The New York Times Tries to Trash Melania Trump

And the Biden contempt for the entire Trump family "runs deep."

Every day the so-called Fourth Estate gives us new examples of why it is being forced to cut costs, lay off writers and staff, and is generally suffering from a massive loss of credibility. This week is no exception.

Because I am going to be discussing the selection of language to influence the reader, I will henceforth eschew the term “Fourth Estate” to describe the members of the media. But, since they apparently enjoy borrowing from the language of pre-revolutionary France, “ancien régime” seems more appropriate than “Fourth Estate,” since the latter confers a tad too much dignity upon these ink-stained wretches. I shall use that more historically accurate term henceforth.

The ancien régime is engaging in self-destruction via a variety of self-inflicted wounds. Some are out-and-out-lies. Others are lies of omission. Still others are telling a story while employing both lies and material omissions, but also using artful language and loaded phraseology that would have been the envy of Joseph Goebbels.

Because of their constitutional inability to change their approach, the soldiers of the ancien régime are leading the charge into their own Valley of Death, despite the now-obvious results for their credibility. But unlike Lord Cardigan’s cavalrymen memorialized by Tennyson, they are neither bold nor deserving of honor.

The New York Times can always be counted upon to provide examples of this self-immolation. It gave us another example earlier this week by one of its White House correspondents, Katie Rogers. On February 21, the Times published a piece of her propaganda, apparently without the benefit of adult editorial oversight. No, that’s not fair — we know that the editor are equally woke and dishonest.

Rogers’ article is about “Dr.  Biden” and “Mrs. Trump.” Here is my summary:

“Dr. Biden is a wonderful, modern woman. Like any independent woman, she continues her career as a professor at the insistence of her academic colleagues. Mrs. Trump, on the other hand, is a shallow, vain thing, whose only contribution of note is to parrot her husband’s lies. She didn’t even issue a statement on January 6. And her personal correspondence is gauche.”

That is the take-away. But bear with me while we look a little closer at Rogers’ techniques.

Consider the contrast set up by the lede in Rogers’ opening paragraph:

“The incoming first lady was arguing with her husband about whether she could keep working as an English professor, bucking concerns that it would be too much for her to handle. The outgoing first lady had taken to wearing terry cloth bathrobes during the day and sorting through an office aides referred to as her “swag room,” a locked room filled with key chains, crystal bookends and other trinkets from her time at the White House.”¹

Well, that sets the tone, doesn’t it? Mrs. Dr. Biden is a professional woman who is fighting The Man by insisting that she can continue her work as a professor despite the demands of being First Lady. The outgoing First Lady, on the other hand is a vapid thing who wanders about in a robe all day, as if she were some mafia boss trying to evade prosecution, while occupying herself with shallow trivialities such as her “swag.”

“As Dr. Biden worked toward becoming the first woman to keep a career, her predecessor, Melania Trump . . . . showed how pretty much every aspect of being first lady, which carries no salary and no formal job description, is optional. . . . Dr. Biden shaped the role in a way that allowed her to preserve her career and identity, while Mrs. Trump spent four years flouting many of the expectations about what a modern first lady should be.”

There’s that contrast again: Dr. Biden will keep her career while Mrs. Trump did virtually nothing as first lady. One might say that it was the ancien régime that flouted the expectations of how a first lady should be treated for four years, but that would require some introspection by the Times, which is in short supply these days.

“Baby, Mr. Biden said gently, using a pet name his wife dislikes, as they huddled with senior advisers during a campaign stop in Pennsylvania in October of 2020.”

There we have good old Lunch Bucket Joe, whom we all got to know and love. He uses his “pet name” for Dr. Biden, even during high-level conferences.  And see how gentle he is? What a guy! What’s not to love?

“He reminded her that there were still questions about whether she could earn a salary without violating ethics laws, according to two people with direct knowledge of the exchange.”

Of course he did. We all know how ethical Joe is and this just confirms it. We haven’t seen anything yet the least bit positive about The Donald. Maybe that’s to come? Plot spoiler: Don’t hold your breath.

“The issue came to a head when the . . . incoming first couple was strategizing with a group of senior aides, including Ron Klain, a longtime adviser and Mr. Biden’s first White House chief of staff; Anita Dunn, who managed communications for the campaign; and Mike Donilon, a senior adviser and a longtime Biden whisperer.

On that call, according to several people involved, Dr. Biden was asked if she planned to teach full-time. Her answer was matter-of-­fact: Yep.

At that point, the president-­elect chimed in: You are? he asked, according to two people who heard the exchange.

Mr. Biden wanted to know how many credits — only a handful, right?

She responded that she was teaching 15 credits. A full course load.

Mr. Biden said that he was not aware that she’d be teaching so much.

“Joe, I told you this,” she said . . . .”

By this point, Dr. Biden had already spent weeks learning how to ramp up for online teaching, necessary during the Covid era. “I took the training, but it is hard stuff,” she emailed to a colleague on Jan. 3, 2021.”

The lengthy quote provides context. It shows that (although Rogers likely did not intend to reinforce the widespread views of Joe as too old and forgetful) Joe Biden was blissfully unaware of his wife’s plans. Even though it was a major issue, she had spent weeks working on it, and had told him about it, Joe Biden had no recollection of any of this.  Is this beginning to sound familiar?

“By Inauguration Day, it was clear She was going to keep her day job.

Of course, you know, people around me said, ‘No, no, you can never do it,’ Dr. Biden recalled, reflecting on the process in a later interview.

And I said, ‘I’m going to do it. So figure it out.’”

What a tower of strength is this woman! She’s going to do it and the rest will have to just “figure it out.”  General Patton would no doubt quail in the face of such decisiveness. We shall not see the likes of Doctor Biden again, at least not if Trump is elected in 2024.

Having established the good Doctor’s bona fides as a modern, independent woman, Rogers turned to her job of contrasting Mrs. Trump with this paragon of strength and independence.

For months, Mrs. Trump had taken to walking around the Executive Residence in hotel-style terry cloth robes. Throughout her husband’s presidency, she often perched on the bed in his room to listen to or join in on his calls with advisers and allies, Stephanie Grisham, Mrs. Trump’s former press secretary, said in an interview.

What a commoner! She wears robes that look like they came from a hotel. And, like a small bird she ‘perches’ on a bed to listen to calls. I wonder, does Doctor Biden “perch?”

Rogers makes clear that Mrs. Trump did not care a whit for the official duties of a first lady. She only used her East Wing office infrequently.  Why? Rogers tells us why:

Mrs. Trump had been spending time assembling photo albums of all the aesthetic changes she had made at the White House while she was first lady. (“All she cared about was those photo albums,” Ms. Grisham said, using an expletive to describe the albums.)

Can you imagine a shallower first lady?  “All she cared about was those photo albums.”  Nothing further really needed to be said, but Rogers said it anyway, repeating her tidbit about the “swag room,” just to drive home the frivolous character of the outgoing first lady:  

In the days before the attack on the Capitol, Mrs. Trump had been cataloging the contents of her swag room, including the small mementos and gifts that she would hand out to friends and allies of the Trump family.

Imagine that – she was trying to sort out what mementos were available to give to friends and supporters. But unlike Dr. Biden, who will no doubt do the same thing someday, Mrs. Trump keeps the gifts in a “swag room.” How utterly low class. These must be “swag” that she won at a state fair or some other blue-collar venue.

But that is not the worst part. The real sin was that she has not swallowed 100% of the ancien régime’s version of January 6.

Mrs. Trump had also started repeating a version of her husband’s false belief that he had actually won the election, telling her associates that “something bad” had happened.

Gadzooks! She actually thought that “something bad had happened.”  Katie (if I may), you need to get out more. So does half the country.

Worse yet, Mrs. Trump declined to authorize a tweet in her name that someone had drafted, “as the mob descended on the Capitol.” You may wonder why on earth would she refuse to endorse peace, motherhood and apple pie? Fear not, Rogers tell us: She was too busy. “Mrs. Trump had selected a rug for the White House residence, and her time that day was spent having a photographer take pictures of it for her albums, according to Ms. Grisham [her former press secretary], who had knowledge of her schedule.” Again, we see here that affairs of state must take a back seat to frivolous pursuits such as getting photos of a rug. Can you imagine?

As she was getting close to wrapping up, Rogers challenged Melania Trump’s clothing and sense of style. I had always thought that Melania projected poise, grace and style. But as a former mud-covered infantryman, I must yield to a female writer from the New York Times on such matters. When I do, it becomes clear that Mrs. Trump committed some sort of stylistic faux pas because during the afternoon of January 20, she was caught wearing sunglasses and even flats!

When the Trumps left the White House . . . on the morning of Jan. 20, 2021, Mrs. Trump was dressed in a black suit and carrying an Hermès Birkin bag. By the time the couple touched down in Palm Beach, Mrs. Trump, known for designer clothes tailored to fit her figure, had changed into a loose and billowing patterned dress.

That afternoon, the first lady’s sunglasses were on. She was even wearing flats. For a woman who had spent four years communicating to Americans through the clothes she wore, this time the message was unmistakable. It was the fashion equivalent of an out-of-office reply.

I confess that even though I must defer to Rogers on such matters of feminine taste and style, it escapes me why the sunglasses are a bad thing, particularly in Florida. Lunch Bucket Joe himself famously sports aviator-type shades almost everywhere he goes. Dr. Biden apparently copies him, judging from a photo included in the Rogers’ article.

Erin Scott for The New York Times

And for those who are so blind that they cannot see, Jill Biden is clearly the equal of Melania Trump when it comes to looking stylish and even sexy. You can see that clearly from her other photo that the Times includes.

Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times

In her parting shot, Rogers makes clear that, as befits a doctor of her stature, the incoming first lady is contemptuous of Mrs. Trump’s lack of politesse. Although the outgoing first lady “left a note wishing her successor good luck,” the note was something that could have come from a washer woman:

“Dr. Biden described it as a “typical good-luck letter.” She said she didn’t appreciate that it was typed and not handwritten. “I do a lot of correspondence,” Dr. Biden said of her penchant for writing notes in her own hand. “I know how important it is.”

Perhaps if Mrs. Trump had left a note handwritten in one of the four languages other than English in which she is fluent, it might have been better received. No, I joke, of course. Nothing she could have done would have been graciously received by the Bidens, because the Times makes clear that Dr. Biden’s “dislike of the Trump family runs deep.” It is not just the Bad Orange Man, mind you, but Jill Biden has a deep dislike of the entire “Trump family.”

In her bio on the Times web site, Ms. Rogers says “I want all of my work to be accurate and fair, and I make every effort to understand a story from multiple viewpoints.” Read it and judge for yourselves. 

1. Quotes from the article are italicized; bolding is mine; internal quotation marks are sometimes omitted.