If I had a nickel for every time I read a ridiculous pearl-clutch from someone at The New York Times that was the complete opposite of something they've posted before, I'd have a buttload of nickels. It's bizarre that they haven't figured out that basing their entire worldview on how much they hate one politician only makes them look stupid.
When you've programmed yourself to pushback on every single thing a president does you only end up looking like some biased toolbag who stand for nothing.
Like Peter Baker.
Baker is upset that Trump's White House is standing by a State Department nominee who was honest about racism against white people. Oh, I know, we're not supposed to talk about it when white people are mistreated because of the color of their skin, but if you pay any attention at all to what's happening in this country, he's onto something.
Which is probably why Trump is standing by the guy who had the nards to say so:
Recommended
White House stands by State Department nominee who complains that "white Americans are increasingly second-class citizens," warns of "white erasure" and says "the Jews love to see themselves as oppressed." @CAMcGrady https://t.co/n6Xk0WltJ0
— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) February 14, 2026
THE HORROR.
How dare he tell the truth about racism?
What a monster.
Not to mention, Baker himself has said some ... interesting and hateful things about white people:
Without fail, you will always find tweets like this from journalists who write things like that.
— Christian Heiens 🏛 (@ChristianHeiens) February 15, 2026
I'm not kidding here. It's every single time. https://t.co/e6QpX8VjhU pic.twitter.com/nr47uPURDI
There's ALWAYS a post.
Always.
============================================================
Related:
============================================================
