Mark Patricks – Of all the press coverage of the recent presidential race, perhaps none was more egregiously one-sided than that of The New York Times.

The famous “Gray Lady” of newspapers is widely hailed as one of journalism’s best-known standard bearers. But in the race between Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton, the paper gave up all pretensions of journalistic integrity and objectivity as it bent over backwards to not only present the Democrats’ case in the best light but to actually become the Clinton campaign’s surrogate mouthpiece, particularly in the latter stages of the contest.

Even early on, the paper clearly had a different tone and imbalanced coverage that favored Clinton over her primary rival Bernie Sanders, who was drawing far larger crowds than the former Secretary of State. But among the Establishment crowd, Clinton had long been the odds-on favorite not only to win the primaries but to dominate the general election itself, no matter who the Republican nominee turned out to be.

Although the paper has long been an elite liberal voice, favoring Democrats over Republicans for decades in terms of its endorsements and editorials, the journal’s undisguised contempt for Donald Trump stretches back more than 35 years.

To his credit, Trump also has had a longstanding disrespect for the New York broadsheet, blasting the paper’s criticism of his various civic projects and real estate developments around the city.

Continue reading →