The New York Times Cowardly Held Back Damaging Info About Trump MONTHS Before Election

Share This Story

Donald Trump was able to force the media in the United States into submission through his threats & lawsuits. The media’s timid nature was particularly observable in leadership of the New York Times, as it has been revealed they possessed damaging information about Trump for months and chose to do nothing.

The bombshell information about the New York Times was published by a New York Times staffer named Liz Spayd. She, in part, wrote:

Conversations over what to publish were prolonged and lively, involving Washington and New York, and often including the executive editor, Dean Baquet. If the allegations were true, it was a huge story. If false, they could damage The Times’s reputation. With doubts about the material and with the F.B.I. discouraging publication, editors decided to hold their fire.

But was that the right decision? Was there a way to write about some of these allegations using sound journalistic principles but still surfacing the investigation and important leads? Eventually, The Times did just that, but only after other news outlets had gone first.

It is true that the New York Times eventually did publish their information, but it happened much later. This is something Spayd pointed out with extreme prejudice, had the information come to light sooner it may have helped to influence the electorate to not support Trump. Spayd continued:

There is an unsettling theme that runs through The Times’s publishing decisions. In each instance, it was the actions of government officials that triggered newsroom decisions — not additional reporting or insight that journalists gained.

The entire matter is now a curiosity, as Trump is now the president and nothing is going to change that unless he dies or is impeached — both of which appear highly unlikely.

Share This Story

What do you think?