Yesterday, amidst hand-wringing and moral preening about President Trump’s “rhetoric” being to blame for the mail bomb scare, the (failing) New York Times published an article in their book review section titled “Five Novelists Imagine Trump’s Next Chapter” – one of which fantasized about the Secret Service assassinating President Trump.
Novelist Zoe Sharp decided to give President Trump more ammunition in his claims that the media is his enemy, and wrote a bizarre short story fantasizing about a failed assassination attempt being carried out against Trump, only for the Secret Service to then aid in Trump’s assassination. Even more surprising, the Times published it.
How does the tale of Trump, Putin, a British spy, a contested election and a rumored videotape end? We asked five novelists — Joseph Finder, Laura Lippman, Jason Matthews, Zoë Sharp and Scott Turow — to imagine the last chapter. https://t.co/ZIZZNwnp0P
— New York Times Books (@nytimesbooks) October 23, 2018
Honoured to be in @nytimesbooks this week alongside @ScottTurow @JoeFinder @LauraMLippman Jason Matthews. We were asked to write short fiction on what happens next on the US/Russia scene. https://t.co/tW8UVvNn8S
— Zoe Sharp (@authorzoesharp) October 24, 2018
The piece, titled “How It Ends,” reads as follows…
The Times sure couldn’t have timed the publication of the essay more poorly, as they were left simultaneously blaming Trump for yesterday’s bomb scares and fantasizing about his assassination. Here are some select examples of the Times blaming Trump for political violence before salivating over his assassination.
Here’s NYT White House correspondent Maggie Haberman:
Trying to imagine W conveying this kind of you-did-it-to-yourself message when anthrax-tainted mail was sent to New York Post, AMI and Tom Daschle doin after 9/11 attacks. https://t.co/B5hrfzzcUP
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) October 25, 2018
And here’s the NYT’s alleged economist Paul Krugman:
I’ll be curious to see the GOP response to the assassination attempts against Soros, the Clintons, and Obama (because that’s what they were). The smart thing would be to pretend to be horrified. But I’m not sure they can even manage to fake it.
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 24, 2018
Is there any way to read this other than, “If you don’t stop reporting things I don’t want reported, expect more bombs”? pic.twitter.com/BLZnzx8vx2
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 25, 2018
And NYT columnist Charles Blow:
Trump: “We have to unify, to come together.” This from a man who spend every waking day trying to rip us apart.
— Charles M. Blow (@CharlesMBlow) October 24, 2018
Aside from right-wing publications, no one seems to be reporting on this story. You know what they say – if liberals didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all!
Refreshingly, the response has been overwhelmingly negative.
— Brandt (@UrbanAchievr) October 24, 2018
The only decent response to political murder porn is revulsion. I don’t care what team you’re on or if you think your readers are in on the joke. It needs to stop.
— Brandt (@UrbanAchievr) October 24, 2018
You are sick. Zoe Sharp. That was not funny.
— Dan Pollak (@PollakDan) October 24, 2018
This is disgusting.
— YellowRichter (@YellowRichter) October 24, 2018
— Ben Domenech (@bdomenech) October 24, 2018
Nice timing. Ricin, Pipe bombs, and assassinations, oh my. Enjoy the inevitable fallout. God I hope this murder porn doesn’t inspire any further political violence.
— Infinito Absurdum (@DeciduousWoulds) October 24, 2018
Amusingly, there were plenty of people who said they’d have canceled their New York Times subscriptions over this article if they hadn’t already canceled them previously.
The Times didn’t offer up much of an explanation for why they published the fictional pieces, simply stating in their article that:
“Our focus here at the Book Review is on books and stories, but also on how the books being written and read reflect the world outside of books. And one of the biggest stories out there, of course, is the Mueller investigation and the relationship between Trump and Putin. It’s hard not to speculate about what might happen next. To that end, we thought: Who better than some of today’s most talented spy and crime novelists — Joseph Finder, Laura Lippman, Jason Matthews, Zoë Sharp and Scott Turow — to conjure possible outcomes?”
It’s no secret that the New York Times has a liberal bias and that their coverage of Trump is overwhelmingly negative, but you’d think they’d give a second thought to publishing murder fantasies about Trump.
And speaking of Secret Service interventions regarding the President, ironically Mrs. Sharp could be having a conversation with them sometime soon…