The New York Times Proves Again They're In The Pocket Of Trump--UPDATED

By Nicole Belle — May 26, 2019

I want you to fully imbibe the irony of the above commercial for The New York Times and then look at this tweet from The New York Times' Politics account:

Hope Hicks, one of the best-known but least visible former members of President Trump’s White House staff, is facing an existential question: whether to comply with a congressional subpoena https://t.co/8NXpfQvxQL pic.twitter.com/L7aWVMsIdq

— NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) May 24, 2019

Um, it's an "existential question" to comply with a subpoena now?

Existential questions are questions like "Why do I exist?" and "What is love?" and "In the word 'scent', is it the 's' or 'c' that is silent?".

The word that The New York Times is missing is "compulsory." Complying with subpoenas is not an existential question, IT IS COMPULSORY.

But The New York Times' writers are so deeply invested into normalizing everything about the Trump administration, that they have fully entered the Upside Down and they write stories about people possibly, maybe (but probably not) respecting the rule of law and frame it as something legitimate and heartwrenching for the oh so glamorous Hope Hicks.

Prosecutors tell witness every day to comply with subpoenas & testify even if they’re worried about retribution from gangs, organized crime & in their professions, because it’s the law & the right thing to do. McGhan, Hicks, Donaldson need to do the same. https://t.co/0Qsve6exzY

— Mimi Rocah (@Mimirocah1) May 26, 2019

*whether to break the law

There. Fixed it for you.

— The Hoarse Whisperer (@HoarseWisperer) May 26, 2019

THANK you!

It is amazing we are now at the point where media is "Gee, I wonder if folks should obey the law? Well, let's debate that."

— Kurt Eichenwald (@kurteichenwald) May 26, 2019

Bear with me, former civics and government teacher here, that’s NOT how subpoenas work. If you folks at the @nytimes need to run this kind of thing by someone with a rudimentary grasp of the judicial system I or one of my former high school students would be happy to help.

— DTwyman 🦋 (@dtwyman) May 26, 2019

Only white people can claim that not complying with a congressional subpoena is an existential question. https://t.co/NNAyB4OF48

— Radio Justice 📻🎙 (@justiceputnam) May 26, 2019

Note to reporters: complying with subpoenas aren’t optional. https://t.co/VbeOBwb1vQ

— Neera Tanden (@neeratanden) May 26, 2019

Weird, if I tried to ignore a subpeona, I’d be in fucking jail. https://t.co/vnsCNQHQio

— Chris Swartout (@chrisswartout) May 26, 2019

ah, white Republicans get to decide whether they “comply” w/ subpoenas https://t.co/HZBcge7xO1

— Eric Boehlert (@EricBoehlert) May 26, 2019

Most existential questions have no clear answer. What is my purpose in life? What happens after I die? Is there a higher power guiding my destiny? Does my dog have a soul?

Other "existential questions," however, are answered by 2 U.S.C. §§ 192 & 194. Compliance is mandatory. https://t.co/QJdGfMxIA9

— Max Kennerly (@MaxKennerly) May 26, 2019

I'm sorry, I can't let this go. It is not an "existential question." It's a legal question, and it has one answer: yes of fucking course you have to comply with congressional subpoenas, because otherwise, what's the fucking point of a congressional subpoena? https://t.co/9ca0hQlKpt

— Ken Tremendous (@KenTremendous) May 26, 2019

Trump has launched a daily assault on the rule of law and the Constitutional separation of powers, but I didn't think his power grab would ever be casually aided by the headline writers at the New York Times.

— Ken Tremendous (@KenTremendous) May 26, 2019

UPDATE: In case you were not convinced by the corrosive nature of The New York Times' access journalism, allow me to present yet another exhibit:

Why is this a front page story? https://t.co/VOhewoZIf6 via ⁦@nytimes⁩

— Mimi Rocah (@Mimirocah1) May 26, 2019

I am starting to believe the New York Times has decided to become handmaidens to the incoming tide of American authoritarians. https://t.co/kQFcaBKrwp

— David Neiwert (@DavidNeiwert) May 26, 2019