New York Times admits it was “overly cautious” acknowledging charges that Trump is a rapist

@NYMag / Twitter In next week 39 s cover 1561220385.jpg...
@NYMag / Twitter

The New York Times is very sorry that they were reluctant to publish credible allegations that the President of the United States is a rapist.

Many have written to ask us why we didn’t give the allegations more attention on our website and in print. (The Times published an 800-word story on Friday evening, but did not promote the story on its home page until late Saturday morning and did not run a print story until Sunday.) Some questioned whether the lack of prominence showed too much deference to the president’s denials, or whether it even suggested misogyny or an unwillingness to believe a victim’s account.

But upon reflection, maybe, they might have handled it better. So says (now) the Times’ Executive Editor, Dean Baquet.

He said the critics were right that The Times had underplayed the article, though he said it had not been because of deference to the president.

Why, then, when presented with the charge, did the Times demur? Well, you see, because they didn’t break the story. It was first published by a pesky competitor.

[T}he Carroll story, Mr. Baquet said, was different because the allegations were already receiving broad attention, with New York Magazine publishing an excerpt from Ms. Carroll’s book detailing the incident. “We were playing by rules that didn’t quite apply,” Mr. Baquet said. “They’ve allowed us to break major stories, from Bill O’Reilly to Harvey Weinstein. But in this case, it was a different kind of story.”

Felony rape by an American president was… a “different kind of story.” OK then…

In other words, it wasn’t their story. Not that the fact that the elected leader of our country very likely assaulted a woman, shoving his penis halfway inside her without her consent. Hey, it’s not our story. So we’ll relegate it to the “book section.”

Nevermind the fact that dozens of women have accused this creature of similar behavior.
Baquet admits that the Times’ reporters did follow up and verify the accounts by the two women whom E. Jean Carroll told about Trump’s rape of her in the Bergdorf-Goodman department store.

In retrospect, Mr. Baquet said, a key consideration was that this was not a case where we were surfacing our own investigation — the allegations were already being discussed by the public.

The fact that a well-known person was making a very public allegation against a sitting president “should’ve compelled us to play it bigger.”

Ya think? Maybe we should go over it one more time for you.

The moment the dressing-room door is closed, he lunges at me, pushes me against the wall, hitting my head quite badly, and puts his mouth against my lips. I am so shocked I shove him back and start laughing again. He seizes both my arms and pushes me up against the wall a second time, and, as I become aware of how large he is, he holds me against the wall with his shoulder and jams his hand under my coat dress and pulls down my tights.

I am astonished by what I’m about to write: I keep laughing. The next moment, still wearing correct business attire, shirt, tie, suit jacket, overcoat, he opens the overcoat, unzips his pants, and, forcing his fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway — or completely, I’m not certain — inside me. It turns into a colossal struggle. I am wearing a pair of sturdy black patent-leather four-inch Barneys high heels, which puts my height around six-one, and I try to stomp his foot. I try to push him off with my one free hand — for some reason, I keep holding my purse with the other — and I finally get a knee up high enough to push him out and off and I turn, open the door, and run out of the dressing room.

The Columbia Journalism Review is not impressed with Baquet’s excuses.

{T]hey ultimately come down to whether the Times is willing to put its institutional imprimatur behind the credibility of women making allegations against powerful men. And while Baquet says he regrets not giving Carroll’s claims more prominent placement in the paper and on the Times website, he also mentions another informal rule that privileges newsroom ego over the interest of the reader: a reluctance to follow up on another outlet’s scoop: “In retrospect, Mr. Baquet said, a key consideration was that this was not a case where we were surfacing our own investigation—the allegations were already being discussed by the public.”

In other words. it only matters if we break the story. Or perhaps, just maybe, it’s simply another instance of yet another so-called American “institution, ” “normalizing” this president’s revolting behavior.

So much for the “paper of record.”

Thank you to all who already support our work since we could not exist without your generosity. If you have not already, please consider supporting us on Patreon to ensure we can continue bringing you the best of independent journalism.

Leave a Comment

2 Comments on "New York Times admits it was “overly cautious” acknowledging charges that Trump is a rapist"

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

America the Beautiful…


Oh give me a fkn break. The NYT certainly never demurred when they ran with the “blue dress” story even though it originated on an online news site in the 90’s — it was the Drudge Report for crying out loud. And let’s not forget the NYT peddling all those monumental LIES from that RWNJ fever swamp entitled Clinton Cash. None of your phony excuses passes even a rudimentary smell test. So do me a favor Baquet, go fk yourself.