SHARE

Dear NYT, Delete your account

In its pathological Liberal Media quest to catch Billary Clinton Doing Some Kind of Bad Thing That Is Bad Maybe, the New York Times published a devastating, campaign-destroying, earth-shattering, game-changing, smoking gun GOTCHA! story late Thursday night, and it was Not Excellent News for Hillary:

Criminal Inquiry Sought in Clinton’s Use of Email

Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether Hillary Rodham Clinton mishandled sensitive government information on a private email account she used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.

That sounds pretty uh oh. Criminal, even! Hillary will never be president now because she will be in PRISON, for emailing sensitive classified state secrets from her personal GrammaYOLO@Hillz.com email, even though she said she only used it to plan her daughter’s wedding and talk about yoga. But no! She used it for doing crime and jeopardizing national security. Bad Hillary, no White House for you!

Just one little problem: it’s not true, according to the Justice Department. Oops!

A statement issued by the Department said it had received a “referral” on the matter, although it did not say who originated it.

“It is not a criminal referral,” the statement said.

But what about looking into Hillary’s “use of email”? Nope, that’s not true either:

The Justice Department said Friday it has been asked to investigate the “potential compromise of classified information” in connection with the private e-mail account that Hillary Rodham Clinton used while serving as secretary of state.

That’s a little bit different from saying Hillary Clinton might be criminally investigated for emailing classified information, isn’t it? As the Times noted in its shocking story:

In the course of the email review, State Department officials determined that some information in the messages should be retroactively classified. In the 3,000 pages that were released, for example, portions of two dozen emails were redacted because they were upgraded to “classified status.” But none of those were marked as classified at the time Mrs. Clinton handled them.

So the State Department is retroactively classifying documents Hillary emailed, which were not classified at the time, but that adds up to criminal activity by Clinton, and the DOJ is ON IT, except not? Ace reporting there, The New York Times!

The paper eventually decided it regrets the error of getting the whole thing wrong, so it changed the headline and the lede and the story, and added a “correction,” and it is very sorry about that, we good now?

NYT correction

But the interweb is forever, so you can see the changes from the original story here, thanks to NewsDiffs.

So, how did the Times fuck this up so badly? Well, it got some secret memos. Can’t tell you how, it is a SECRET. But Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings, who is a member of the House Benghazi Committee To Investigate Hillary Clinton Until They Prove She Did Benghazi, thinks he might know:

In a statement, Cummings said that “this is the latest example in a series of inaccurate leaks to generate false front-page headlines — only to be corrected later — and they have absolutely nothing to do with the attacks in Benghazi or protecting our diplomatic corps overseas.”

So hmm, maybe Republicans are leaking information to the Times to try to turn a story that isn’t a story into a story, for their own political gain. But nah, they would never do something like that, would they? And the Times would never play along, would it? (Yes and yes.)

So never mind. But wow, that sure was exciting for a hot minute, wasn’t it? Nice try, The NYT, better luck next time. Again.

[NYT / WaPo / NewsDiffs via Daily Kos]

$
Donate with CCDonate with CC
  • Nounverb911

    When did Scooter Libby join the NY Times staff?

    • WiscoJoe

      Someone had to take over for Judith Miller.

  • dslindc

    Way to go, Hillz! INPEACH!!!!1!!!1!1

  • Msgr_Moment

    BANhammerGHAZIII!!!

  • Nounverb911

    “this is the latest example in a series of inaccurate leaks”
    Do you know who else made a series of inaccurate leaks?

  • Jaime Oria

    Clearly a False Front-page operation!

    • cousin itt

      Hillary has implants?

      • nmmagyar

        Teeth or boobs?

        • TootsStansbury

          Say, Hillz needs a pair OT the Wonkette panties…hmmm.

  • Msgr_Moment

    • RoyalUglyDude

      Eso si que es.

    • calliecallie

      Is that her pick for Veep?

      • YourMom

        I hope so.

  • whatwhomever

    When did the NY times get all Breitbarty and stuff?

    • WiscoJoe

      When liberals learned how to use the internet and stopped paying for newspaper subscriptions?

      (Also, whenever a Clinton is involved.)

    • r m reddicks

      When was it not? Just the kinder softer Breitbart.

    • Latverian Diplomat

      When Joseph Lelyveld became editor? (Back in ’94). At least I think that’s when the “No allegation against the Clintons is not worthy of pages of coverage” era began.

      • Vegan and Tiara

        Well, the Clintons DID murder Vince Foster!

  • Latverian Diplomat

    Something that apparently used to be common practice, but which no one does (to Republicans at least) any more. “If an anonymous source lies to you, you out them when you correct the lie.” If there are no consequences, they will continue to pull this shit; why wouldn’t they?

    • Msgr_Moment

      Yeah, but then you’ll lose that person as a source [or erroneous information].

      • HobbesEvilTwin

        you also might get uninvited to the next party of cool kids.

        • Reddishrabbit

          Could you imagine having a table next to Buzzfeed in the back at the next White House Correspondent Dinner if a R somehow won? What would be the point of being a journalist then?

      • Latverian Diplomat

        And what a loss that is. One might have to cut lunch short and do some real investigative journalism.

      • cleos_mom

        If a source lies, no loss.

  • JD Mulvey

    Dear NYT:
    You are the most gullible “journalists” on the planet. Did you learn nothing from the aggravation Scooter Libby caused you? In future, when some Republican staffer does you a solid by sharing some obviously partisan juiciness, STOP… put on your thinking cap for one whole scond, and consider doing a little fact-checking. You might just spare yourself being humiliated yet again.
    Yer pal,
    JD

    • chazmanr

      The NYT has had a bug up its ass for the Clintons since the 1990s. This is nothing new for them.

      • Lot_49

        It’s just not right that people from Arkansas—or worse yet, the suburbs of Chicago—should become powerful.

  • Tendernob

    I wonder if they’ll print a big retraction on page one: “NYT lied about criminal probe of Clinton.”

    • r m reddicks

      Judith Martin is on it!

    • Latverian Diplomat

      No, but enough people complain that they should, the ombudsman will publish a lenghty essay on why that would be exactly the wrong thing to do.

    • PubOption

      She was not overcharged for her colonoscopy.

    • Esteban Rey

      NYT now focus of criminal probe in story-planting investigation.

    • Metadude

      I just did a spit take. You have a fine comic sensibility, Tendernob!

  • JoeChristmas

    The way is clear for Bernie!!1!

  • cousin itt

    Leave the ratfucking to Ghost Nixxxon’s professionals, NYT.

  • WiscoJoe

    Reminds me of that old story about the boy whom cried wolf. How did that one go again? Something about how even though you know someone is crying wolf, you should still publish everything they say and protect their anonymity as long as it makes for a good headline? Perhaps my recollection is a bit fuzzy, but that’s the moral that best justifies my bottom line and career ambitions so I’m sticking with it.

  • Painter of Goats

    We misrepresent, you decide.

  • Bitter Scribe

    This is a Times tradition, dating back to at least the Joe McCarthy days.

    The New York Times once looked back upon its own coverage of a McCarthy investigation and acknowledged that it had done its readers a great disservice….Reporting developments from the only possible source, the investigators, it ran such headlines as Rosenberg Called Radar Spy Leader; Radar Witness Breaks Down, Will Tell All; Monmouth Figure Linked to Hiss Ring. The Times admitted that there turned out to be no truth in any of these stories, but it explained that it had seen no alternative to publishing them. “It is difficult, if not impossible, to ignore charges by Senator McCarthy just because they are usually proved false. The remedy lies with the reader.” To many people, this was rather like saying that if a restaurant serves poisoned food, it is up to the diner to refuse it.

    –Richard Rovere, “Senator Joe McCarthy”

    • Little Lulu

      I was under the impression that the NYT had printed a retraction, but they appear to be standing by what they were told. They’re not letting HRC off the hook or admitting an error, despite evidence to the contrary.

    • Little Lulu

      I was under the impression that the NYT had printed a retraction, but they appear to be standing by what they were told. They’re not letting HRC off the hook or admitting an error, despite evidence to the contrary.

  • Callyson

    Now I am glad I unsubscribed from that rag…

    /FFS

    • SuspectedDemocrat

      Hey! The book reviews are still pretty good.

      • Callyson

        Gail Collins and other columnists also too. Otherwise…

        /FFS

      • jmk

        They have a reliable crossword puzzle…and the extra puzzle is usually ok, also too.

    • Lot_49

      Yeahbut, what are you gonna read that’s better?

      And where else are you going to learn how to decorate your 5,000-square-foot cottage in West Hampton? Hate to tell you, but sofas upholstered with antique Persian rugs are so last year.

      • AnOuthouse

        Wonkette?

  • memzilla

    BREAKING! MUST CREDIT WONKETTE!!1!!

    Entirety of Faux “News” Special Report on New York Times Corrected Headline and Lede:
    .

  • longtail

    Will political hatchet jobs designed to smear candidates while having no actual veracity be referred to as Benghaziing in the future or will it still be called swift boating?

    • UnsaltedSinner

      I think this is a classic case of the Clinton Rules, as explained by Paul Krugman:

      “The usual rules didn’t seem to apply; instead it was Clinton rules, under which innuendo and guilt by association were considered perfectly OK, in which the initial suggestion of lawbreaking received front-page headlines and the subsequent discovery that there was nothing there was buried in the back pages if it was reported at all.”

      Any story that implies a Clinton has done something fishy is obviously too good to check.

  • janecita

    But, but The New York Times is the most liberal newspaper in this country!

  • azeyote

    c’mon just by looking at the pic you can see that them thar jowls are just stuffed with Benthefu#kingazi secrets that she can’t quite get down – and then trying to hide behind them shades – guilty i say guilty –

  • Villago Delenda Est

    You’d think the NYT would have learned from Whitewater and from Wen Ho Lee. But no. They learned nothing.

    Which is why the NYT isn’t fit to print news anymore. They’re fools for scandal.

    • Latverian Diplomat

      Specifically, fools for Democratic scandal.

    • Lot_49

      Not to mention Mr Flood-the-Zone Howell Raines and his ward and heir, Jayson Blair.

    • Lot_49

      Not to mention Mr Flood-the-Zone Howell Raines and his ward and heir, Jayson Blair.

  • Villago Delenda Est

    Would Trey Gowdy lie to a reporter from the New York Times?

    Of course not. Never. In a million years, never.

    • weejee

      Trey’s three tongues can lie in harmony.

  • Beaumarchais?

    Clearly, both sides do… something. Or not.

    • Steely_Fan

      Will someone, anyone, please tell me, give me one example, of something the Democrats have done that is in any way comparable to the massive mountain of colossal fuck-ups that the Repugs have committed over the last 40 years? Starting with the October Surprise, continuing through Watergate, Iran-Contra, the 2000 election, the invasion of Iraq on false pretenses, Abu-Graib, black sites, Gitmo, torture, Isis? What d’ya got? A blow job? A buggy website? The successful insuring of millions of Americans? Allowing kids who were brought here through no fault of their own to remain here pending legislation to resolve the “immingration problem?” Oh wait, I forgot. The president is blah. Yeah, I guess it all balances out.

  • Jen_Baker_VA

    Sooooo….is the right going to go nuts on the NYT for getting the story wrong the same exact way they still decry rolling stone (which is a music rag, not a news outlet, so it would make more more sense to decry the sloppy journalism of an actual newspaper, you dig)?
    Just speculating

    • Villago Delenda Est

      The right’s outrage is highly selective and does not apply if the target is one with which the right does not agree.

      ALWAYS.

      • willi0000000

        VDE – i think you might have tied yourself in one too many ‘nots’ there.

        • Steely_Fan

          IOKIYAR

  • HobbesEvilTwin

    If I could get Krugman, Collins, Blow, (sometimes) Bruni, and (sometimes) Nocera to write elsewhere, I could save a lot of money not paying to get past their paywall.

    • Reddishrabbit

      That’s what friends and family are for. That and HBO login info.

    • BoatOfVelociraptors

      That’s the content biz. I was considering telling you how to bypass their paywall, but I reserve such fuckery for comcast.

    • JD Mulvey
    • riledupone

      Collins has an RSS feed which I subscribe too. The others may as well. On mobile I subscribe to the “Opinion ” daily newsletter from the NYT and you can link from the email to the specific columnist. No paywalls involved.

    • Biel_ze_Bubba

      Does the Google trick work, like it does for the WSJ? When you hit the WSJ paywall, you copy the headline, search on it in Google, and click back to the article via the search results.
      (I pay for the NYT, so I can’t test this without mucking with my browser’s cookies and whatnot.)

      • SophieCT

        Incognito window works.

        • Biel_ze_Bubba

          That means the NYT uses cookies to tally your visits. Disable cookies from nytimes.com, and you can read to your heart’s content.

  • RoyalUglyDude

    Good thing the NYT apologized and issued a correction.
    Now about that WMD story…

  • Lot_49

    Who doesn’t love Rep Elijah Cummings? He has the name of, looks like and sounds like a biblical prophet. Plus he delivers The Word.

    • r m reddicks

      He might be the bees knees and a fine fellow, but I’d never trust a preacher.

      • Lot_49

        Rep? Rev?

        • r m reddicks

          Who can figure? I do kind of like the guy. But still don’t trust a preacher. Or a prophet . Or deliverers of some word.

          • Msgr_Moment

            IK,R? My newspaperboy is the worst.

      • nmmagyar

        It’s OK, he’s not actually a preacher, he just sounds like one.

  • vivian

    “All the newsprint that fits.”

  • disqus_0lWqMBoD8b

    Yeah, I liked the bit where they did a half-mea-culpa stating “This
    incident shows the danger of relying on reckless, inaccurate leaks from
    partisan sources”.

    Gee, you think? Get out.

    • disqus_0lWqMBoD8b

      The more I think about the passive condescending tone of this half-admission non-apology, the more it pisses me off.

      Like they are instructing us on how to report news instead of, “Hey, we really, really messed up AGAIN and relied on folks who have LIED to us BEFORE about pretty much the SAME thing.”.

      • Villago Delenda Est

        DING DING DING DING DING

    • lovelydestruction

      So smooth

  • calliecallie

    Today we are all GrammaYOLO.

  • Toomush_Infer

    FOXED News says that there are “Media Reports” of bad e-mail conduct by Hilary Clinton, citing FOXED News!….

    • Blank Ron

      They’re going with the most reliable source they know – themselves.

  • Lot_49

    In their defense, NYT does a lot of good stuff. Like when they tipped the 2004 election in Shrub’s favor by suppressing James Risen’s NSA eavesdropping story until after the election.

    Okay, bad example….

    • MilwaukeeKent

      There’s a reason the Washington Post scooped the NYT on Watergate back in the day, although now it’s doubtful the WAPO could scoop a litter box.

      • Lot_49

        Haw!

  • chazmanr

    I cancelled my subscription 6 months ago because of this shite!

  • Retroactively classifying information is how the Obama-Holder DOJ sent Jeffrey Sterling to prison, and ruined Thomas Drake’s life attempting to do the same.

    Luckily for Hillary, those two were whistle-blowers and she is not.
    ~

    • AnOuthouse

      It’s widely reported on the internet that Hillary whistles when she walks.

  • VandeGraf

    The implication is that some GOP sympathizers are doing a bit of lying. I’m shocked. Shocked and appalled. Whoda thunk it?!

  • weejee

    Although a real pisser, leaking leakers gotta leak jsut like grifting grifters gotta grift.

    • TheBidenator

      Turn that bucket upside down and have it leak out hog crap and you’ve got George Dubya Bush

  • YourMom

    The long arm of the Bush organization at work. He’s only mildly rebuking Trump, laying back and letting the desperate loons destroy each other before really kicking it in. Meanwhile, the RNC and its Hill staffers are carrying out strategic leaks… Bush’s organization playing the long game here.

  • disqus_0lWqMBoD8b

    NYT and AP are like Charlie Brown, to hear them tell it, and Republicans on
    the committee or their staffs are like Lucy promising to hold the football, and the football is a scoop on Hillary Clinton, only every time they go to kick the ball, Lucy pulls the football away (it turns out to be lies).

    And Like Charlie Brown, they “fall for it” every time.

  • Metadude

    This is great. Now my (few remaining) wingnut FB friends will be posting this on my page weekly for the next decade.

  • Msgr_Moment

    We would like to apologize for our story of July 24. Darrell Issa has apparently not stopped beating his wife yet.

    • Amy!

      We have a correction to our retraction of the story of July 24. We incorrectly stated that Darrell Issa has apparently not stopped beating his wife. Congressman Issa’s office informs us that the Congressman does not beat his wife. We congratulate the Congressman on abandoning his pernicious habit, and wish the Congressman’s wife a speedy recovery.

    • Wendel

      Correction: But he HAS stopped beating his hamster.

  • OrdinaryJoe

    Hillghazi !!!

  • OrdinaryJoe

    So I take it Judy Miller is back writing fiction for the Times?

  • Me not sure

    i-ghazi!

  • FDRliberal

    The New York Times has of course been writing utter bullshit about the Clintons since the grunge era. My only theory is that Her Vapidness, the Clinton-hating and Clenis-obsessed MoDo, has some inside info on one of the Sulzbergers.

    • Wendel

      We need the Pegster’s input first as an appetizer.

  • TheBidenator

    Donald Trump has recalled his investigators from Hawaii for this YOOOGE conspiracy. Hillz will be swinging from a gallows after all the “amazing stuff” that they find which is never released, count on it.

    • Wendel

      He will release all the “evidence” once he arrives at the White House.

  • Playonwords

    Let me guess, the correction was printed in 4 point type.

    • AnOuthouse

      It requires a digital subscription to the Times too.

  • TheBidenator

    How much does anyone want to bet this is Darrell Issa’s (R-Firebug) doing? Trey Gowdy is a little too um, South Carolina stupid for this but Rep. Hexxus from “Fern Gully” would be definitely the one I suspect first…

    • Zyxomma

      Issa or Trey Gowdy.

  • Rick Hill

    This is the long game. Folks only remember hearing something about HRC. Doesn’t matter if it’s later corrected and apologized for. Heck, I’ve talked to people who still believe there were WMD found in Iraq regardless of the fact that none other than dubya hisself said there were none. Just keep the bad news coming and it’ll add up. Now if the gop could only stop being complete idiots every time they talk for more than five minutes they might just pull this off….

    • JD Mulvey

      Exactly. They don’t need to attract voters to whatever Idiot the Republicans nominate. All they need to do is supress enthusiasm for Hillary and they can win.

      Remember that next time your friend tells you about the vague, unspecified air of sleaze he says is around Hillary Clinton.

      • ButchWagstaff

        I’ve known some liberals who still believe the worst lies the RW cabal came up with about the Clintons. That’s how frighteningly effective that shit was.

        • JD Mulvey

          Not to dredge up old battles, but in ’08 some of Obama’s people –Plouffe and Axelrod in particular –fanned that kind of nonsense. They basically made it okay for libs to repeat the FOX talking points.

        • cleos_mom

          And some of them claim to be the “true liberals.” Sort of like Every True Scotsman.

    • Wendel

      The big problem is that Hill and Bill are so darn boring. I can stand criminal, but boring is unpardonable.

  • AnOuthouse

    Secret anonymous info is always accurate. That’s journalism 101.

    • JohnnyZhivago2

      ONLY If it’s on the Internet.

  • Jukesgrrl

    I am one of The Oldz so I long for the days when major publications had fact-checkers.

    • JohnnyZhivago2

      I remember when the major news outlets had REPORTERS!

      • Pierre_de_Fermat

        Was that during that war in Veetnam? Takes you back.

    • They need ombudsmen (or ombudsladies). The WaPo has a factchucker, he specializes in “both sides do it.”

      But no more is there a person in charge of saying, “Hey you craven fuck, you lied, now repent!”

      Because Fred Hiatt didn’t like that.
      ~

    • Dee Andee

      Fact-checkers and proofreaders.

    • Pierre_de_Fermat

      Wow, that must have been in Harry Truman’s day, ’cause NYT don’t need to do that now. They just ask Judy Miller.

    • Wendel

      And editors!

  • azeyote

    who cares for facts when it’s Ratings man Ratings – It’s ratings that make trooth don’t ya know – learned it on Fox – i did

  • JohnnyZhivago2

    This is Obama/Clinton shredding the Constitution! The Constitution even specifies the IP addresses to be used by the Secretary of State!!!!

    • Pierre_de_Fermat

      I think the Supreme Court has been ambiguous on whether the SOS is to use Unicode or ISO 8859-1, so there may be case here.

  • idiotboy

    Who the fuck controls the NY Times now, I really do not know.

    One of my favorite things to do in the whole world was to sit and read (on the beach, porch, looking out the window and watching it snow) the Sunday Times followed by the LA Times and the SF Chronicle. An entire day. No way to respond in a rapid manner to any article or opinion.

    Now, the Wonkette. Followed by hollow retorts like this.

    My life is pitiful.

    • riledupone

      I, too used to love the Sunday Times. Many years ago, a friend decided to take me to brunch the day after my parents died, to get me out of the house for a bit and to cheer me up. Anyway, when we got to the restaurant they had copies of the Sunday NYTimes so people could grab a section while they ate. We’re in Toronto so that wasn’t common. We ordered our drinks and I picked up my section of the Times and turned it over. The headline read, “Medical Schools Report Shortage Of Cadavers”. My friend and I both started howling with laughter, as we both have very very dark senses of humour. Grief is very weird.

    • Markuserektus

      Doesn’t Carlos Slim have controlling interest in the Times?

      • SophieCT

        Yes.

  • House0fTheBlueLights

    Oh no! People who would never have voted for Hillary will now never vote for Hillary.

  • TootsStansbury

    The NYT? Like the fucking WAPO, you can always wipe your butt with it and set on fire.

    • Msgr_Moment

      Offer not valid in Idaho.

      • Markuserektus

        …void where prohibited by law. Thank you doctor.

    • Wendel

      But then you get newsprint ink all over your nether regions and that’s not a good thing.

  • Enfant Terrible

    Oh joy, it’s the 1990s magical mystery nostalgia tour! Let’s bring back the macarena while we’re at it.

    • ButchWagstaff

      Oh. God. No.

    • cleos_mom

      We live near an Air Force base, and we sometimes see black helicopters fly over.

  • Rufus T. Firefly

    Bernie Sanders doesn’t even use email!*

    *not intended as a factual statement

  • Paperless Tiger

    She could email a picture of her ass, tell them to kiss it, and still win the election.

    • bargal20

      Oh for a time machine and a cute puppy with which to start a conversation…

  • George

    When was the Times bought by Murdock? I missed that transaction. He can have it. I mean, really. Let him have it. Please. The only things worth reading any more are op-eds by C.Blow, P. Krugman and G. Collins. I got no times for the rest of the thing.

  • SadDemInTex

    I am totally disgusted by this…who the hell owns them now.

    • Theodora30

      The Times has been after the Clintons since the early 90’s. It was the Times that was used as a mouthpiece by right wing operatives to push the completely bogus Whitewater story. The Times allowed its reporter Jeff Gerth to repeatedly print accusations without making sure there were independent sources corroborating the charges (just as the later did with Judith Miller’s WMD stories). Worse they downplayed the two taxpayer-financed, Republican-led investigations that looked into it and cleared the Clintons. Jay Stevens investigated for the RTC then Robert Fiske was appointed as special prosecutor to look at the Whitewater charges and both found no wrongdoing by the Clintons. The Times buried the story and kept demanding an “independent” counsel be appointed (by a panel of right wing judges) and we got Ken Starr. The Times has never paid a price for their key role in this debacle so they are continuing their disgusting ways, strengthening the far right and damaging our democracy.
      I have always believed that the Times could not accept that a guy from nowheresville Arkansas could be a legitimated president.

      • SadDemInTex

        I was going to mention Judith Miller and the WMD crap. Follow the $$$$$

  • willi0000000

    new NYT logo?

    The Truth Shall Make Us Flee

  • Alex Grey

    The Grey Lady has a santorum stain on her face now…

  • Biel_ze_Bubba

    Shorter mea cupla:

    Correction: July 24, 2015
    An earlier version of this article was based on information provided by a Republican politician.
    The Times regrets the error.

  • coozledad

    When the NYT is in the tank for the Republicans this early in the campaign, you know that Jeb Bush is already the Republican nominee.

    This has the Bush family’s shitty fingerprints all over it.

    • beatbort

      It has their footprints all over it too.

    • D_C_Wilson

      Nuh-uh. The Donald is going to be the yoogist, classyist GOP nominee of all time.

      • Steely_Fan

        We can only hope…

  • beatbort

    As Atrios says, it must be time for a blogging ethics panel!

  • dead_red

    since the NYTimes didn’t feel like issuing a real correction for this, Kurt Eichenwald did it for them: http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-new-york-times-emails-357246

  • bradygirl20

    As the woman has said many times, F you, Grey Lady

  • Blank Ron

    CNN had a phone interview with The Donald this morning (Sunday). Sounds like he didn’t get the memo about this ‘story’ being complete bullshit, as he was screaming about how Hillary was a ‘criminal’ and thus shouldn’t be allowed to run for President.
    The jokes just write themselves sometimes, don’t they?

    • JD Mulvey

      So she’s in good company. Obama, Planned Parenthood, everyone from Mexico… To the nutjobs, EVERYBODY’S a criminal.

      • Blank Ron

        Talk about streamlining the criminal code, eh?

  • Boone76

    keeping classified documents after you are done working with the government is criminal.

    • JD Mulvey

      Yeah yeah yeah… except that if the flag in the courtroom has gold fringe on it that makes it an admiralty court without jurisdiction over sovereign citizens, amiright?

  • Ryan Denniston

    Ugh, the Clinton Rules are in effect. You’d think major news outlets would be on the lookout for ratfvcking, but nosiree, not the Times.

Previous articleWonkette Camping Corner: Don’t Set Your Poo Wipes On Fire, Dumbass
Next articleRush Limbaugh Mad Teenage Boys Don’t Put Out Like They Used To