Opinion by: Saagar Enjeti
The Democratic debate hasn’t even started but I think we can be reasonably certain how it’s going to go. How do i come to this certainty? Well, all we need to know is, who’s asking the questions.
The New York Times demonstrated Saturday morning exactly why I’m so certain that the debate will be rigged in favor of Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren while Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and Andrew Yang are in for a hell of an evening.
Saturday morning was, of course, the time of release for this gem of a story on presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard. Just look at the subheadline of the story, you really don’t need to read it to know exactly what the premise is.
The story is the mainstream media trifecta. Find a candidate you don’t agree with. Pose a question analysis headline and then answer your question with the greatest hits of smears.
In this particular case against Tulsi her crime is being famous on the internet for daring to question the bipartisan consensus, occasional praise from racist freaks, and of course their favorite of all, the friend of Russia argument.
I could do an entire monologue dismantling that ridiculous article, but it’s emblematic of the pervasive bias that we will witness tomorrow evening. We already know the cushy treatment that Elizabeth Warren will receive.
How? Well look no further than my monologue on friday in which highlighted a news analysis by a New York Times reporter who said that any criticism of Elizabeth Warren’s past is part of the GOP’s sexist playbook against Hillary Clinton.
They already told us how they feel about Warren’s Native American heritage scandal in the story itself. They buy her version of events that a dna test which effectively disproved her entire story is plenty enough for them. Don’t expect nary a skeptical question from them to Warren about her past except as an opportunity to demonize skeptics as sexist pigs.
To Joe Biden? Why you already know the answer. What else did I highlight last week? Of course, the New York Times saying that claims that Hunter Biden made millions of dollars profiting off of his father’s office were “unfounded.”
The best part, of course, is that all you need to disprove this ridiculous claim at the very top of a New York Times story about the subject… is the New York Times own reporting.
They’ll ask biden some version of a question about how his son’s past has been quote “weaponized” against him by President Trump. Biden will say again that he never once talked with his son or his family about their profiting from his office, and then pivot to a diatribe about how Trump needs to be impeached, and everybody will clap. A follow-up question is extraordinarily unlikely.
The media already played right into biden’s hands Sunday, after hunter put out a statement saying he’d step down from the board of the private equity firm funded by the Chinese government, as if that was the only problem. Buried way down in hunter’s statement was of course the note that he wasn’t divesting himself from his ownership stake in the fund, which has 2.1 billion dollars in Chinese capital management.
Even better, his fund has invested in technology that the Chinese government is using to lock up Uighur muslims in the western province of Xinjiang. You see as long as Biden slightly covers his bases, then the soft and legal corruption underneath is completely fine.
Debates are supposed to be battle for the ethos of a party. the DNC’s concentrated control and partnering with establishment media institutions ensures the scrutiny Americans so badly need through this process will be denied. it’s almost like they wanted to prove Tulsi Gabbard’s point when she said that she was considering skipping the debate.
Despite that, actually we learned this morning she will be up there so I’m very glad to heard that because we need somebody to check the others on the stage since the moderators won’t do it.
Copyright 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.