear I read the servers were in her house many times, but it appears if the WSJ and CNN are right, they were not. My bad! Fuck I hate when I spread misinformation and I am wrong.

  75. 75
    Betty Cracker says:

    @debbie: Two weeks of labor, haha! I don’t remember that pair, but I do remember how elastic time was on the soaps. Mom told me that one of the characters on All My Children (I think) had started out about the same age as me but was a grown, married doctor with children of his own when I was still in high school!

  76. 76
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Tommy: The WHOIS record for her domains was registered to her home office address in Chappaqua (which is in Westchester County, only called “upstate” by people not from NY.) This is, of course, common. I administer domains where my US home address is all you’ll find, but the hosts are in Europe. There are lots of benign reasons to do this, but people who don’t understand how the Internet works get confused.

  77. 77
    Lee says:

    @Tommy: All I found is that the email severs are now hosted by McAfee. Earlier we have no idea.

    Giving McAfee any money for any reason is now enough for me to question her ability to make good decisions. /s

  78. 78
    Tommy says:

    @Gin & Tonic: I saw the home address as the register. Under the name of her aid. But I read, from my searches that proved me to be wrong, the servers were in NY.

  79. 79
    NorthLeft12 says:

    @Roger Moore: Yes, the way they got it wrong is the way they have got a few other big stories wrong before. It is frustrating that they don’t seem to ever learn from those errors.

    What I suspect from this story;
    1. They relied on one source only, and this “very good” source played them. If he got it wrong, they should have a follow up story about how the incorrect details got into the story. Based on how the story evolved after they went public, it is very difficult to understand how they got this so wrong outside of being deliberately mislead.
    2. The story went out so quickly because it was about Hillary Clinton, and there was more fear about getting the story out late rather than getting it right. The NYT or any media will never admit the hatred that they have for Hillary Clinton, and how that colours their reporting.
    3. There will be no changes in their reporting process based on what happened here, and it is destined to happen again….and specifically to Hillary Clinton.
    4. This story will not be retracted, nor will there be any further discussion in print about what went wrong, etc. because frankly, I don’t think the news department really thinks anything was really wrong. They just were off on a few minor details, right? No biggie.

    And they are already spinning it, to point the focus back on Hillary Clinton, rather than their own shoddy and lazy reporting. Schmidt has been quoted by Politico as pointing the finger at “Clinton supporters” for demands in changes to the story. Not that it was….you know….factually wrong and misleading.
    Schmidt should be fired for the combination of his poor reporting and his mealy mouthed comments to Politico.

  80. 80
    Gin & Tonic says:

    Here’s a story about a cat that was *really* “floofy.” Three stone is 42 pounds.

  81. 81
    Chris says:

    @David Koch:

    Recently, we’ve been having a debate about the Confederate flag. Some of you may be familiar with this. This was a symbol for those states who fought against the Union to preserve slavery.


    I really have developed QUITE an affection for this POTUS.

  82. 82
    MattF says:

    @NorthLeft12: FWIW, there is now an ‘Editor’s Note‘ on the article.

  83. 83
    Tommy says:

    @Gin & Tonic: Wow that is a big cat. My little girl is getting older, nine now, and I’d like her to gain weight. She isn’t “skin and bones” by any means but adding a pound or two wouldn’t hurt.

    I’ve tried more “wet” food and tuna. But if I put out more than a spoon full she eats it so fast she can get sick. I tried the stuff you can get at Target, the pet food in the fridge that costs an arm and a leg. She won’t eat it. I have told her I bought you this really expensive food, could you please try it? Not listening.

    I feed her Blue Buffalo dry food which I hear is the best of the best. Wondering if moving her back to like Friskies would put some pounds on her.

    Any thoughts …..

  84. 84
    Kay says:


    I don’t have any faith the email story will be reported well because I watched the IRS story. Campaign finance is complicated, they didn’t feel like looking into it or explaining it, so they all went with the notion that Tea Party groups were singled out based on absolutely nothing.

    They did this while Propublica was reporting the really complicated story, with documents. Propublica didn’t treat it as an Obama scandal. They treated it as a campaign finance story.

    Those two stories were reported simultaneously. One was complete and factual, the other was not. They never intersected.

  85. 85
    Amir Khalid says:

    In Malaysia our beloved PM Najib Tun Razak has sacked the deputy PM Muhyiddin Yassin for doubting his innocence in the 1MDB case, and Attorney General Abdul Gani Patail because — I don’t know, maybe Najib was pissed that nobody believed Gani Patail’s task force when they said they found nothing to tie Najib to the 2.67 billion ringgit of 1MDB funds that the Wall Street Journal said was parked in Najib’s personal bank accounts. Is Najib drowning, or just waving? Can’t tell yet.

  86. 86
    magurakurin says:


    it’s all good. You’re cool by me. You, actually made a mistake. It happens, no worries. I like your comments here.

    The New York Times, however, didn’t make a mistake, I’d wager. They printed a blatantly false hit piece because somebody or bodies frickin hates the Clintons. It’s like the last scene of A Bronx Tale:

    Was that fight really over a parking space?

    Must be some really bad blood somewhere.

  87. 87
    Tommy says:

    @magurakurin: Thanks. The NYT has an entire editorial department to correct errors. The best editorial department I have is my cat. She doesn’t fact check or copy edit.

    I just don’t know how a company makes this mistake. I say this as somebody with a MA in Journalism. I do not know how you do this.

  88. 88

    Try letting her lick butter or another fat off your finger. A bit of extra fat every day will help her put on some weight quicker than you’d think.

  89. 89
    Elizabelle says:

    Hello from an undisclosed location with imperfect internet access. Have to catch up on the thread, but I think someone or some people should be fired for the HRC story. And the NY Times should open an investigation, internally or externally, and the source identified, if he or she lied. This is happening way too often, and it’s dragging the Times down. Politico should not be the exemplar of journalism today.

  90. 90
    Tommy says:

    @Roger Moore: Well that didn’t work. She walked off and laughed at me.

  91. 91
    Lee says:

    @Tommy: My wife is a vet. Blue Buffalo is a bit of a scam. They just had to change their marketing because it was misleading.

    One of our male cats is prone to blocking so we feed them a dry urinary formulated food with the occasional Friskies canned food.

    As a general rule you wants your pets to be a bit skinner than fatter. They live longer and healthier that way.

  92. 92
    rikyrah says:

    Heard it on the radio this morning.

    New poll out from New Hampshire….

    Guess who’s winning?

    Man with rat on top of head.


    He’s leading Jeb by 2-1.

    tee hee hee

  93. 93
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Tommy: I got nothing. Our two cats are sisters, around 12 years old. One is skinny as a greyhound, one is, let’s just say, not. They both eat the same food at the same time, except when not-skinny walks away from the bowl, skinny hangs around and eats the remaining share. I just chalk it up to different metabolism, since neither has any obvious health issues.

  94. 94
    Tommy says:

    @Lee: @Lee:

    My wife is a vet. Blue Buffalo is a bit of a scam.

    Please tell me. It is so hard to track this or that and how you buy foods. I am a military brat. I spent my entire life as a military brat. There is no world where I don’t come down pro-military. Hard to find people don’t find it.

  95. 95
    rikyrah says:


    They did this while Propublica was reporting the really complicated story, with documents. Propublica didn’t treat it as an Obama scandal. They treated it as a campaign finance story.

    That’s still possible today?

    Imagine that.

  96. 96
    Germy Shoemangler says:

    @Tommy: Fancy Feast paté. Not the stuff with the gravy or slices, too much filler and carbs. Stick with the paté.

    I tried blue buffalo and newman’s own and our girl wouldn’t touch it.

    Have you tried hard boiled egg yolks? Mash them up with a bit of unsalted butter. A good protein treat. I’ve never met a cat who didn’t love it.

  97. 97
    Kathleen says:

    @debbie: Was Steve Hardy before or after Phil? (Yeah, I’m old. Watched 7 soaps the year I was off work after my daughter was born).

  98. 98
    Kathleen says:

    @rikyrah: Wait – did Rand Paul pull ahead of Trump suddenly? Never mind. Rand Paul wears a dead ferret on top of his head. I forgot.

  99. 99
    Lee says:

    @Tommy: LOL sorry I thought the context would help. My wife is a veterinarian.

  100. 100
    Lee says:

    @Tommy: As for the other for foods. For 90% of all cats Friskies is fine. You can feed them dry normally with the occassional canned food as a treat. Do not feed them canned all the time as they will have a myriad of health issues.

    For dogs, Don’t buy the cheapest or the most expensive. She used to recommend (& fed ours) Iams/Eukanuba (and it was really good) as soon as she heard they moved their production to China she stopped adn switched. We fed ours Pedigree(?) (bright yellow bag) until they turned into senior dog., Now it is a senior formulation with glucosamine.

    If they have health issues, use what is recommended by your veterinarian.

  101. 101
    Samuel Knight says:

    Few obvious things:

    1) The Wash Post and the NY Times have always HATED the Clintons. Whitewater, travelgate, When Ho lee, and now all this email garbage. Was told in the early 1990s that the Post “knew” how dirty the Clintons were – and it’s been a non-stop BS show for years.

    2) The nut job commentators just love hurling the most idiotic garbage at the Clintons – just make stuff up and throw it. Today’s most idiotic – Camille Paglia – Bill Clinton is just like Bill Cosby because they both cheated. )(never mind that drugging and consent thing….).

    3) McCain is a complete jerk, as is Christie and almost the entire GOP field. A fact that the national media really wants to pretend NOT to know. Why don’t people care about what Trump said about McCain? Well how’s Trump being a jerk different in the GOP field?

  102. 102
    debbie says:


    Same time. He was their supervisor, I believe.

  103. 103
    Seanly says:


    Hmm, I wasn’t aware that by 1993 all US states had revised their laws to include marital rape. I thought there were surely a few states that lagged behind. SC does require a higher level of violence (WTF?) and some states view victim/perpetrator differently if married (still WTF?).

  104. 104
    PurpleGirl says:

    Cassie (Cassie’s Kitten Kastle in NE CT) heard of a nursing home cat who was going to be euthanized because of his weight (32.5 lbs). Well, she went and got the cat and found one of her foster parents to take him (KitKat Marvin). The foster plays with the cat and rolls it on the floor, etc. and now he is losing weight and getting more active and is a lot less lethargic. (Losing about 1-2 lbs per week.) The nursing home patients loved the cat but no one kept track of who feed him what (food or treats) and he gained all that weight. KitKat Marvin is a love bug and the foster is going to formally adopt him now.

    Cassie feeds the cats and kittens in her care Fancy Feast, Friskies, Sometimes Royal Canine Kitten wet. I’m spacing the name of the dry kibble she uses. As you can guess, she needs to balance the goodness of the food against the price.

    ETA: She sometimes has to cook chicken herself for them, and also feeds them pumpkin.

  105. 105
    PurpleGirl says:

    @Seanly: It was a long and concerted effort to get a range of actions to be classified marital rape and included as abuse that could be prosecuted.

  106. 106
    Brachiator says:


    The NYT or any media will never admit the hatred that they have for Hillary Clinton, and how that colours their reporting.

    At the larger mainstream papers, it’s more complicated than this. I don’t know if the publishers, all the editors and the Beltway reporters hate Hillary Clinton. It’s unlikely. But there could be some disposed to dislike her, just as there is just as likely to be a friendly cabal.

    This story will not be retracted, nor will there be any further discussion in print about what went wrong, etc. because frankly, I don’t think the news department really thinks anything was really wrong.

    They may not retract the story, but the damage is already done. Some can now easily reject them as Clinton haters. Others, including myself, will look at the publisher and editor in chief as amateurs who cannot do good journalism. This may also be another sign of the staggering decline of traditional media in the Internet age.

    And yet, if the Times fully retracts the story and takes full responsibility for its screw up, the rabid right wing will read this as another sign of the liberal media conspiracy. The NYT’s stupidity makes it easier for Fox News to continue its pretense of legitimacy.

  107. 107
    Elizabelle says:

    Thinking the Times’ craven story might bring HRC some sympathy and increased skepticism of future negative reporting by the Times and other outlets. way to go, NYT in scoring an own goal.

  108. 108
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @debbie: I just heard the radio version of that ad. Not just “our values are yours” but “we are the ones whose values are yours.”

  109. 109
    sukabi says:

    @Tommy: It’s all bluster for the rubes… and if called on it he’ll likely use legalese to weasel out of the seemingly definitive statement. It will be something along the lines of “Of course you can’t rape your wife, that would be illegal, my client is a law abiding citizen….blah, blah, blah”

  110. 110
    Another Holocene Human says:

    @David Koch: ::applause::

  111. 111
    mclaren says:

    Examples like this explain why it seems to me that the Clintons will get different treatment this time around. The pushback against the vicious distortions in the press against HRC is now coming partly from inside the press itself.

    That’s very different from the 90s and Bill Clinton’s presidency.

Comments are closed.