This is an absolutely appalling article about Trump’s deranged campaign rally in MN. Compare with the reporting @ddale8 or others who were there to see the degree of normalization. /1 nytimes.com/2019/10/10/us/…
According to the New York Times, Trump was “fired-up “ and “combative,” generic language one can employ to cover most political rallies. Was that really the story of last nights rally? Or made the content and tone reflect what was unique about it? /2
The most irresponsible paragraph is the one in which they serve as stenographers for Trump’s violence-inciting, scurrilous and dangerous campaign against Rep. Omar./3
Note that they repeat two of Trump’s charges in his voice, adding “he said” only at the end. Then, they fact check only one of those claims in an end of the paragraph parenthetical in the most passive way possible—(“no proof has emerged”). /4 
Moreover, by letting the “America/hating socialist” charge stand without correction or analysis, one could assume that they find this characterization plausible or self/reputing enough that they can simply quote it./6
However, by offering a mild correction to one claim and leaving the other one uncommented upon, they structure the paragraph in a way that offers the possibility of the reading that they don’t feel the need to contextualize the statement because it is not false./6
Was Trump “proudly on offense” throughout the rally? Or was this, as other reporters suggested, a highly disturbing and unhinged rant? /7
Baker and Karni do not mention Trump’s bizarre, near-pornographic (even Fox called it “slightly blue”) rendition of the Strzok/Page texts. Hard to fit this in the mode of a “fired up” speaker./8
They devote five (5!) paragraphs to repeating Trump’s unsubstantiated and/or false charges against Joe and Hunter Biden, without offering so much as one corrective. /9
Finally, the claim that Trump’s decision to hold a MAGA rally is a “show of confidence” is arguable in the extreme. One could just as easily call it a sign of his desperation. Would a confident person act that unhinged? /10
All in all, the selective quoting, the extremely limited factchecking and contextualization, and the use of the most generous descriptions of his behavior all add up to a radically incomplete accounting of the rally./11
