Is Amy Goodman Trying to Out-Rachel Rachel?

By Ray McGovern

Toward the top of her program yesterday, Amy Goodman featured the following summary from a par-for-the-course Russia “expose” just published by the New York Times:

“A New York Times investigation has revealed how Russian warplanes have repeatedly bombed hospitals in Syria — including four hospitals in a 12-hour period on May 5 and 6. It is a war crime to recklessly or intentionally bomb a hospital. From April to September, more than 50 hospitals and clinics in opposition-held Idlib province were attacked. Russia has backed Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad in his brutal effort to recapture territory from opposition groups.”

( Not to miss the clever graphics, see: .)

I decided to tweet ( ):
Note to Amy @democracynow: There you go again, uncritically parroting NYT anti-Russian drivel re bombing hospitals in Syria & the White Helmets, no less! You took the NYT story hook, line & sinker. For once drop your line in RT waters; you’ll catch this:

Will Amy dare fish out — and perhaps even report the RT version — if only to provide some “balance?”  In this case at least, RT promptly put out “the other side of the story.”

Clearly, the HWHW (Hillary Would Have Won) virus is still making the rounds in erstwhile progressive media that, earlier, were not obsessed with demonizing Russia.

Quick, someone tell Amy that Mrs. Clinton gave her tacit permission to tune in to RT.  (And surely, a wider sampling of news and views might stem the well deserved loss in’s credibility on things Russian.)

Several years ago (on March 2, 2011) when she was secretary of state, Hillary Clinton surprised everyone by noting publicly: “The Russians have opened up an English language network. I’ve seen it in a couple of countries and it’s quite instructive.”  She added: “We are in an information war and are losing that war.”

You can’t win by telling only one side of the story — and that goes in spades when it’s a NY Times “investigation” of Russian “war crimes.”