In recent days, two websites outside of the legacy media establishment exposed repugnant social media activity by New York City’s new first lady. She took part in celebrating the October 7, 2023 massacres.
But over at The New York Times, the “paper of record” has been trying to run cover for her. I explain in the new episode. Listen now:
Rama Duwaji, wife of Mayor Zohran Mamdani, liked social media posts that “unambiguously celebrated the terrorist attack, which saw nearly 1,200 Israelis and foreign workers killed, thousands wounded, 251 civilians and military personnel kidnapped and numerous episodes of sexual assault,” Jewish Insider reported.
It was the biggest slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust. But Duwaji was busy liking posts that “traffic in antisemitic themes, including Holocaust inversion,” The Free Press reported. One called the well-documented rapes by Gazan terrorists a hoax.
Meanwhile, the Times was going after the spouse of a different Democrat. The reason involves the paper’s adoration of Mamdani, and his antidemocratic threats.
A heated congressional race
Mamdani buddy Brad Lander (whom I’ve covered) is challenging Rep. Dan Goldman in a primary. The Times supports Mamdani and Lander. So the paper published information meant to smear Goldman’s wife. But there’s no there there.
The Times reported that Corinne Levy Goldman had the audacity to — gasp — like social media posts condemning the October 7 terrorists and their supporters. She and her kids were hiding in bomb shelters in Israel at the time.
One post likened “Jews for Palestine” to “Chickens for KFC.” Another suggested that “people supporting ‘Free Palestine’ be sent to Gaza, to live under its rules,” the paper wrote.
Goldman was right to like both. As I explain in this episode, Palestinian governments pay for the slaughter of Jews. And Americans screaming “Free Palestine” should go live under either antidemocratic Palestinian government to learn what they’re talking about.
But, try as they might, the Times couldn’t distract Americans from the Duwaji news. So they published a story running cover for her.
The different coverage these two women received is screamingly obvious. If the Times had any shame, it would go hide under a rock. (I discourage visits to failed media, but if you wish to see the two articles, here you go.)
According to the Times, Goldman liked or shared posts that “used what some saw as insensitive or hateful language.” But Duwaji? In the Times’ piece, she did nothing “insensitive or hateful.” The posts she liked simply “supported the Palestinian cause.” Holy Lord.
The Times even made that their original headline: “Mamdani Defends Wife Amid Criticism of her Support for Palestinian Cause.” The paper ultimately altered the headline, but kept that language in its subheadline.
Goldman liked posts from “right-wing” accounts, the Times tells us. But Duwaji? No mention of her liking posts from “left-wing” accounts (including a Maoist, pro-Iran tech mogul).
In a desperate effort to justify this, the Times noted that Goldman is treasurer of her husband’s campaign, while Duwaji did not officially work for Mamdani’s. Who cares? Duwaji is the city’s first lady, living in a mansion paid for by the public, site of an Islamist terrorist attack over the weekend. She’s obviously far more newsworthy and influential than Goldman, as evidenced by the Times’ glowing coverage of her.
As a reminder, this is the kind of thing the October 7 terrorists did:
A baby's cries lured people to slaughter
Imagine being so deeply committed to building bridges and peace that you choose to live near the Israel-Gaza border. You do whatever you can to help the people on the other side. You find ways to bui…
The differences between these two New York Times reports should be studied for decades to come. It’s what real journalism does not do.
Want to tell the Times how you feel? Here’s how.
Supporters: Share thoughts, questions, and links you want me to fact check:
JL