Protests from @ajentleson aside, this surprises no Hill reporter nor did we report his position on Merrick Garland credulously. We all understood his blockade was partisan, not principled. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/29/us/politics/mitch-mcconnell-supreme-court.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share … via @nytimes
-
Hi Jonathan! The NYT wrote a entire standalone story on the Biden rule, dedicating a whole story to a 25-year old speech and legitimizing it as a GOP counterargument. I remember reading this piece. It bestowed legitimacy and others followed the NYT’s lead.https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/us/politics/joe-biden-argued-for-delaying-supreme-court-picks-in-1992.html …
Of course you can find a single story chronicling an episode in the Merrick Garland saga. As you know full well as a former Senate press guy, the Biden speech was a moment in that saga and we report moments. Read the totality of the coverage.https://www.nytimes.com/news-event/supreme-court-nomination-2016 …
-
-
you’re pathetic. your paper is pathetic. faux access tabloid journalism. sorry you’re not taken seriously outside of your own “newsroom”. junk
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.