New York Times Calls for ‘Godfather’ Tactics to Stop Trump’s SCOTUS Nominee

by Thinker

The far-left New York Times editorial board is calling on Democrats to use mafia tactics from The Godfather to stop President Trump from filling a Supreme Court vacancy. Using language that appears to not only condone, but to encourage violence, the editorial board writes: Barring some unforeseen development, the president will lock in a 5-to-4 conservative majority, shifting the court solidly to the right for a generation. This is all the more reason for Democrats and progressives to take a page from “The Godfather” and go to the mattresses on this issue.

The term “going to the mattresses” means going to war.

The Urban Dictionary accurately describes the phrase as meaning “preparing for battle” within the context of a mob war, a violent mob war involving firearms, assassinations, and bombings. The anti-Trump New York Times describes this editorial as a “call to arms” and adds that the “fire now raging against Mr. Trump and his nominees can’t be sustained indefinitely.” As of July 7, Breitbart News has documented 190 acts (this list continues to be updated) of media-approved violence and harassment against Trump and his supporters during the last 31 months.

The establishment media continue to ignore, downplay, encourage, and even:
www.breitbart.com/big-journalism…s-nominee/

When you own a newspaper/magazine, your opinion might not be that of the majority, but the minority.

The New York Times has been around for a long time, so what have they given back to the people and city that supports them? Is there an emergency shelter for families that they sponsor? Does the New York Times sponsor a food kitchen? Have they put in a park on the lower income side of town with their name on it? What does a newspaper that has dominated on city give back? Words followed by actions and history continue to tell the truth about the content of character for every individual and organization in the world.

The “New York Times” is an American newspaper based in New York City with worldwide influence and readership for a very “LONG” time and was founded in 1851. The paper is owned by The New York Times Company, which is publicly traded but primarily controlled by Jewish family Ochs-Sulzberger through a dual-class share structure. It has been owned by the family since 1896. Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. on December 14, 2017, announced he would be ceding the post of publisher to his son, Arthur Gregg “A.G.” Sulzberger, effective January 1, 2018. In February 2009, Sulzberger began writing for The New York Times. The newspaper published his first article on March 2, 2009. He was named an associate editor of The New York Times in August 2015. In October 2016, he was named deputy publisher, putting him in line to succeed his father as publisher. He is the sixth member of the Ochs-Sulzberger family to serve in the role.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Gregg_Sulzberger
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times

How the New York Times Lies About Lies: Obama v. Trump as Example by Eric Zuesse – Strategic-Culture

Although the New York Times says that President Donald Trump lies vastly more than did President Barack Obama, the definite liar in that comparison — based on the factual record, to be presented here — is the New York Times itself. It lies in alleging this, which isn’t to say that either President lies more frequently than the other, but instead, that the Times’s calculation fails to count, at all, but instead altogether ignores, some of President Obama’s very worst lies — ones that were real whoppers. These were lies that were essential to his maintaining support among Democrats (such as the owners of this corporation, the NYT, are), and that would keep Democrats’ support only if they failed to judge him by his actual decisions and actions (such as the NYT’s owners do — or else they secretly know the truth on this, but prevent this truth from being published by their employees).

Even to the present day, Obama is evaluated by Democrats on the basis of his lies instead of on the basis of his actions. He’s admired for his stated intentions and promises, which were often the opposite of what his consistent actual decisions and actions turned out to be on those very same matters, on which he had, in retrospect, quite clearly lied (though that was covered-up at the time — and still is). For example, among the list of lies that the NYT counts from Obama, is excluded Obama’s having asserted on 20 May 2009, at the signing into law of both the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act and the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act: “This bill nearly doubles the FBI’s mortgage and financial fraud program, allowing it to better target fraud in hard-hit areas. That’s why:
thedailycoin.org/2018/06/18/how-…s-example/

1,581 views