Ok, so I’ve been laughing at this for about a half hour now:
The New York Times needs your help. We’re looking for false information being spread deliberately to confuse, mislead, or influence voters ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. https://t.co/p3eeW5fnGm
— The New York Times (@nytimes) September 18, 2018
Wow, that’s almost as funny as Paul Krugman’s prediction about the markets on election night!
The ink is barely dry on the Times’ correction to their attempted hit piece blaming Nikki Haley for spending money that was in fact allocated during the Obama administration:
— NYTimes Communications (@NYTimesPR) September 14, 2018
And by asking for examples of attempts to “confuse, mislead or influence voters” ahead of an election, would that include constant reminders about how the Republican has almost no chance of winning?
— Doug Powers (@ThePowersThatBe) September 18, 2018
Or does publishing an anonymous op-ed written by somebody claiming to be a “senior” Trump admin official making claims that may or may not be total BS count as an attempt to influence voters ahead of an election? Or how about this from just over a month before the 2016 election:
Trump's 1995 taxes show a $916 million loss, suggesting he could have paid no federal taxes for up to 18 years https://t.co/kedGabJpxe
— The New York Times (@nytimes) October 2, 2016
If New York Times editors want to see questionable or false information being spread before an election all they have to do is read the New York Times.
It gets worse (and by “worse” I mean even more hilarious):
This NYT correction. Woof. pic.twitter.com/EVyul90Oij
— Alex Griswold (@HashtagGriswold) September 19, 2018