Your piece seethes with resentment against The NY Post's success and the paper's crusades on issues such as congestion pricing. The NY Post's true status as an underdog was revealed when it published the first stories on Hunter Biden's laptop, but was censored by Twitter and roundly ignored by the rest of the media -- until more than a y…
Your piece seethes with resentment against The NY Post's success and the paper's crusades on issues such as congestion pricing. The NY Post's true status as an underdog was revealed when it published the first stories on Hunter Biden's laptop, but was censored by Twitter and roundly ignored by the rest of the media -- until more than a year after Biden's election. The Post was also blasted by the White House and NYT. among other media, for running "fakes" after a front page story and headline on a wandering, confused Biden. The NYT quickly reversed itself after Biden's debate with Trump, but never retracted its criticism of the Post, which proved spot on.
This gets conveniently forgotten. The Post got it right about Biden's decline, and the laptop story was real. That the Organ of the MIC, the NY Times, censored and spun the story, is expected. That the Times' readers went with it is disappointing, to say the least.
Your piece seethes with resentment against The NY Post's success and the paper's crusades on issues such as congestion pricing. The NY Post's true status as an underdog was revealed when it published the first stories on Hunter Biden's laptop, but was censored by Twitter and roundly ignored by the rest of the media -- until more than a year after Biden's election. The Post was also blasted by the White House and NYT. among other media, for running "fakes" after a front page story and headline on a wandering, confused Biden. The NYT quickly reversed itself after Biden's debate with Trump, but never retracted its criticism of the Post, which proved spot on.
This gets conveniently forgotten. The Post got it right about Biden's decline, and the laptop story was real. That the Organ of the MIC, the NY Times, censored and spun the story, is expected. That the Times' readers went with it is disappointing, to say the least.