(Headline USA) Democrats are working overtime to justify their irrational opposition to former President Donald Trump, with a New York Times editorial board member even arguing it is right for the media to apply a “different standard” to Trump than to Vice President Kamala Harris.
“I think the challenge, not just for journalists, but really for the country, is that not only is Donald Trump a threat, but, you know, it lowers the bar. So I don’t think it’s unacceptable,” Mara Gay told MSNBC when asked why leftist outlets push Trump harder than Harris.
Since being anointed the de-facto nominee after party elites’ coup of President Joe Biden, Harris still has not held a full press conference and has sat for only one interview with CNN, which was pared down to 18 minutes and still widely panned.
Gay admitted that “there are plenty of things that we could hear from the vice president, that we’d love to hear more about policy speeches. It’d be great to see her take more questions from the press.”
However, those things aren’t that important when compared to the “extremism of the Republican Party” and “how extreme Donald Trump is,” she continued.
“It’s hard to hold both candidates accountable equally, because one is committed to democracy and is functioning as a normal candidate from a normal American party, and the other is not,” Gay said.
Democratic strategist James Carville made a similar argument this week, specifically calling out the New York Times.
“Now you have Joe Kahn—the new editor or publisher, whatever he is—at the New York Times, saying, ‘We’re just going to cover this down the middle. We’re going to cover what it is.’ I don’t think that’s the role of the news media at a time when the entire Constitution is in peril,” he claimed in a recent episode of his podcast, as reported by the Gateway Pundit.
There’s nothing wrong with “slanted coverage” when it comes to Trump, Carville ranted.
“I would have something against it at most other times in American history, but not right now. F**k your objectivity,” he continued. “The real objectivity in this country right now is we’re either going to have a Constitution, or we’re not.”
Democrats began making similar arguments eight years ago, when Trump was running against Hillary Clinton in the 2016 race.
Far-left New York Times columnist Paul Krugman attacked objective media for their “false equivalence” of Trump and Clinton.
“If Donald Trump becomes president, the news media will bear a large share of the blame,” he griped.
The unprecedented idea of holding Trump to a different standard of reporting was, soon thereafter, embraced by then-Times managing editor Dean Baquet, with much of the mainstream media following suit.
The loss of credibility that ensued due to reckless and biased reporting on matters like the Russia-collusion hoax and the Hunter Biden laptop led many leftist outlets to downsize or fold altogether. Others, including the Times, issued notable mea culpas in which they promised to do better moving forward.
