Issues & Insights

The New York Times Has Just Been Caught In Two Monstrous Lies

From PxHere

I&I Editorial

On Tuesday, the public learned that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes. Just a few days before that, the public learned that the “Russian Bounty” story was fake. In other words, in the span of a week, the “newspaper of record” has been exposed for grossly misleading the public about two major stories — both designed to discredit President Donald Trump.

And the mainstream press still has the audacity to label conservative news sites as unreliable?

Start with Sicknick. The New York Times was the paper that reported he’d been killed by a pro-Trump protester who threw a fire extinguisher at Sicknick during the Jan. 6 incursion into the Capitol Building. The Times claimed that, after being struck and suffering a “bloody gash on his head,” Sicknick “was rushed to the hospital and placed on life support” where he later died.

It was a horrifying story, repeated ad nauseam, that caused millions of Americans anguish, and anger, over the protests. It was proof that the “insurrectionists” were violent. It became a central fact in Trump’s second impeachment trial, with House impeachment managers saying that “the insurrectionists killed a Capitol police officer by striking him in the head with a fire extinguisher.” President Joe Biden said that Sicknick lost “his life while protecting the Capitol from a violent, riotous mob on Jan. 6, 2021.”

What did the Times base its story on? Unnamed sources, of course. There were no pictures. No videos. No on-the-record accounts. No medical examiner’s report. The story fell apart, as news emerged — no thanks to the mainstream press — that Sicknick had texted his family about being in good spirits that night. Then we learned that he’d returned to his office after the events at the Capitol, and only later went to the hospital.

Why the medical examiner’s report didn’t come out until more than three months had passed is a mystery, but when it was finally released this week, it turned out that Sicknick had died of natural causes — from strokes — not from any injuries during the Capitol Hill melee.

The Times could have — and should have — known that its story was false from the beginning, or at least not credible enough to publish. But why bother checking facts when attacking Trump is your main goal?

The second massive fraud perpetrated by the Times involved a shocking claim that Russia was paying a bounty for any U.S. soldier killed in Afghanistan and that Trump either knew or should have known about it.

A June 2020 Times story based on — you guessed it — unnamed sources, this time in the intelligence community, said that “a Russian military intelligence unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan — including targeting American troops.”

Like the Sicknick hoax, every other news outlet parroted the Times. Biden himself said that the fact that Trump denied the truth of the Times’ reporting was further evidence that his “entire presidency has been a gift to Putin.” Never-Trump Republicans had a field day with the story.

But when the Times decided to go with this story there was no evidence to support the claims, other than the word of unnamed sources.

As Glenn Greenwald notes:

Not only was no evidence presented to support the CIA’s assertions — something that, by itself, should have prevented every real journalist from endorsing its truth — but commanders in Afghanistan were saying months ago they could not find convincing evidence for it.

Then last week, the Biden administration suddenly admitted that the bounty story was bogus. Why? As Greenwald explains:

Now that this CIA tale has served its purpose (namely, preventing Trump from leaving Afghanistan), and now that its enduring effects are impeding the Biden administration (which wants to leave Afghanistan and so needs to get rid of this story), the U.S. government is now admitting that — surprise! — they had no convincing evidence for this story all along.

Readers might ask why we bother pointing out these media lies when everyone knows the press is biased? (A new study shows how media coverage went from 89% negative in Trump’s first year to mostly positive under Biden.)

We point out such flagrant media lies because not everyone knows how corrupt, how partisan, and how utterly unreliable the mainstream press has become.

When the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, network news, etc., are no longer considered “mainstream” but are correctly labeled as propaganda arms of the Democratic party, then we will stop complaining when they commit flagrant acts of journalistic malpractice.

— Written by the I&I Editorial Board

Will You Help Us In The Fight For Free Speech?

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day -- without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press, and because we aren't afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left. Revenue from ads on the site help, but your support will truly make a difference in keeping our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

You can also subscribe to I&I: It's free!

Just enter your email address below to get started.

Share

I & I Editorial Board

The Issues and Insights Editorial Board has decades of experience in journalism, commentary and public policy.

12 comments

  • Never forget, the Slimes’ Walter Duranty ran cover for Stalin and lied about the Soviet Union. It also ignored and lied about the Holocaust. This penchant for lying and making up stories is nothing new.

  • The time has come to make these people feel some pain – literally and figuratively. We don’t tolerate our children lying through their teeth repeatedly. When our children attempt such dishonesty, we punish them – severely. A trip to the wood shed is long overdue with this bunch of lickspittles.

  • Who were the reporters on these two stories, and where do they live? It is time to peacefully protest in front of their homes.

  • When will the public realize the NYT is poor journalism? How many times can they distort the news and still have any credibility? And why can’t people see they and David Brooks are setting the liberal one-sided narrative that is NPR/PBS? Have we had a conservative voice on PBS since William Buckley? No, only the propaganda from the left. Shameful!

  • I consider all stories that are based on unnamed sources to be fake news.

  • Issues and Insights team, appreciate your calling out the obvious. The New York Times lies. Yes, just like any other arm of leftist policy. We’ve got thousands upon thousands of examples to prove this.

    What we need now is: how do we divest ourselves from these leftists? How do we rid ourselves of this cancer? This is the hard work. We could use your insight and direction on this infinitely more difficult topic. We already know the conditions are past ripe for another revolution. The stage is set. How does it play out? THAT’S where the money is.

    • Thank you for the comment and we are trying to figure out what to do ourselves!

  • You conveniently conflate the NYT with the Biden administration in you second example. Maybe that’s because you are equally guilty of letting your biases guide your interpretations of available information.

  • What is funny is people think that the NY Slimes are telling these lies by accident.

  • All publications are vulnerable to errors and the NYT is no exception but just because they were wrong about the etiology of officer Sicknick’s death doesn’t alter the violence of the insurrection.
    The Russian bounty story was bought by both sides and does point to a lack of verification by many media outlets.
    The extrapolation to MSM outlets being propaganda machines for the Left based on these errors is an attempt to discredit the Fourth Estate and weaken our free exchange of information.

  • “Why the medical examiner’s report didn’t come out until more than three months had passed is a mystery….” Sorry, but mystification about why the medical examiner’s report was suppressed for 90+ days requires a level of obtuseness of which I’m incapable.

Subscribe to Issues & Insights via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to I&I and you can receive notifications of new articles in your email. It’s simple, and free.

Join 5,479 other subscribers

We Could Use Your Help

Will you help us fight for honesty in journalism and against the tyranny of the left? Issues & Insights is published by a team of volunteers who believe in free speech and in quality journalism. If you like what you see, leave a donation by clicking on the Tip Jar above. You can also set up regular donations if you like. Ad revenue helps, but your support will truly make a difference. (Please note that we are not set up as a charitable organization, so donations aren't tax deductible.) Thank you!

About Issues & Insights

Issues & Insights is run by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page. Our goal is to bring our decades of combined journalism experience to help readers understand the top issues of the day. We’re doing this on a voluntary basis, because we believe the nation needs the kind of cogent, rational, data-driven, fact-based commentary that we can provide. 

%d bloggers like this: