The Boston Globe has written several articles by psychiatrists who are trying to diagnose President Donald Trump with mental illness, despite not having examined him. This runs contrary to American Psychiatric guidelines, yet the Globe continues to give these psycho charlatans a platform.
Today’s ridiculous article asks the question about why we are so reluctant to deal with the issue they keep raising?
Well, first, they aren’t President Trump’s doctor and they are acting unprofessionally by seeking to do a public diagnosis.
Second, quoting Mr. Kellyanne Conway, Kellyanne Conway’s husband, to impugn Trump’s reputation is an underhanded way of attempting to further smear the President in the same way.
Third, most Trump supporters continue to support him despite his character flaws, whether those are mental health-related or not. He is clearly not “crazy.”
I think the only reason this subject comes up is because the Democrats and the Boston Globe still cling to the hope that President Trump can be removed by invoking the 25th Amendment. Well, the partisan traitors perhaps thought they had their chance in the first year of the Trump presidency, but it didn’t happen. Now that people know about Rod Rosenstein’s offer to wear a wire and James Comey’s disloyalty to the President, we are unlikely to see an invoking of this Amendment to ever come to fruition.
Well, I guess after the bombshell of the Mueller Report, the Globe needs some hope of removing Trump before 2024, and maybe this is it. Good luck.
*Requires minimim of 5 Ratings to be displayed
Grading articles for bias is subjective. We hope that with widespread participation, we can give the reporters and editors at the Boston Globe valuable feedback on their professional work. Here are our suggestions for grading news articles for bias. (We do not rate editorial opinion columns for bias. But we do analyze the Boston Globe for overall editorial balance.)
Consider whether the article is completely free of bias (a grade of 10 or A), has been mostly free of bias (8 or 9, A- or B+), has been biased but not terribly or where the bias did not hurt the integrity of the underlying information (7 or 6, B or B-).
If the article was fairly biased overall, but subtle; or where the bias was particularly prominent but isolated to a single section, give the article a 5 or 4 (C+ or C). If the article was very biased but perhaps not intentionally so, perhaps a C- (3) would be deserved.
If the article was extremely prejudiced with major misstatements of fact, intentionally misleading, or ignored well known facts to advance a false narrative, give the article a D or F (2 or 1).
Reviewers must subscribe to Public Editor and agree to our terms of service to participate. Subscriptions are currently free. We recommend that all readers subscribe to the Boston Globe or the newspaper of their choice to support journalism, and to send the Boston Globe your feedback directly. Thank you for participating in Public Editor’s bias rating project!