peter baker - search results
In Friday's New York Times, chief White House correspondent Peter Baker tut-tutted the “normalization” of Donald Trump’s profoundly aberrational presidency. But it's not the public that treats Trump like he's a normal president. It's Baker and his colleagues. I have the receipts.
An article about how Democrats and Republicans have turned themselves “upside-down” when it comes to their views of John Bolton is a master class in false equivalence. Democrats don't suddenly like him, they just believe hist testimony could help arrive at the truth.
Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman accepted what White House officials said about a new executive order on face value. But their report, stating that Trump would order Judaism to be interpreted as a nationality, lacked appropriate skepticism about the motives behind the move -- and maybe about its meaning as well.
Yes, Peter Baker of the New York Times, truth was on trial on Monday, as you wrote in your lede, but your job was not to throw up your hands and wink, it was to shout the truth from the rooftops, and you failed.
Our major news organizations should have been all over Trump's highly revealing comment. It should have been the news peg for angry lead stories about Trump’s ongoing, calamitous failure to save American lives. But there was barely a peep.
A warm round of applause for Philip Rucker, Josh Dawsey and Yasmeen Abutaleb, who instead of simply repeating what Trump said, wrote about the absence of any plan for the widespread national coronavirus testing that public health officials say is essential.
The only really good reason for reporters to show up at Trump's briefings is this: They are the only people allowed in from outside his bubble. They alone can demand the answers the public needs and deserves. And they alone can confront him with the reality that he denies.
Yes, it was Trump’s first public acknowledgment of the true scale of the disastrous coronavirus pandemic. But reporters largely ignored that it was accompanied by yet another round of magical thinking on his part.
Political journalists are still headlining Trump’s nonsense and trying to explain his decision-making. Stop!
Trump repeatedly makes it clear to anyone listening that he has no idea what he's talking about, and no plan to get the country back to normal. But too many political journalists are still working under assumptions that apply to normal presidents and trying to explain his thinking.
Rather than hide Trump's misinformation-filled briefings or broadcast them as is, the cable news networks should respond by doing journalism – in this case, some journalistic jujitsu. Real-time split-screen bullshit-calling would be a negative consequence for Trump -- and a big win for viewers.