Ankush Khardori---gross, dishonest, self-serving--- doesn't begin to describe it---this "sane-washing" by the New York Times is what we've come to expect. Always still demoralizing. Thank you, Nina, for keeping on top of this. At least there's this one truth "they serve Rich criminals all day long" that goes for the New York Times, as well. And, while I recognize the inequity if Ruemmler's getting the boot---while the men go scott free---I do not feel sorry for her. No one should. She knew and she did nothing. Period.
I no longer assume anything is accurate or truthful. When I see a gaggle of “journalists” at Pedophile’s pressers, not one asks a follow-up question, nor do they defend each other against the felon’s abuse and insults.
Clearly, Reummler is a smart, accomplished, experienced and successful lawyer. And she, like all the others, chalks up her involvement with Epstein by blaming him and his masterful manipulation skills. No insight, explanation ( or contrition) about what in her OWN personality traits allowed her to be manipulated so easily. Power? Ego? Flattery? Expensive Gifts? Like the others, zero accountability for their action.
You may not be interested in "crucifying Kathy," but history will and I am.
Kathy traded her hard earned reputation for what, exactly, Prada handbags from Uncle Jeffrey, that she could well afford on her own. No, she wanted in and she was clearly treading on the back of teenage girls to get in.
In many ways, I think making an example of Kathy will teach more women who are climbing unwelcoming ladders that it will NEVER be worth it to look the other way or to comply, even if your ambition and morality might permit it.
Ruemmler's shilling for Prince Bone Saw against the families of 9/11 victims is enough bad behavior to know who she is. Also no one could mistake sleazy Ken Starr or O.J./Von Bulow defender Dershowitz as anyone remotely possessing a moral compass.
Thanks for your usual wit and wisdom. Re NYT fact checking, once upon a time, and if not spinning like a top, they did do it. I had THREE phone calls from a checker requesting minor changes to a mere letter to the business section (lambasting an asinine Ben Stein assertion.) But I had no hoity toity byline.
Thank you, Nina, for providing more information on Kathryn Ruemmler. We could use an entire book on someone like this, so we can understand how and why an intelligent person, college-educated, makes it possible for another person, Epstein, a pedophile, to continue engaging in self-destructive or harmful behavior. I follow Dietrich Bonhoeffer's theory on "stupidity." Bonhoeffer argued that stupidity is not an intellectual defect but a moral one. People surrender their independent critical thinking under social pressure or systems of power. This makes them highly susceptible to manipulation. Please investigate and write a book.
I am surprised at this point that anyone takes the New York Times seriously. Their blatant slide began during the big propaganda push to justify the war in against Iraq after 9/11. They didn’t dig at all regarding the lies about weapons of mass destruction. Afterward they gave one inch to a “oops, sorry, we were wrong“ article that was hidden so few people could find it. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
If you can’t trust all of their reporting, you can’t trust any of it.
back in the day i.e. during the run-up to the Iraq war, a Canadian journalist described the Times and other 'establishment' news media in the US as "voluntary TASS" - in the Soviet Union and Russia after, the news agencies toed the government line because they had to. In the US, they did so because they chose to.
With Trump, they sanewashed his bizarre and demented speeches and answers to questions because they were afraid of the violent MAGA base and I suppose because they were afraid of what he could do to them if he won re-election. And he's certainly tried, and often succeeded, in punishing negative or even skeptical media.
I would argue that it's more complicated than that. The Times is a huge operation, and while you can't assume that what you read is gospel, I think their biggest weakness is overcaution.
Good, Nina. I think she should take her money and go away. I truly do not know what the hell is happening with the Times. Wrote a piece on them, the Atlantic with its weird vendetta against Platner, and the pompous Republicans without portfolio (Brooks, Frum) who presume to give advice to Democrats while cherry picking facts like mad. Basically, I asked why the establishment media (with some exceptions) not only seems clueless, but is breaking the rules we learned in Journalism 101. I won't be crass and post it here, but it's out today on my Substack. Going to take a nap now....
I stopped my subscription to the New York Times last year. I was shocked, then enraged, when it turned out the Times was afraid of Trump, carefully sane washing or simply ignoring all the corruption, cruelty, lies, indecency, sheer stupidity and now obvious physical decay of the man.
While showing absolutely no respect for the intelligence, and rights to the truth, of their readers.
Ankush Khardori---gross, dishonest, self-serving--- doesn't begin to describe it---this "sane-washing" by the New York Times is what we've come to expect. Always still demoralizing. Thank you, Nina, for keeping on top of this. At least there's this one truth "they serve Rich criminals all day long" that goes for the New York Times, as well. And, while I recognize the inequity if Ruemmler's getting the boot---while the men go scott free---I do not feel sorry for her. No one should. She knew and she did nothing. Period.
I no longer assume anything is accurate or truthful. When I see a gaggle of “journalists” at Pedophile’s pressers, not one asks a follow-up question, nor do they defend each other against the felon’s abuse and insults.
But that’s access journalism in white press corps unfortunately always been that way ..
Clearly, Reummler is a smart, accomplished, experienced and successful lawyer. And she, like all the others, chalks up her involvement with Epstein by blaming him and his masterful manipulation skills. No insight, explanation ( or contrition) about what in her OWN personality traits allowed her to be manipulated so easily. Power? Ego? Flattery? Expensive Gifts? Like the others, zero accountability for their action.
You may not be interested in "crucifying Kathy," but history will and I am.
Kathy traded her hard earned reputation for what, exactly, Prada handbags from Uncle Jeffrey, that she could well afford on her own. No, she wanted in and she was clearly treading on the back of teenage girls to get in.
In many ways, I think making an example of Kathy will teach more women who are climbing unwelcoming ladders that it will NEVER be worth it to look the other way or to comply, even if your ambition and morality might permit it.
Ruemmler's shilling for Prince Bone Saw against the families of 9/11 victims is enough bad behavior to know who she is. Also no one could mistake sleazy Ken Starr or O.J./Von Bulow defender Dershowitz as anyone remotely possessing a moral compass.
Thanks for your usual wit and wisdom. Re NYT fact checking, once upon a time, and if not spinning like a top, they did do it. I had THREE phone calls from a checker requesting minor changes to a mere letter to the business section (lambasting an asinine Ben Stein assertion.) But I had no hoity toity byline.
Thank you, Nina, for providing more information on Kathryn Ruemmler. We could use an entire book on someone like this, so we can understand how and why an intelligent person, college-educated, makes it possible for another person, Epstein, a pedophile, to continue engaging in self-destructive or harmful behavior. I follow Dietrich Bonhoeffer's theory on "stupidity." Bonhoeffer argued that stupidity is not an intellectual defect but a moral one. People surrender their independent critical thinking under social pressure or systems of power. This makes them highly susceptible to manipulation. Please investigate and write a book.
I am surprised at this point that anyone takes the New York Times seriously. Their blatant slide began during the big propaganda push to justify the war in against Iraq after 9/11. They didn’t dig at all regarding the lies about weapons of mass destruction. Afterward they gave one inch to a “oops, sorry, we were wrong“ article that was hidden so few people could find it. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
If you can’t trust all of their reporting, you can’t trust any of it.
back in the day i.e. during the run-up to the Iraq war, a Canadian journalist described the Times and other 'establishment' news media in the US as "voluntary TASS" - in the Soviet Union and Russia after, the news agencies toed the government line because they had to. In the US, they did so because they chose to.
With Trump, they sanewashed his bizarre and demented speeches and answers to questions because they were afraid of the violent MAGA base and I suppose because they were afraid of what he could do to them if he won re-election. And he's certainly tried, and often succeeded, in punishing negative or even skeptical media.
I would argue that it's more complicated than that. The Times is a huge operation, and while you can't assume that what you read is gospel, I think their biggest weakness is overcaution.
Good, Nina. I think she should take her money and go away. I truly do not know what the hell is happening with the Times. Wrote a piece on them, the Atlantic with its weird vendetta against Platner, and the pompous Republicans without portfolio (Brooks, Frum) who presume to give advice to Democrats while cherry picking facts like mad. Basically, I asked why the establishment media (with some exceptions) not only seems clueless, but is breaking the rules we learned in Journalism 101. I won't be crass and post it here, but it's out today on my Substack. Going to take a nap now....
Kathy Ruemmler is a feminist -- no, an *arch*-feminist -- because Jeffrey Epstein said so? Really?
thank you!
I cancelled the NYT the first Trump admin when Maggie Haberman wrote front page PR pieces for him.
I stopped my subscription to the New York Times last year. I was shocked, then enraged, when it turned out the Times was afraid of Trump, carefully sane washing or simply ignoring all the corruption, cruelty, lies, indecency, sheer stupidity and now obvious physical decay of the man.
While showing absolutely no respect for the intelligence, and rights to the truth, of their readers.
“Norwegian politician Thorbjørn Jagland”
Is he the Norwegian version of Markwayne Mullin?
Did you notice something about the 2013 email? The one saying Brad Karp introduced them ‘initially’.
It didn’t say when.
I have a theory… with some support … that Epstein and Ruemmler knew each other long before 2013.
In fact a decade earlier, no later than 2003, maybe earlier.
For example, I think it was Epstein who helped her onto the Enron Task Force. Lots of very weird stuff there.
Nice work
I’m going to send this to people who question the decision I made a couple of years ago to cancel my NYT subscription.