Lately, Kennedy's campaign, with previously surprising momentum, stumbled after the novice candidate made imprudent comments at a private dinner about the ethnic bias of virus-induced vulnerabilities. of Covid, and that a video showing these remarks had been frantically broadcast on the media. The Times and other mainstream media are extremely hostile to the trend launched by Kennedy, and the editorial staff of these media may have hoped that this barrage could have stopped the emergence of his campaign.

It is unlikely that the content of this article, signed by Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent for this newspaper, has taught its readers anything new, whether they are supporters or opponents of Kennedy. The beginning of the article states that Kennedy "became a source of deep anguish among his many brothers and sisters, cousins, nieces and nephews." The candidate is presented as a former drug addict, kicked out of the private schools he attended, married three times, and whose second wife committed suicide. On the other hand, there are very few comments in this article on the great achievements of his long and brilliant career as a prosecutor in the environmental field.

The article focuses primarily on the strained relationship between Kennedy and his large family, made up entirely of die-hard Democrats, perplexed and saddened by his strange and self-destructive behavior. The article is peppered with negative quotes about his opinions — "deplorable and false" according to his sister Kerry Kennedy, called "morally and factually false" by his brother Joseph P. Kennedy II, and his nephew Joseph P. Kennedy III tweeted “I unequivocally condemn what he said. » The article begins with a denunciation made by the only grandson of President John F. Kennedy, asserting that his cousin "with a conspiratorial mind was tarnishing the legacy of his grandfather and his illustrious family through his proud project. I counted no less than 13 quotes in this article from different members of the Kennedy family, and almost all of these quotes were in the same unflattering vein.

The general tone of the article is implacably negative, and clearly aims to present the non-aligned Democratic candidate as holding strange opinions, even as a destabilized personality, and certainly not as a character worthy of ensuring a future for the nation of UNITED STATES. It is plausible that highly paid henchmen of the Democratic Party carefully reviewed every word spoken or written by various members of the Kennedy family over the past decade, extracting the most carefully chosen extracts, then published by the Democratic Party's many media allies, including the Times.

It is therefore safe to assume that every misstep made by Kennedy, and even the slightest smear of mud concerning him, will now have been plastered in the press, and this may lead us to see some meaning behind any silence concerning him. So I read the Times article carefully, focusing more on what it strangely fails to present, rather than what it does present.

Over the years, Kennedy repeatedly publicly claimed that both his father and uncle died as a result of a conspiracy, and pointed to the CIA as the most likely culprit. It is likely that several million Americans have been able to read his writings or listen to one of his interviews on this subject, which positions him among the most explicit fringe of "conspiracy theorists", a strongly pejorative term that the media uses. systematically employ the image of political candidates they do not like.

read the article