Greta Van Susteren unloads on New York Times for ‘pathetic’ hit piece

Source: The New York Times

Fox News host Greta Van Susteren took on The New York Times for ridiculously lambasting Sen. Marco Rubio’s driving record.

“Pentagon Papers?” she asked in a post published on her website Friday. “Nope! Why the headline?”

The Times’ headline said, “Rubios on the Road Have Drawn Unwanted Attention.”

Van Susteren added:

Senator Rubio is trying to get the job as the President, and not with Uber….note how NYT writes this headline and article about his driving record:

“….A review of [Rubio driving] records dating back to 1997 shows that the couple had a combined 17 citations: Mr. Rubio with four and his wife with 13…”

She then unloaded on The Times in the Florida Republican’s defense, saying:

Why are Mrs. Rubio’s driving infractions pinned on him?  He wasn’t driving those 13 times, she was!  The headline is written to pin her driving record on him.  Headlines matter — that is what most people read and then stop.  Collapsing the two driving records in that one headline smears the candidate.   She is the one with the driving problem – 13 violations to his 4.

Yes, it is fair to talk about his driving record (he is running for President) but you and I both know 4 driving  infractions is not newsworthy (even the NYT recognizes that!) and hence a 4 traffic violation story about a  presidential candidate would get past no editor.  A headline: candidate has had 4 traffic violations in his life also is not something that would get past an editor.   So what to do?  Figure out a way to jack that number up!   So, to boost the story, NYT had to go out and add his wife’s infractions.  Snarky?  Bad journalism? both?

The Times, she said, got even “more pathetic” by reporting:

“….Mr. Rubio’s troubles behind the wheel predate his days in politics. In 1997, when he was cited for careless driving by a Florida Highway Patrol officer, he was fined and took voluntary driving classes. A dozen years later, in 2009, he was ticketed for speeding on a highway in Duval County and found himself back in driver improvement school…..”

Vans Susteren questioned why The Times would waste money and manpower on such a baseless hit piece, saying:

So the driving infractions are 12 years apart – not 12 weeks!  Back to 1997!  How can Senator Rubio’s old driving history – it is not a DWI –  possibly be newsworthy?   4 infractions? The Times story has two reporters and at least one editor assigned to it.  Is that the best use of the NYT resources?  And now to be fair, is the NYT going to scramble to every DMV and get  stories on all the candidates’ stale driving records and the driving records of their spouses?  Are you not more interested in candidates’ records creating jobs? or views on ISIS?

Of course — if Senator Rubio had had a drunk driving arrest (not even a conviction but an arrest), or there was an effort to cover up even an insignificant driving infraction, this would be news.  It would likewise be news if Mrs Rubio were hired with campaign funds to drive the campaign bus.  I just don’t see the news in 4 infractions dating back 18 years.

In her typical nonpartisan way, Van Susteren offered a mea culpa for her own mistakes as a journalist, writing:

I am not telling you to vote for or against Senator Rubio.  I don’t care who you vote – that is your business.  I am urging the media to think and use good judgment.   The media has limited resources (every news organization has cut back) and we should attempt to use them wisely – and fairly.

PS Yes, I know in my job I have reported things in hindsight that I regret.  We can’t all have perfect judgment all the time but we ought to constantly be trying.

Perhaps The Times editors decided they needed something to offset the paper’s almost non-stop coverage of scandals over Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation.

You may also like:

Left comes unhinged: Palin dares to blast disgusting hypocrites’ coverage of ‘pedophile’ Lena Dunham compared to Josh Duggar

Classic Trey Gowdy cross-examination: Does President Obama have a private email server?

But this isn’t it.


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles