AP featured image
FILE – This undated photo provided by Fox News shows news analyst Brit Hume. (AP Photo/Fox News)

Because they do a daily disservice to real objective journalism, it is never a bad time to dunk on the New York Times. And their bizarre suggestion Friday that the Democratic National Committee appoint an “an unbiased, apolitical panel” to investigate former Joe Biden Senate staffer Tara Reade’s sexual assault claims against the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is worth a whole lotta dunkin’.

As I noted yesterday, even journalists like Axios’s Jonathan Swan were incredulous over the paper’s advice to the Biden campaign, as was Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who correctly pointed out after reading Swan’s tweet accusing the paper of being “spectacularly stupid” that “It’s who the [Times] are. They don’t even pretend anymore.”

The latest power-dunk on the paper comes from Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume, who shredded the editorial board during a segment done on Fox News’s “Special Report” program with anchor Bret Baier Monday night.

As Baier was reading from the editorial the Times wrote, you could hear Hume chuckling in the background. When the camera did a split-screen shot of the two of them, Hume was still laughing and had to compose himself before speaking:

BRET BAIER: I want to ask you about this Tara Reade allegation. I’ve heard you speak – that we may not know the end result of where it goes, but one thing raised eyebrows this week, and that’s The New York Times. To investigate Tara Reade’s allegations, “The Democratic National Committee,” it says, “should move to investigate the matter swiftly and thoroughly with the full cooperation of the Biden campaign. Any inventory should be strictly limited to information about Ms. Reade and conducted by an unbiased, apolitical panel put together by the DNC and chosen to foster as much trust as possible.” What do you think of that?

BRIT HUME [LAUGHING]: When I first heard about it, I thought it was not true. I thought it couldn’t possibly be true. But then I looked and read the editorial itself, it is true. And it’s just – it’s almost like nothing I’ve ever seen before. It is really quite beyond parity that a leading newspaper would suggest that the presumptive nominee of a party ought to be investigated by that party. I mean, you know, that tells you as much as anything ever could about the state of the mainstream media in America today and it is absolutely amazing. And I know that at least some on the Democratic side are walking away from that idea. They don’t think that’s gonna fly. And of course it won’t fly. But it tells you a lot about the state of our media.

Watch the humorous segment between Baier and Hume below, via MRC-TV:

Hume is, of course, right on the money. To emphasize what I said yesterday, all of this has given the public a rather open, revealing and embarrassingly candid look at how national media outlets and Democratic political campaigns try to coordinate strategy in terms of how a damaging story is going to be covered – along with how each side should handle it on their end. I have no doubt this has happened thousands of times behind the scenes with the public not having a clue about it.

It’s fascinating to see it play out in real time. It’s not a good look by any means, but it’s fascinating to watch all the same.

Related –>> GOP Chair Ronna McDaniel Goes off After ABC’s Martha Raddatz Went Whatboutism Route on Sexual Assault Claims

Sister Toldjah
North Carolina-based Sister Toldjah, a former liberal, has been writing about media bias, social issues, and the culture wars since 2003. Follow her on Parler here.
Read more by Sister Toldjah