NYT - Pre-published the WRONG VERDICT for Trump's Attempted Assassin...

Not Guilty? LOL - link

Would-be Trump assassin Ryan Routh was declared guilty on Tuesday on all charges, but The New York Times accidentally published the wrong article.

In journalism, outlets often pre-write obituaries, election outcomes and potential court verdicts of major cases before they occur, using the basic facts of the story and adding whatever key details are essential on the day of.


However, a screenshot indicated that the New York Times accidentally published a headline, "Man Found Not Guilty of Trying to Assassinate Trump in Florida." The lede of the now-scrubbed article added, "In a surprise verdict, a federal jury acquitted Ryan Routh of attempting to assassinate a major presidential candidate last year. The screenshot also indicated that the article would be published in the print edition on September 24, 2025.

How dreadfully egregious. I guess that means you'll quit subscribing and using them as a credible source? :laugh:
 
In the internet age, this is absolutely normal as the first Headline posted, the first video posted get more clicks than the 100Th. As a result of this they will prepare many 'APPROVED' headlines to cover any eventuality even ones they think remote or unlikely as having to wait for approval causes delays.
QPeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee,


So you are saying it is the receptionist defense?

So the sole reason you guys see this as wrong or idiocy is because you are dumb.

We understand. You have told us all how much smarter you are than everyone on this forum ad nauseam.
Sorry to say it but it is true.

This is where you will decry 'but it was never going to happen so therefore they should not prepare' and again that is just dumb as remote and unlikely things do happen over enough time and incidents so you prepare since it costs you nothing to do so.

'but it was never going to happen so therefore they should not prepare'
 
Last edited:
The paper continues to be regarded across the globe as one of the finest newspapers in the world, and the best in the U.S. Already this year it has won four Pulitizers including one for its new coverage of the assassination attempt on Trump.

As always, ignoramuses hate it.

Like all media with integrity, they print corrections when they occasionally get it wrong. When is the last time you saw any Reichwing media do that? They generally need to be sued in order to force a retraction. See, e.g., Dominion vs. Fox News Corp.
 
Like all media with integrity, they print corrections when they occasionally get it wrong. When is the last time you saw any Reichwing media do that? They generally need to be sued in order to force a retraction. See, e.g., Dominion vs. Fox News Corp.
:magagrin:
 
The New York Times is a fine newspaper...and its coverage of the news is excellent. But, THE TRUTH is what MAGA morons call "slanting left" so, since The Times reports the truth, MAGA morons have to bad mouth it. They, morons that they are, think FOX News is what news reporting should be.

I've subscribed to the NYT for years. It's got outstanding writing, worldwide coverage of events and news (not just the U.S.), and possesses a great deal of integrity. If you prefer your "news" to come in soundbites, there's Tiktok and other social media for that. If you want to learn more about an event, the NYT can provide that.

BTW You're right about MAGATs' take on the alleged slant. The truth does have a distinct LW bias.
 
Not Guilty? LOL - link

Would-be Trump assassin Ryan Routh was declared guilty on Tuesday on all charges, but The New York Times accidentally published the wrong article.

In journalism, outlets often pre-write obituaries, election outcomes and potential court verdicts of major cases before they occur, using the basic facts of the story and adding whatever key details are essential on the day of.


However, a screenshot indicated that the New York Times accidentally published a headline, "Man Found Not Guilty of Trying to Assassinate Trump in Florida." The lede of the now-scrubbed article added, "In a surprise verdict, a federal jury acquitted Ryan Routh of attempting to assassinate a major presidential candidate last year. The screenshot also indicated that the article would be published in the print edition on September 24, 2025.
Anyone surprised?
 
....

'but it was never going to happen so therefore they should not prepare'
That is exactly what stupid people think.

A stupid person think 'low odds event never happen', we are a massive favorite... we are much stronger... and they have no Plan B.

Smart people and businesses ALWAYS have a Plan B even when they know the other option is remote.
 
That is exactly what stupid people think.

A stupid person think 'low odds event never happen', we are a massive favorite... we are much stronger... and they have no Plan B.

Smart people and businesses ALWAYS have a Plan B even when they know the other option is remote.

QPeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee,

I was repeating your quote. "But it was never going to happen, so therefore they should not prepare."

BTW,
I'm pretty sure you will find Republicans far more "prepared" than democrats.
 
Would-be Trump assassin Ryan Routh was declared guilty on Tuesday on all charges
I have major problems with the unnecessary overzealousness of these convictions. Ryan Routh should have been charged (and convicted) of only two of the five charges levelled. The three major charges should never have been filed in the first place, and the judge should have thrown them out.

Ryan Routh should have only been charged with:

* Being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition (maximum penalty: 15 years in prison)
* Possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number (maximum penalty: 5 years in prison)

... and that's all for which prosecutors had evidence. But prosecutors were overzealous and went for the gold medal, leveling charges for which they had no evidence, but could nonetheless get an unwitting jury to convict. The judge should have tossed the following:

* Attempted assassination of a major presidential candidate (Maximum penalty: Life imprisonment): zero evidence
* Possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence (Maximum penalty: Life imprisonment): hinges on the claimed assassination attempt
* Assaulting a federal officer (Secret Service agent) (Maximum penalty: 20 years in prison): classic railroading on trumped-up charges

That last one really bothers me. Routh's attempt to avoid arrest caused him to swing his AK as he moved, prompting a SS agent to claim that Routh's AK was technically pointed in his general direction, which prosecutors framed as Routh having "aimed" his AK at the agent, leading prosecutors to file the charge of "Assaulting a federal officer."

I hope those last three are vacated while Routh is serving his well-deserved sentence for the first two.
 
Your avatar makes it look as though you are in your toilet.
Perhaps but the Dems actually are.

"Who leads on the economy? Republicans, by 7. Immigration, Republicans by 13. How about crime, a big issue for Donald Trump and the Republicans? Look at that, lead by 22 points. ... Whatever Democrats are doing, it ain't working. Republicans have the lead on all three issues," Enten said breathlessly on CNN about a September Washington Post/Ipsos poll. Enten continued with a damning declaration of Democrats' political status.


 
Perhaps but the Dems actually are.

"Who leads on the economy? Republicans, by 7. Immigration, Republicans by 13. How about crime, a big issue for Donald Trump and the Republicans? Look at that, lead by 22 points. ... Whatever Democrats are doing, it ain't working. Republicans have the lead on all three issues," Enten said breathlessly on CNN about a September Washington Post/Ipsos poll. Enten continued with a damning declaration of Democrats' political status.
Tell that to a Democrat. I am not a Democrat.
 
In journalism, outlets often pre-write obituaries, election outcomes and potential court verdicts of major cases before they occur, using the basic facts of the story and adding whatever key details are essential on the day of.
Makes sense.

I can't find a picture of the screenshot.
 
Like all media with integrity, they print corrections when they occasionally get it wrong. When is the last time you saw any Reichwing media do that? They generally need to be sued in order to force a retraction. See, e.g., Dominion vs. Fox News Corp.
Meanwhile Fox News pushes lethal injection for the homeless and bombing NYC for allegedly sabotaging Trump's escalator.
 
But you’re even further left than them, by your own admission.

On social issues, I am much further to the left than most people...Sanders, Klobuchar, for instance.

That is not something I am saying as an "admission"...I am bragging about it.

BUT...as I said, I am not a Democrat.

And they’re too far left for their own good.
You are welcome to that opinion, Anon.

I disagree.
 
Back
Top