Leftists Melt Down After New York Times Columnist Tells the Truth About Democrats’ ‘Coup’
The article discusses recent comments by New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, who candidly criticized the maneuvering of powerful Democrats to elevate Vice President Kamala Harris as the presidential nominee, effectively sidelining President Joe Biden. Dowd described the actions as a “jaw-dropping putsch,” citing the influence of prominent figures such as Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer in this alleged coup. Her remarks sparked outrage among liberal audiences on social media, leading to backlash against both her and the Times for what some perceived as an unjustified and harsh criticism of the Democratic Party at a sensitive time, just weeks before the 2024 election. The article highlights the division within liberal circles and raises questions about the media’s role in political narratives, suggesting that there may be concerns about the Democratic Party’s decision regarding Harris as its candidate amidst public discontent.
Suspicions arise when the establishment media prints the truth.
On Saturday, columnist Maureen Dowd of The New York Times — the ultimate establishment mouthpiece — for some reason told the truth about powerful Democrats’ coup against President Joe Biden last month, which resulted in the sudden and undemocratic elevation of Vice President Kamala Harris to the top of the party’s presidential ticket.
Meanwhile, on the social media platform X, Dowd’s unusual honesty left liberal readers apoplectic.
Remarkably, the Times’ editors ran Dowd’s opinion piece under the following headline: “The Dems Are Delighted. But a Coup Is Still a Coup.”
With equally remarkable candor, Dowd characterized Biden’s ouster as “a jaw-dropping putsch.”
“A coterie of powerful Democrats maneuvered behind the scenes to push an incumbent president out of the race,” she wrote.
Dowd even named names.
For instance, she described “the handprints of Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries on the president’s back.”
Then, she acknowledged that Pelosi and others have shamelessly and disingenuously feted Biden since stabbing him in the back.
“Party leaders whitewashed the coup by ornately extolling Biden,” Dowd wrote.
Liberals on X could not handle that much honesty.
Veteran actress Lea Thompson, for instance, decided to shield her eyes altogether.
“I canceled my @nytimes subscriptions. I used to love @maureendowd,” Thompson wrote.
I canceled my @nytimes subscriptions. I used to love @maureendowd pic.twitter.com/APMGHGWGM0
— Lea Thompson (@LeaKThompson) August 18, 2024
Another user called the Times’ rare honesty “unforgivable” so close to the 2024 election.
I can’t remember if I loved her or not but there’s no question that I subscribed to the NYT for decades but no more, and Dowd it a “coup” 8 weeks before the most important election in US history is unforgivable.
— Datsun Hoffman™ (@DatsunHoff66) August 19, 2024
“Hey Maureen Dowd, a President peacefully handing over power to his successor isn’t a coup,” another delusional user wrote.
Hey Maureen Dowd, a President peacefully handing over power to his successor isn’t a coup. pic.twitter.com/AdAth709JG
— Morten Øverbye (@morten) August 18, 2024
“The New York Times has lost it’s way. #ripnyt,” another user wrote.
Coup is a shortened for “coup ‘d etat” which specifically is a violent overthrow of the government by the military.
What happened in the Democratic Party was not a coup.
What Trump tried on January 6 ’20 was a coup attempt.
The New York Times has lost it’s way. #ripnyt https://t.co/vKyEAkrTiJ
— Mark Simko (@thndrbck) August 18, 2024
Of course, the sight of liberals turning on each other always provides a source of amusement.
In this case, it reminds us that the Times’ snowflake readers cannot even handle the truth from a fellow liberal.
Above all, however, it raises questions about the Times’ ultimate objective.
For instance, last week establishment media outlets did not react favorably to Harris’s proposal for Communist-style federal price controls.
Thus, one wonders if powerful Democrats have had second thoughts about their latest gibberish-spewing presidential nominee. If they would not go as far as to replace her at this late hour, might they have enlisted their media minions to pressure the vice president into toning down her instinctive Marxist radicalism for appearances’ sake?
Nothing else seems sufficient to explain the Times’ rare lapse into honesty.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
Thank yyou for anny other great article. Wheee else may just anyboddy
gett thast tyhpe off information iin such a perfect manner of writing?
I’ve a presentatioon next week, and I aam on the look
forr ssuch info.
Feeel free too surf to my site: wezporn.com/xxx/mov7634226911