Look, the Times editorial page has every right, and maybe even a duty, to publish differing viewpoints. But it should -- at the very least -- not publish rank, obvious bullshit.

The (several) reasonable points in that op-ed, which gets no link from me, are overwhelmed by the avalanche of tendentious propaganda.

The piece is an embarrassment, not just to its author but more meaningfully to the Times.

The New York Times once published a story about Hitler in which the reporter wrote -- and editors approved -- the following: "But several reliable, well-informed sources confirmed the idea that Hitler's anti-Semitism was not so genuine or violent as it sounded, and that he was merely using anti-Semitic propaganda as a bait to catch masses of followers..."

That should have left an indelible lesson. It didn't.

The Times repeats its worst failures. It's institutional.

(h/t @dkiesow)

@dangillmor @dkiesow

Apparently there is a meme among the MAGA crowd when asked if they agree with his dictator rhetoric, they say he doesn't mean it, just trying to 'own the libs.' The NYT feeds this dangerous meme.