There is a lot to unpack from the recent interview with Donald Trump in The New York Times, but it’s not because it’s chock full of Trump’s usual incoherence, grandiosity and, to put it delicately, his utter bullshit. That’s to be expected. What is remarkable, though sadly not at all surprising, is that it is less a journalist interviewing the most powerful—albeit demented—man in the world, and more a fawning stenographer hanging on his every word. In this interview there are no follow-up questions, no challenging of claims being made, no … journalism. Here are just a few examples of The Times’ reporter Michael Schmidt’s hard-hitting style.
We open with Trump repeatedly denying that there was any collusion between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia, calling it a “witch hunt,” and, says Trump, “Virtually every Democrat has said there is no collusion,” before sequeing into his magnificent Electoral College strategy. So, does Schmidt bother to ask about the CIA, FBI, NSA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence conclusions that Russia did interfere in the election, does he ask him to identify and quote the Democrats who have allegedly cleared his name? Nope. Schmidt’s response?
You would have run completely differently.
Giving Trump one more chance to wax poetic about his brilliant campaign, and bonus! Insult Hillary. Schmidt then moved on to Mueller, asking when he would be done with his investigation, and, when told that Trump didn’t know, (sadly?) asked, “But does that bother you?” Yes, the burning question that keeps us all up at night.
They then moved onto Paul Manafort. You remember him. Trump’s former campaign chairman who was indicted for, among other things, “Conspiracy against the United States”? Trump insisted he barely knew the guy who ran his campaign and who stood with him on the stage at the Republican National Convention, to which Schmidt agreeably responded:
A very short period of time.
But what about Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his conversations with Russia? Or George Papadopoulos, Trump’s former foreign policy adviser who pleaded guilty to lying to investigators about his meetings with Russians to “get dirt” on Hillary Clinton? Well, there’s no answer on that because Schmidt didn’t bother to ask about them. At all. Instead, Schmidt let him ramble on about the Democrats colluding with Russia and didn’t even blink when Trump stated:
I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department.
That elicited absolutely nothing from Schmidt. (Hell, we would have settled for a gasp at this point.) But, as Trump continued his Democratic collusion rant, Schmidt did manage to helpfully insert:
So they had to do this to come after you, to undercut you?
But enough about the dastardly efforts by the Democrats to undercut Trump, because Schmidt wanted to talk about the hugely unpopular, massive tax cuts for the rich and corporations that will screw over the middle class, gut Medicare and take away health care for millions that was rammed through Congress in the dead of night without any Democratic input:
Tell me about the Democrats on the tax bill, which you were telling me about. Explain that to me, I thought that was interesting.
Moving on. What about Trump endorsing Roy Moore? Well, that was an opportunity for Trump to meander around about how he always thought Moore would lose, but hey, he’s a Republican, so what choice did he have? But what about the allegations of Moore being a dirty, stinking child molester? Him being a bigot and a racist and a homophobe? Any thoughts on that? And speaking of allegations, what about the 19 women who have accused Trump of sexual assault? Crickets. Not asked.
But back to taxes:
O.K., let’s get onto your final question, your other question. Had the Democrats come through. …
SCHMIDT: Tell me about that, yeah.
TRUMP: Had they asked, “Let’s do a bipartisan,” Michael, I would have done bipartisan. I would absolutely have done bipartisan.
SCHMIDT: But they didn’t. … They didn’t …
You cannot make this crap up. The interview goes on and on like this. And in the end, Trump does tell one important truth:
We’re going to win another four years for a lot of reasons … But another reason that I’m going to win another four years is because newspapers, television, all forms of media will tank if I’m not there because without me, their ratings are going down the tubes. Without me, The New York Times will indeed be not the failing New York Times, but the failed New York Times. So they basically have to let me win. And eventually, probably six months before the election, they’ll be loving me because they’re saying, “Please, please, don’t lose Donald Trump.” O.K.
And again from Michael Schmidt … crickets.
