President-elect Donald J. Trump picked David Friedman as his ambassador to Israel. Friedman, unlike so many previous ambassadors, likes Israel and doesn't like Islamic terrorists. So the New York Times decided to let him have it with four hit pieces in one day.
There were all the usual smears and calumnies. David Friedman is a "hard-liner", he's "right-wing" and he endangers the non-existent "peace process." But there was a major problem with one of the attacks by Matthew Rosenberg.
Noah Pollak at the Free Beacon had already provided ample evidence of how Matthew Rosenberg's Twitter antics showed extreme bias. But this is beyond bias. Because at no point in time had David Friedman said this.
Matthew Rosenberg had come perilously close to faking a quote.
David Friedman had blasted J Street, an anti-Israel group. He had not referred to "Jews who support two-state solution". That appears to be a misrepresentation that originated with J Street which was since picked up by, among other Friedman opponents, Jerrold Nadler, who had backed the Iran nuke sellout. It's an extreme distortion of Friedman's comments.
Noah Pollak writes...
What Friedman actually said at the Saban Forum, which this claim is taken from, is that J Street, which promotes itself as a Jewish and pro-Israel group, embodies the values of neither Judaism nor the pro-Israel community (allow me to enthusiastically co-sign this assessment). But instead of reporting this, Rosenberg replaced “J Street” with “Jews who support the two-state solution” and asserted that Friedman said all those millions of Jews “are not Jewish.”
That is the small lie. The bigger lie is the piece’s studious conflation of J Street with “Jews who support two states” in order to then conflate opposition to J Street with opposition to two states—and to present Friedman as an enemy of American Jews. But nobody opposes J Street because of the group’s claimed support for two states. The group earns its opprobrium through ceaseless apologetics for Israel’s enemies, promotion of anti-Israel policies such as the Iran deal and the endorsement by Congress of the Goldstone Report, and fundraising for anti-Israel politicians such as Keith Ellison.
Meanwhile on Twitter, Matthew Rosenberg admitted that he had misrepresented David Friedman's remarks, but used the "140 characters" defense.
I’m comfortable with the “some Jews” construction in a tweet. It’s a 140 characters — and linked to a story with far more context & nuance https://t.co/eGFfZAtEHu— Matthew Rosenberg (@AllMattNYT) December 16, 2016
Even as the New York Times, among other media outlets, condemns "fake news", one of its own people blatantly misrepresents a quote on Twitter and then uses "Hey, it's Twitter" as his excuse.
Yes, he did. said J Street - which is all about a 2-state solution — are worse than kapos. my paraphrase inelegant but not inaccurate https://t.co/3ZO1RCsnIK— Matthew Rosenberg (@AllMattNYT) December 16, 2016
If David Friedman had said that the New York Times and its reporters are a bunch of shameless liars, and Matthew Rosenberg had reported that David Friedman claimed that anyone who reports the news is a liar. This is the same childish and dishonest game.
If the New York Times had a shred of ethics, it would apologize to David Friedman. Because this is the same frame used by the Times.
Why can't the New York Times just tell the truth instead of putting out fake news?