Hello NYT Those That Live In Ulrta Thin Glasshouses Shouldn't Throw Boulders

Editorial

 

  If one was to make a point on the height of arrogance a perfect example would be looking at the lead oped from this mornings New York Times. "Facebook and the Digital Virus Called Fake News" is the title of the piece of crap
 The example of what I now call hyper-hypocrisy "This year, the adage that “falsehood flies and the truth comes limping after it” doesn’t begin to describe the problem. That idea assumes that the truth eventually catches up. There’s not much evidence of this happening for the millions of people taken in by the fake news stories — like Pope Francis endorsing Donald Trump or Mr. Trump pulling ahead of Hillary Clinton in the popular vote — that have spread on social media sites.

Most of the fake news stories are produced by scammers looking to make a quick buck. The vast majority of them take far-right positions. But a big part of the responsibility for this scourge rests with internet companies like Facebook and Google, which have made it possible for fake news to be shared nearly instantly with millions of users and have been slow to block it from their sites."

 To make my initial point the hyper-hypocrisy is pointed out in red type by the NYT. Notice the NYT only points out the popular vote not the electoral college which is more relevant. Hey NYT you are the biggest scammers going. And of course the NYT blames the political right for their wrongs.

 The bullshit goes on "Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and chief executive of Facebook, has dismissed the notion that fake news is prevalent on his platform or that it had an influence on the election. But according to a BuzzFeed News analysis, during the last three months of the presidential campaign, the 20 top fake news stories on Facebook generated more engagement — shares, likes and comments — than the 20 top stories from real news websites. OMG LMAO like the NYT is a real news website since when LMAO!!!

These hoaxes are not just bouncing around among like-minded conspiracy theorists; candidates and elected officials are sharing them, too. Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska, on Thursday tweeted about people who have been paid to riot against Mr. Trump — an idea propagated by fake news stories. A man who wrote a number of false news reports told The Washington Post that Trump supporters and campaign officials often shared his false anti-Clinton posts without bothering to confirm the facts and that he believes his work may have helped elect the Republican nominee.

Abroad, the dissemination of fake news on Facebook, which reaches 1.8 billion people globally, has been a longstanding problem. In countries like Myanmar, deceptive internet content has reportedly contributed to ethnic violence. And it has influenced elections in Indonesia, the Philippines and elsewhere. Social media sites have also been used to spread misinformation about the referendum on the peace deal in Colombia and about Ebola in West Africa.

 Yeah ok like the NYT has never had a negative influence on an election before.

 The crap piece end finally "Facebook says it is working on weeding out such fabrications. It said last Monday that it would no longer place Facebook-powered ads on fake news websites, a move that could cost Facebook and those fake news sites a lucrative source of revenue. Earlier on the same day, Google said it would stop letting those sites use its ad placement network. These steps would help, but Facebook, in particular, owes its users, and democracy itself, far more.

Hey umm NYT you all know about losing money big time so look in the mirror might I remind you morons about how you took over a BILLION $$ loss in selling another piece of shit paper you once owned the Boston Globe. Oh how soon we forget.

Facebook has demonstrated that it can effectively block content like click-bait articles and spam from its platform by tweaking its algorithms, which determine what links, photos and ads users see in their news feeds. Nobody outside the company knows exactly how its software works and why you might see posts shared by some of your friends frequently and others rarely. Recently, the company acknowledged that it had allowed businesses to target or exclude users for ads for housing, employment and credit based on their ethnicity, in apparent violation of anti-discrimination laws. It has said it will stop that practice.

Facebook managers are constantly changing and refining the algorithms, which means the system is malleable and subject to human judgment. This summer, Facebook decided to show more posts from friends and family members in users’ news feeds and reduce stories from news organizations, because that’s what it said users wanted. If it can do that, surely its programmers can train the software to spot bogus stories and outwit the people producing this garbage.

Blocking misinformation will help protect the company’s brand and credibility. Some platforms have suffered when they have failed to address users’ concerns. Twitter users, for instance, have backed away from that platform because of abusive trolling, threatening posts and hate speech, which the company hasn’t been able to control.

Mr. Zuckerberg himself has spoken at length about how social media can help improve society. In a 2012 letter to investors, he said it could “bring a more honest and transparent dialogue around government that could lead to more direct empowerment of people, more accountability for officials and better solutions to some of the biggest problems of our time.”

None of that will happen if he continues to let liars and con artists hijack his platform.

Editors note

Just to remind my readers that it has been a known fact that Mark "Sucker" Zuckerberg is a known liberal piece of shit because he has blocked people on his as the NYT puts it "platform" aka facebook

of those who have a different political position than his.

NYT Bashing Trump's Cabinet Picks

Editorial

  Well now that the establishment got its ass handed to them in the 2016 Presidential election with a Donald Trump victory now the New York Times through their little hissy fits they are now attacking the picks of the PRESIDENT-elects cabinet.

 For example this morning in their lead OPED "Jeff Sessions as Attorney General: An Insult to Justice" the little hissy fit.

 Their bitching begins "In 1986, President Ronald Reagan nominated Jeff Sessions, then a United States attorney from Alabama, to be a federal judge. The Republican-controlled Senate rejected Mr. Sessions out of concern, based on devastating testimony by former colleagues, that he was a racist.

Three decades later, Mr. Sessions, now a veteran Alabama senator, is on the verge of becoming the nation’s top law-enforcement official, after President-elect Donald Trump tapped him on Friday to be attorney general.

It would be nice to report that Mr. Sessions, who is now 69, has conscientiously worked to dispel the shadows that cost him the judgeship. Instead, the years since his last confirmation hearing reveal a pattern of dogged animus to civil rights and the progress of black Americans and immigrants.

 Umm wrong NYT the Democrats were in charge of the US Senate in 1986 and Jeff Sessions is not a racist by the way. He will be a great US Attorney General way better than the screwed up DOJ right now under the last two bigots Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch.

 The rant goes on "Based on his record, we can form a fairly clear picture of what his Justice Department would look like:

For starters, forget about aggressive protection of civil rights, and of voting rights in particular. Mr. Sessions has called the Voting Rights Act of 1965 a “piece of intrusive legislation.” Under him, the department would most likely focus less on prosecutions of minority voter suppression and more on rooting out voter fraud, that hallowed conservative myth. As a federal prosecutor, Mr. Sessions brought voter-fraud charges against three civil rights workers trying to register black voters in rural Alabama. The prosecution turned up 14 allegedly doctored ballots out of 1.7 million cast, and the jury voted to acquit.

Forget, also, any federal criminal-justice reform, which was on the cusp of passage in Congress before Mr. Trump’s “law and order” campaign. Mr. Sessions strongly opposed bipartisan legislation to scale back the outrageously harsh sentences that filled federal prisons with low-level drug offenders. Instead, he called for more mandatory-minimum sentences and harsher punishments for drug crimes. The one bright spot was his working with Democrats to reduce the 100-to-1 disparity between punishments for crack and powder cocaine offenses.

 Obviously a better record than the far left has done.
   It ends "But Mr. Sessions can do plenty of damage without any congressional action. As attorney general, he would set the guidelines prosecutors follow in deciding what cases and charges to bring. In 2013, Eric Holder Jr. ordered his prosecutors to avoid the most severe charges in low-level nonviolent drug cases, which has helped cut the number of absurdly long sentences for minor players. Mr. Sessions could reverse that with the stroke of a pen. He could just as easily reverse Mr. Holder’s decision not to interfere with state marijuana laws, likely ramping up prosecutions even as states continue to legalize the drug for medicinal or recreational use. “Good people don’t smoke marijuana,” he said at a Senate hearing in April.Mr. Sessions has been the Senate’s most ardent opponent of fixing the immigration system. In 2015 he proposed a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for anyone re-entering the country illegally after being deported. That could increase the federal prison population by as much as 30 percent. As Mr. Trump’s chief law enforcer, he is likely to fully support efforts to enlist local law enforcement in a widening dragnet for people without papers. He also, during the campaign, endorsed the idea of a ban on Muslim immigrants.

Count Mr. Sessions, as well, among those Trump allies calling for a special prosecutor to continue investigating Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, a decision that, if he is attorney general, would be his to make.

Donald Trump ran a presidential campaign that stoked white racial resentment. His choice for attorney general — which, like his other early choices, has been praised by white supremacists — embodies that worldview. We expect today’s senators, like their predecessors in 1986, to examine Mr. Sessions’s views and record with bipartisan rigor. If they do, it is hard to imagine that they will endorse a man once rejected for a low-level judgeship to safeguard justice for all Americans as attorney general.

  It good to reverse the perverse ways of the current DOJ which has been nothing but a bunch of hack leftists.

Post Election View Of NYT NOT!!!

Editorial

 Is this a post election review from the New York Times editorial board? And why would they do this they are so sure about a Hillary Clinton victory but defeat for our great country.

 It simple they are in the Democratic tank as always. Their lead OPED this morning singing the praises of Hillary "Imagining America on Nov. 9" is usual bullshit.

 It begins "The United States has seen worse than Donald Trump. It has endured political crises and corruption, war abroad and bloodshed at home. But that doesn’t make it any easier to contemplate the catastrophe that looms if we wake up Wednesday morning to President-elect Trump."

 It would be better than President-elect Clinton all over again oh yeah by the way corruption that your paper continues on a daily basis to cover up. Clinton is the catastrophe if she gets elected.

 It goes on its bs rant "There’s no sense complaining anymore. The hurricane is three days from landfall. The urgent thing now is to avert the worst, minimize the damage, save the foundations, clear the mess.

 Ok then NYT shut the fuck up then.

  Averting the worst starts with electing Hillary Clinton. For many voters that will mean defying Republican efforts to jam the electoral machinery through lies, legal obstructions and the threat of violence. We hope the voters hold out, however intimidating the process and long the lines. For Americans who may feel unmoved or unwilling to vote for Mrs. Clinton, here is a question from the future: In 2016 we were closer than ever to electing an ignorant and reckless tyrant — what did you do to stop him?

This surreal, miserable presidential campaign exposed a lot of rot in our democracy’s infrastructure, and anger in the populace. Those conditions are related. It has exposed a sick Republican Party. Some in the never-Trump movement tried and failed to stop the nominee. But history will not be kind to the other Republicans who, out of cravenness or calculation, sidled up to a man they knew to be unfit for office. Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio — weaklings all. A party of holier-than-thous standing athwart history, saying, “Stop Hillary, whatever the damage.” Mike Huckabee, on Twitter, shared this pithy lunacy: “Trump may be a car wreck, but at least his car is pointed in right direction.”

 My comments in what's red highlighted lies obstructions that the lefts playbook NYT.
 My comments in whats green highlighted weaklings and what are democrats strongmen No fucking way fuck you NYT!
 Ramblings go on "It is a history of coded race-baiting combined with myopia and cowardice that puts the Republican establishment in lock step now with the alt-right, the Ku Klux Klan, the racists and misogynists and nut jobs, the guy who shouts “Jew-S.A.,” the crowds that scream, “Lock her up.” For some it is taxes, abortion or immigration, for many it is simply Clinton hatred that allows them to justify supporting a candidate who also stands for torture, reckless war, unchecked greed, hatred of women, immigrants, refugees, people of color, people with disabilities. A sexual predator, a business fraud, a liar who runs on a promise to destroy millions of immigrant families and to jail his political opponent.

If Mr. Trump is rejected on Tuesday, the nation will have a momentary breather. And some good news to build on. The Republicans who have spent the last weeks and months jumping on, then off, then on the Trump bus will have been discredited, and some may be unseated. Those in the Trump inner circle will be freshly disgraced, and perhaps go away — like Rudy Giuliani, former New York mayor, now Mr. Trump’s conspiracy ghoul, and Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, who has been separately brought low in an unrelated courtroom drama. And the electorate will have demonstrated its decency.

  In gold highlight its the establishment period not Republican (except the spineless RINOS) Yes liberals you are purest form of establishment. In purple they must be talking about Bill Clinton.

 The mouth runs more raw sewage finally ends "The rejection of Trump is the simple part. Win or lose, the harder job will be confronting the conditions that spawned him. This country’s problems will still be deep and complex, and the Republicans in Congress show no signs of giving Mrs. Clinton any more respect than they gave President Obama, or of abandoning their jihad against responsible governing. If she wins, Mrs. Clinton will have the burden of managing the jihadis, while governing for the benefit not only of her supporters but also of the tens of millions who will have voted for Mr. Trump expecting — against all evidence — that he will make everything better. It won’t be easy.

“Winter Is Coming” is the title Garry Kasparov gave his book about Vladimir Putin. Autumn is here in the United States, too. It’s time to focus. To confront what Trump represents, the better to end it. Let this election have the salutary effect of reminding Americans as a nation of who we are, and the good we can do, when we are put to the test."

 In ending lets end Hillary Clintons chances of any further damage to this great country by electing Donald Trump

NYT Doesn't Know What Reality Is

Editorial

  I love it especially this morning the New York Times Editorial board trying to say Donald Trump is in denial of whats economic reality I'm literally laughing my ass off.

 Today's piece of crap entitled "Donald Trump’s Denial of Economic Reality" give me a friggin break man.

 It begins "To listen to Donald Trump describe the American economy is to hear about a horrifying alternate reality in which the recession that started at the end of 2007 is still with us. The truth is very different. The recovery that began in the middle of 2009, though not perfect, has steadily created jobs and lifted wages."

 Thanks to the bullshit Stimulus that didn't stimulate a damn thing and ObamaCare.

 It goes on "More than 15.2 million jobs have been added since early 2010. The 4.9 percent unemployment rate is half of what it was in the depths of the recession in 2009. On Friday, in its monthly employment report, the Department of Labor said that average hourly wages jumped 2.8 percent, to $25.92, in October from a year earlier, the biggest such increase since 2008.

 BaBaBabullshit. Where did they get these fudged packed numbers LOL.
 It ends "Add these findings to a recent report from the Census Bureau showing a decline in the number of people in poverty and the percentage of people without health insurance, and it is clear that by almost every economic measure the country is doing better than it was just a few years ago.

Mr. Trump refuses to acknowledge these truths, presumably because he believes that his best shot at the White House is to insist that the economy is in terrible shape and that he alone can fix it. When the data don’t agree with his dystopian vision, he calls them “phony numbers.” His campaign called Friday’s employment report “disastrous.” Little wonder that 370 economists, including eight Nobel Prize winners, have signed a letter denouncing him for peddling “magical thinking and conspiracy theories over sober assessments of feasible economic policy options.”

There is no doubt that the economic recovery has not touched every American equally. About one-quarter of the unemployed, or two million people, have been out of work for 27 weeks or more. Some 81 percent of people between the prime working ages of 25 and 54 are in the labor force (employed or looking for work), an increase from last year but still lower than in early 2007 when it was 83 percent. The poverty rate fell to 13.5 percent last year, from 14.8 percent, but it is higher than it was in the late 1990s and early 2000s. For many people, health insurance remains too expensive.

The next president and Congress need to focus on those whom the recovery has left behind. Hillary Clinton would increase investments in infrastructure, help lower the burden of student loans and expand access to affordable health care. Mr. Trump’s main policy idea is to cut taxes for the wealthy, a reprise of the old trickle-down economics that has consistently failed. His plans to impose big tariffs on imports would start a trade war, leading to big job losses, and his vow to repeal the Affordable Care Act could strip as many as 20 million people of their health insurance.

Better policies could make the economy stronger. Mrs. Clinton has them. Mr. Trump does not.

 Hello NYT and the rest of the left wing in unhinged mediaites out there they are not only phony numbers they are fudged up numbers.

                          

          

 

NYT Now Covering Up Clinton Political Hypocrisy

Editorial

 It doesnot end with being outright political biases now it seems the New York Times its editorial board in particular is into covering up political hypocrisy as now more emails have surfaced via WikiLeaks from the Hillary Clinton for President campaign.

 The OPED this morning a leading embarrassing one to say the least "Emails Again, This Time With Anthony Weiner" politics makes strange bedfellows as the old saying goes LOL.

 It begins "Every time Americans start thinking nothing more can surprise them in this presidential campaign, something detonates to prove them wrong. So it was that on Friday, 11 days from Election Day, the F.B.I. director, James Comey, sent a cryptic letter to Congress saying, “In connection with an unrelated case, the F.B.I. has learned of the existence of emails that appear pertinent” to its investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

Whose emails? About what? Do they have any connection to Mrs. Clinton herself? Mr. Comey wasn’t saying. Indeed, he appeared to have no idea. He went on to inform Congress that the F.B.I. “cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant,” nor could he even predict how long it would take the F.B.I. to figure that out.

In a rare moment of bipartisan agreement — if not mutual interest — the campaigns of both Mrs. Clinton and Donald Trump demanded, quite correctly, that Mr. Comey provide more information, and fast.

 Funny how the NYT jumps all over FBI director James Comey for finally doing his job unlike when he told Rep.Trey Gowdy  Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee being questioned the first time by the aforementioned Gowdy couldn't get his story staright on the Clinton email bs.
  It goes on "According to numerous reports on Friday evening, the new emails were discovered during the bureau’s investigation of Anthony Weiner, the estranged husband of Huma Abedin, an aide and confidante of Mrs. Clinton’s. Mr. Weiner is being investigated in connection with illicit text messages he sent to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina.

Mr. Comey clearly found himself in a bind. On July 5, he disclosed more than the F.B.I. typically does in an investigation, when he announced that the F.B.I. would recommend against the Department of Justice pursue charges against Mrs. Clinton for mishandling classified material through what he called her “extremely careless” use of a private server. That same week, he testified before Congress that his investigators had found insufficient evidence to warrant prosecution of Mrs. Clinton. The discovery of a new email trove presented him with a choice between risking opprobrium for not revealing its existence until after the election or delivering his deeply unsatisfying letter on Friday.

  Oh poor poor Hillary now she and her hit squad cannot go after Trump for his alleged sexual misdeeds to other women who have been full of shit anyway LMAO.

 It ends "There is so far no indication that Mr. Comey’s missive means the F.B.I. is “reopening” its investigation into Mrs. Clinton, as hyperventilating Republicans, including Mr. Trump, are suggesting, nor is it an acknowledgment that the F.B.I. erred in its earlier efforts. It doesn’t mean that anybody within the F.B.I. is trying to influence the election, as some panicky Democrats are implying. But without more information, it’s impossible for voters to judge the significance of this discovery as they head to the polls.

Mrs. Clinton, as she has acknowledged, is responsible for this mess, which led Friday night to a gobsmacking headline on CNN: “Weiner Sexting Probe Leads F.B.I. to Review Clinton Case.” If she is elected, she will do well to recall that line should she ever consider being less than forthcoming. Her apparent effort to blunt scrutiny by means of that private server has only led to far more damaging scrutiny and suspicion, with no end in sight.

But Mr. Comey’s failure to provide any specifics about a new, potentially important development, less than two weeks before Election Day, is confounding. As Mr. Comey put it in July, “The American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest.” They deserve details even more urgently today.

 This could be the final blow to Hillary's Presidential wishes one can only hope

Teresa Tritch AKA Twit NYT Board Member Gets It Way Way Wrong

Editorial

 This piece of garbage this morning is done by a Teresa Tritch an editorial board member at the New York Times entitled "Mr. Gingrich’s ‘Big Trump" another hit piece. Its a short piece since they don't have the intelligence to write the truth lol.

 It begins "It’s no big surprise that Newt Gingrich is still a gung-ho adviser to the Trump campaign. Mr. Gingrich has long espoused political views similar to Donald Trump’s.

 No shit Sherlock ya think there Ms.Twit wow no wonder why your on the NYT editorial board shaking my head.

 It goes on "But there is more to the alliance than a meeting of the minds. Mr. Gingrich understands that Mr. Trump appears to be losing not because his message has failed to resonate with Americans but because he is a poor messenger.

“I don’t defend him [Trump] when he wanders off,” Mr. Gingrich recently told ABC News. But “there’s a big Trump and there’s a little Trump,” he said, explaining that the big Trump is the one who has created issues that make “the establishment” very uncomfortable.

“The big Trump,” he said, “is a historic figure.”

With statements like that, Mr. Gingrich is positioning himself as the keeper of the Trump-campaign themes and, by extension, as the politician best able to mobilize Trump supporters going forward."

 No if Trumps message is failing its because of the left wing Communist media barrage that's hitting Trump on a 24 hour 7 day a week biased basis and not covering Hillary Clinton in the same way.

 It ends "In the 1990s, Mr. Gingrich spearheaded the antigovernment movement. As House speaker from 1995 to 1999, he invoked racial stereotypes about African-Americans during debates over welfare reform. During his unsuccessful bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, he repeatedly called President Obama the “food stamp president.”

Mr. Gingrich played to birther movement sentiments in 2010 when he said that Mr. Obama exhibited

And now, he is extolling the virtues of “big Trump.” There is a pattern here, and it does not bode well for American politics.

 In red highlight that's pure BULLSHIT. Whats the matter Ms.Twit the truth hurts Obama is the "food stamp" President.Here we go again on the birthing bullshit.

 Hey Twit do your homework (which at the NYT the search for the truth is never done apparently) Hillary Cinton Presidential Campaign back in 2008 was the author of the at the time US Sen.Barack Obama birthing issue.

 Bunch of DUMB DUMB Really DUMB ASSES!!!!

Kristof Truly An Idiot Moron

Oped Columnist

   New York Times opinion/editorial columnists are so blinded by their political left wing biases that they cannot use everyday common sense it's laughable. Yes in a nutshell they are that stupid.

  Especially in this mornings post about one Nicolas Kristof a real liberal idiot his piece of crap this morning "If Hillary Clinton Groped Men" I know what you are thinking WHAT? I'm asking myself the same question lol.

 It begins by asking a lame ass question that should not even be asked "Is there a double standard for women in politics?

 You can't be serious instead of looking into the bullshit lies brought forth by Trump's accusers he asks that dumb question.

 It goes on "Imagine if it were Hillary Clinton who had had five children by three husbands, who had said it was fine to refer to her daughter as a “piece of ass,” who participated in a radio conversation about oral sex in a hot tub, who rated men based on their body parts, who showed up in Playboy soft porn videos.

Imagine if 15 men had accused Clinton of assaulting or violating them, with more stepping forward each day.

Imagine if Clinton had held a Mr. Teen USA pageant and then marched unannounced into the changing area to ogle the young bodies as some were naked and, after doing the same thing at a Mr. USA pageant, marveled on a radio show at what she was allowed to get away with.

Imagine if in a primary election debate Clinton had boasted that there’s “no problem” with the size of her vagina.

Imagine if Clinton had less experience in government or the military than any person who has ever become president?

Imagine if she had said about a man running against her in the primaries, “Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that?”

Imagine if it were Clinton who had boasted, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.”

 Here's the difference Hillary's husband Bill did do these things to women and she involved herself in their affairs.

  It continues "Imagine if it were Clinton who had been caught on a hot mike referring in a degrading way to men’s genitals and boasting that her prominence gave her license to grab men’s crotches.                  

Imagine if she had bragged about her attempts to commit adultery — and later reportedly sought to have fired from his job the married man who resisted her seduction efforts.

Imagine that it were Hillary Clinton who had been accused of assault by her first spouse (later recanted) and later of assault in a lawsuit by a business partner.

Imagine if Clinton had defended herself from an accusation of molesting a young man by explaining, “He would not be my first choice, that I can tell you.”

Imagine if Clinton had body shamed Donald Trump, saying that she had observed his rear end and concluded, “I’m not impressed, believe me.”

Imagine if Hillary Clinton had first drawn national attention not with an idealistic speech at the Wellesley commencement, but by being sued for racial discrimination by President Richard Nixon’s administration.

 Imagine if you Kristof grew a pair and investigated the Clinton foundation as much as you look into the bs on Trump you'd be a real journalist.

 It ends "Imagine if she had later been quoted by a member of her staff as saying “laziness is a trait in blacks” and had retweeted white supremacists, including one honoring the American Nazi Party.

Imagine if it were Clinton who had gone through six bankruptcies and compiled a long record of stiffing contractors, from plumbers to painters to lawyers.

Imagine if it were Clinton who had ordered $100,000 worth of pianos from a small music store in Freehold, N.J., and then announced months after taking delivery that she would pay only $70,000. And if the owner recalled: “Because of Clinton, my store stagnated for a couple of years. It made me feel really bad, like I’d been taken advantage of. I was embarrassed.”

Imagine if it were Hillary Clinton who had denounced international trade while manufacturing shirts in Bangladesh, neck ties in China, suits in Mexico and stemware in Slovenia.

Imagine that the Clintons had given an interview to People magazine and, while Bill stepped away to change clothes, Hillary told the male interviewer that she had a room to show him — and then stuck her tongue down his throat.

Imagine if Clinton had boasted on Howard Stern’s radio show that “in the history of the world, nobody has got more hot men than I have” — and referred to those men she had seduced as her “victims.” What if she were called a sex predator on the show, and she nodded proudly?

Imagine if PolitiFact had judged 71 percent of Clinton’s statements that it checked “mostly false” or worse.

Imagine that, instead of releasing 39 years of tax returns, showing most recently that she had paid 31 percent of her income in federal income taxes, she had refused to release any returns — and leaked pages from 1995 returns indicated that she had paid no federal income taxes at all for years.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Imagine if Clinton had rampaged for a week against a former beauty queen, and even tweeted encouragement to “check out sex tape” of the woman — even though such a video did not exist.

Imagine if Clinton had said, “You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.”

Imagine if Clinton had been so lecherous that her daughter, at age 17, made her promise not to date any boy younger than 17. And if Clinton then joked publicly that as a result “the field is getting very limited.”

Imagine if Clinton had seemed completely ignorant of nuclear strategy and NATO yet said she knew “more about ISIS than the generals.”

Imagine if the Clinton Foundation had failed to register properly, had made an illegal campaign donation and had expended resources not on saving lives from AIDS but (possibly illegally) on two giant portraits of Hillary Clinton herself.

So is there a double standard in American politics, indeed in American society, subjecting women to greater scrutiny? You decide.

 Imagine if you actually wrote a piece that mattered Kristof you would finally have done something worth while you piece of crap.