General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)hlthe2b
(102,292 posts)NYT continues to express its Clinton disdain and while not on the order of the Trump ilck, it is indefensible when lives have been put at risk.
DURHAM D
(32,610 posts)still_one
(92,219 posts)and instead the Washington Post
This was the final straw that caused me to drop my subscription to the NY Times when they blamed the Democrats for causing the republicans to reject climate change:
"The Republican Partys fast journey from debating how to combat human-caused climate change to arguing that it does not exist is a story of big political money, Democratic hubris in the Obama years and a partisan chasm that grew over nine years like a crack in the Antarctic shelf, favoring extreme positions and uncompromising rhetoric over cooperation and conciliation."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)and totally unrelated to the story.
If they included in every story about Trump when he's at one of his properties a paragraph about how that property was financed by the Saudis, maybe you'd have a point.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Which is, well... ya know, what background is for, regardless of your (again, irreverent) pleas of chill.
unblock
(52,253 posts)Squinch
(50,955 posts)uponit7771
(90,347 posts)lamsmy
(155 posts)How the house was paid for is completely irrelevant to this story.
It is just another gratuitous attempt to convince the reader of the supposed Clinton-McAuliffe-McCabe link.
tblue37
(65,406 posts)as though the Clintons and McAuliffe were involved in some sort of shady transaction.
kcr
(15,317 posts)lark
(23,105 posts)I will never subscribe to them again. I have kept my WaPo subscription intact because they don't front for rw'ers the way NYT does. I do miss some of the great comments and Paul Krugman, but it's not worth the cost of supporting what they put out.
yardwork
(61,650 posts)Response to DURHAM D (Original post)
unblock This message was self-deleted by its author.
dsc
(52,162 posts)The level of hatred directed toward Bill and Hillary Clinton by the press known few bounds.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)The Clintons bought their 11-room Dutch Colonial home in Chappaqua, an affluent Westchester enclave, in 1999 for $1.7 million as Mr. Clinton ended his tenure in the White House. The decision to settle in Westchester came as Mrs. Clinton was preparing to run for Senate from New York.
If you're going to be pissed at the Times, at least be pissed at what they said, not what some tweet said they said.
chowder66
(9,073 posts)Marc
Manhattan1h ago
Hold up...what is the purpose of this detail? "Facing significant debts from the legal troubles that dogged Mr. Clintons presidency, the Clintons were able to buy the house after their chief fund-raiser, Terry McAuliffe, personally secured a loan."
There are several news outlets that picked that up and linked it;
https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/explosive-devices-found-in-mail-sent-to-obama-and-hillary-clinton/
kcr
(15,317 posts)Seattle Times has the version before The Times edited it. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/explosive-devices-found-in-mail-sent-to-obama-and-hillary-clinton/
It is unclear where exactly the package addressed to Clinton was sent. Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have a home in Chappaqua, a suburb of New York City. They bought their 11-room Dutch Colonial home in the affluent enclave in 1999 for $1.7 million as Bill Clinton ended his tenure in the White House. The decision to settle in Westchester County came as Hillary Clinton was preparing to run for Senate from New York.
Facing significant debts from the legal troubles that dogged Bill Clintons presidency, the Clintons were able to buy the house after their chief fundraiser, Terry McAuliffe, personally secured a loan.
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)but didn't find the text. Could it have been removed? In a different, opinion piece?
I agree that bit would be twisted as written. They'd never cared about accumulating wealth before the presidency and did leave it in debt. And McAuliffe did carry their mortgage, a secure investment. But they also had sure-fire ways to bring in large incomes quickly (including of course speaking engagements with groups willing to pay huge bucks for trophy speakers) and could have easily obtained a mortgage from commercial sources.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/24/nyregion/clinton-obama-explosive-device.html