by Mitch Kokai
Senior Political Analyst, John Locke Foundation
Anyone harboring suspicions that political reporters covering the 2016 campaigns might not have been entirely neutral has just received damning, indeed overwhelming, evidence from an unexpected source: a reporter covering Clinton’s 2016 campaign for the New York Times.
Amy Chozick, the Times’ Hillary embed in 2016, confesses in her new book Chasing Hillary: Ten Years, Two Presidential Campaigns, and One Intact Glass Ceiling that she cried when she wrote about Clinton’s defeat, that she had been “an admirer . . . chasing this luminous figure” since meeting Clinton as an awed child at a signing event for It Takes a Village, that she has dreams in which the two of them are buddies trying on clothes together at Zara, that “it felt damn good” to “bask in the girl power” when Clinton clinched the Democratic nomination, that a campaign video praising Clinton meant for the Democratic convention (but never used) “gave me the chills,” that when she touched Clinton’s shoulder at a party she “felt the luscious satin of her chartreuse tunic beneath my palm,” and that she thought Clinton’s email scandal was no more a matter of national interest than Bristol Palin’s pregnancy had been. Chozick sounds like Peter Daou or any other Clinton crony when she excoriates voters who say, “They’d vote for a woman, just not THAT woman. .?.?. I wanted to scream at every critic that thirty years of sexist attacks had turned her into that woman. That sooner or later, the higher we climb, the harder we work, we all become that woman.”
With reporters like these, who needs flacks?