Team Hillary to the NYT: Stop writing ‘negative’ stories about La Clinton

Posted by: ST on June 5, 2014 at 8:51 pm
Hillary Clinton speaks in Gastonia, NC - 5/2/08. Photo taken by ST.

Hillary Clinton speaks in Gastonia, NC – 5/2/08. Photo taken by ST.

The Washington Free Beacon has an exclusive report on a ‘secret meeting’ between senior members of Team Clinton and the New York Times in which the Clintonistas told the Times to “back off” (via):

Some of Hillary Clinton’s closest aides blasted the New York Times for what they said was unfair coverage of the former first lady during a recent secret meeting with the paper’s Washington bureau, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

Sources said the meeting included Clinton advisers Philippe Reines and Huma Abedin, as well as Times Washington bureau chief Carolyn Ryan and national political reporter Amy Chozick, who has been on the Clinton beat for the paper.

During the closed-door gathering, Clinton aides reportedly griped about the paper’s coverage of the potential 2016 candidate, arguing that Clinton has left public office and should not be subjected to harsh scrutiny, according to a source familiar with the discussions.

Neither the Times nor the Clinton camp would discuss on the record specifics. However, sources familiar with the meeting describe it as an attempt to brush back and even intimidate the staff of the Times. The sometimes fraught relationship between Clinton and the press has been well documented.

“We are not going to comment,” said a Times spokesperson when contacted by the Free Beacon.

Reines and another spokesperson for Clinton did not respond to requests for comment.

Newsbusters’ Tim Graham astutely points out:

Scott Whitlock also noted a puffy Chozick front-pager on how the Clintons would seek to reclaim “populist” (i.e. ultraliberal) ground on income inequality, so it’s not like the Clintons have a lot of complaining to do. But part of the Clintons maintaining their “inevitable” grip on the Democratic nomination clearly means keeping their partisan press operatives in line.

Absolutely.  It’s not like the New York Times treat La Clinton like they would your average Republican politico, and even “negative” stories (by the loosest of definitions) are far fairer on HillaryCo than anything you’d see about her opposition … unless the opposition’s name was Barack Obama, of course.

This is, as Graham noted, just a way for Hillary and her operatives to try and make sure her typical media allies don’t stray too far off course in the coming months as she gears up for a likely presidential announcement. It’s  all part of the massive Clinton media-machine, which will try and break reporters who don’t fall in lockstep with her PR agenda, and which will reward those who regurgitate the Approved Talking Points™.  

If you still had any doubts at this point as to whether or not she would run for President, this report should give you your answer: Yes.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

5 Responses to “Team Hillary to the NYT: Stop writing ‘negative’ stories about La Clinton”

Comments

  1. Too Old To Be Cool says:

    ” [...] has left public office and should not be subjected to harsh scrutiny [...] ”

    Oh, you mean like Sarah Palin.

  2. Aarradin says:

    You should use a current picture of Hillary. She looks like she’s aged at least 20 years since ’08.

  3. Drew the Infidel says:

    This has been the very root of the problem over the past fifty years with the media falling down on the job and becoming lapdogs as opposed to their traditional role of watchdog. As a result we are saddled with the worst president in history.

    Instead of holding commiecrats to account they have been given free rein by the media and have become spoiled.

    “Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another.”–Proverbs 27:17

  4. RogueRat says:

    Hillary Clinton is a self centered, domineering, power hungry Communist who, if ever elected to the White House will finish the destruction of the United States.

  5. Dana says:

    I still think that she won’t run, because she just doesn’t look healthy enough. She’s already had a couple of fainting spells, and the election is still 2½ years away; she’ll be 69 on election day of 2016.