New York Times stealth-edits article claiming Ocasio-Cortez is fighting Jewish influence in Congress
Category: News & PoliticsVia: texan1211 • 3 weeks ago • 44 comments
By: Becket Adams (MSN)
For Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, there is no act of political cowardice or self-preservation so craven the New York Times will not defend.
© Provided by Washington Examiner
On Thursday, after days of criticizing a budget proposal to fund Israel's defensive "Iron Dome" anti-missile system, the New York congresswoman voted "present" on the standalone bill. Not a "nay" vote, which would've at least been consistent with her attempts to strip the "Iron Dome" funding from a larger spending bill, but a meek, worthless "present" vote.
Ocasio-Cortez marked the moment of the bill's passage with a public show of emotion on the floor of the House.
Later, after the proposed $1 billion in funding passed overwhelmingly by a vote of 420-9, the New York Times rushed to the representative's defense, propping her up as some sort of principled crusader against nefarious Jewish influences in Congress.
"Minutes before the vote closed," the paper reported. "Ms. Ocasio-Cortez tearfully huddled with her allies before switching her vote to 'present.' The tableau underscored how wrenching the vote was for even outspoken progressives, who have been caught between their principles and the still powerful pro-Israel voices in their party, such as influential lobbyists and rabbis."
This is one hell of a thing to allege in a supposedly straight news publication. People have literally shot up synagogues over such anti-Semitic conspiracy-theory allegations about "powerful" Jewish lobbies.
What's more, the New York Times is saying quite clearly that when it came time to fund Israel's "Iron Dome" — a defensive system responsible for saving the lives of Jew and Arab alike, which doesn't harm or kill anyone — distraught left-wing progressives were "caught between their principles" and "powerful" Jewish influences.
This is what is known as saying the quiet part aloud.
But then the New York Times quietly edited the report later to remove the not-at-all-subtle line regarding pro-Israel lobbyists and rabbis.
The passage now reads, "The tableau underscored how wrenching the vote was for even outspoken progressives, who have been caught between their principles and the still powerful pro-Israel voices in their party."
There is no editor's note or update drawing attention to the revisions.
Further, the updated paragraph is only marginally better than what was originally published. It still editorializes Ocasio-Cortez's thoughts, words, and motivations. The New York Times has no better understanding of the congresswoman's actions than you or I do, especially given that Ocasio-Cortez's office declined the paper's request for comment. The New York Times is flying blind, but it rests anyway on providing the most flattering interpretation possible for the thinking behind Ocasio-Cortez's vote and state of mind. That is called "spin," not reporting.
How does this sort of thing go to print in the first place?
Former Times opinion editor Bari Weiss likely hit the nail on the head last year when she said Twitter is the New York Times's "ultimate editor." Anti-Israel operatives have a strong presence on social media and, as we've seen time and again, the various positions of left-wing activists tend to bleed over into mainstream reporting.
Ocasio-Cortez can't be faulted for her useless, contradictory vote or her opposition to a defensive mechanism that saves lives, according to these people. No, she is to be forgiven. After all, she is trying to navigate her principles against nefarious Jewish influences.
Tags:Beltway Confidential, Opinion, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York Times