On Thursday, New York magazine published an article titled “Why Hillary Clinton Is the Most Dangerous President Ever.”
In the article, author Michael Grunwald outlines the reasons Clinton is the most dangerous of the four candidates.
Grunstein points to the Clinton Foundation, which is rife with conflicts of interest and has donated to the family of a leading Republican donor.
He also cites Clinton’s ties to the media, which has been critical of her candidacy.
Grungwald writes: In a country where almost all news media is owned by the same oligarchy, where all of its content is manufactured to promote the political interests of the powerful few, where there are no real checks on its power, and where even the media itself is controlled by a handful of people, the media’s role as a vehicle for the advancement of political power has been greatly diminished.
There is no longer a serious debate about the role of the media in American politics.
Instead, a handful, most of them corporate-owned, are deciding who can run the country.
The Washington Post recently described the Clinton family as the “media empire” and compared it to the Rothschilds, who controlled the British monarchy before World War II.
It is true that the Clintons have benefited enormously from the media.
They have amassed a fortune of over $100 billion.
But the Clinton Global Initiative, the Clinton foundation, and other Clinton-related businesses have not benefited at all from the donations made to them by wealthy Americans.
This has been documented by The Guardian, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, and Bloomberg News.
The Clintons also have received millions of dollars from the American media, many of which have used their money to attack Trump and his supporters.
There are countless examples of media bias and cronyism in American journalism.
But it is not the only aspect of American media that is a problem.
Grunsberg points out that the media has a “massive bias against Trump.”
The New York Times recently declared that “he [Trump] has been a major contributor to the paper’s coverage of him.”
A number of news outlets have described Trump as a “serial liar” and “unfit for the presidency.”
As a result, “a large percentage of the U.S. news media has been largely unwilling to report his claims and defend his agenda.”
And the New York Post recently stated that “the Trump phenomenon is the greatest threat to the American political system.”
The Washington Times reported on Trump’s rise in the polls and his “inaccurate, unsubstantiated, and even dangerous claims, including that he could be ‘the first black president.'”
The Washington Examiner has also highlighted Trump’s record of racism, saying that the real estate mogul has “been labeled by some critics as racist and xenophobic.”
The Intercept, a news outlet that specializes in free speech, recently declared Trump “the worst president in American history.”
The American media is no stranger to bias.
In 2015, The New Yorker published a piece titled “Donald Trump: A Man of Lies.”
It detailed Trump’s claims of having seen a UFO during a visit to a casino in Atlantic City.
The piece also reported that Trump was the “chief architect” of the birther movement, which was debunked by the mainstream media in 2015.
Grunerwald writes that the Trump campaign is not just a distraction.
He describes the campaign as a front for the media and corporate interests to promote their political agendas.
The American public has no right to know what the candidates plan for them to do, Grunzberg wrote.
“The public’s only real interest is to elect a president who will uphold the Constitution and protect the most fundamental rights of Americans, and that’s a job that can be done by a candidate who is neither a Democrat nor a Republican.
And that’s not Hillary Clinton, that’s Donald Trump.”
Grunenberg concludes by arguing that “it is time to stop talking about the ‘unfit’ Trump and start talking about who is ‘unfits for the job.'”