New York Times urges readers to call Trump a ‘fascist’ while pretending it’s journalism

In perhaps its most laughable “Campaign Memo” yet, The New York Times on Friday declared, “Democrats Lose Fear of Calling Trump a Fascist” — as if that “fear” hadn’t vanished as soon as he rode down that escalator back in 2015.

OK, fine: Timesman Jonathan Weisman is talking about top Democrats supposedly liberated now thanks to Kamala Harris telling Charlamagne tha God, “Yes, we can say that,” plus Bob Woodward in his latest tome quoting retired Gen. Mark Milley as calling Trump “fascist to the core.”

But, seriously?

Jamelle Boie said it outright in November 2015, albeit at Slate, not in his Times column.

No less than then-President Barack Obama was using the f-word privately back in 2016, according to Hillary Clinton’s running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine, even if in public Obama was only saying “homegrown demagogue” and the like.

The same year, the likes of Adam Gopnik in The New Yorker and Robert Kagan in The Washington Post were making the “fascist” case in print, as did Jeet Heer in The New Republic.

TNR woud later do a cover with Trump’s image “Hitler-fied”; we’re pretty sure that counts, too.

President Biden delivered a prime-time speech year ago warning of “semi-fascism,” and you could practically hear the cough as he said “semi.”

OK, those weren’t the “top Democrats” Weisman now says feel free to say it out loud; on the other hand, his “news analysis” doesn’t actually cite any top Dems doing so in the wake of the Charlamagne show except Hillary Clinton, a has-been crank who also says the 2016 election was stolen from her.

Oh, and Liz Cheney, who is still a Republican (at least for marketing purposes).

In other words, Weisman’s piece wasn’t reporting an actual trend; it was basically a clarion call for more people (especially top Dems!) to start doing it.

And, for the record: Democrats have been accusing Republicans of fascism ever since Dems stopped admiring the great job Benito Mussolini was doing in Italy.

No evidence suggests it’s ever worked, except to warm the cockles of the name-callers’ hearts.

Then again, that’s true of pretty much all the Times’ advocacy-posing-as-journalism.