I'll tell you what reporters said, and then I'll tell you what they really mean.
Here's Ashley Parker, senior national political reporter for the Washington Post, MSNBC analyst, and former NY Times reporter. The thrust of her complaint is that because Vogue magazine was there to do a wedding feature two days before Naomi Biden's White House wedding, that meant it was not private and journalists should have been allowed to cover it.
Readers were understandably outraged at this false equivalence:
Of course, as the wagons circled, Maggie Haberman chimed in:
Pulitzer Prize winner, USAToday columnist, and also wife to Sen. Sherrod Brown commented:
Media critic Dan Froomkin said this:
Okay, now here's the crux of the matter. The only reason they wanted access to this private wedding is because HUNTER BIDEN IS THE FATHER OF THE BRIDE. Period.
Would White House reporters have hovered like flies, trying to question Hunter Biden -- or at least have fabricated some kind of unfavorable story? Maybe caught him picking his nose, and "just asked the question" if he was using again? Of course they would have!
That's why the bride, who wanted the day to be about her wedding, requested that the event be private.
And that's why "journalists" like Ashley Parker are so angry they didn't get that chance to pick at the bones. Of course, she won't say that -- it would be unseemly! It would make her sound like a vulture! Instead, she tries to make it into some kind of national security matter.
If only they'd been this vigilant during the previous administration.
Your librul media, ladies and gents.
