Who the heck is Alexander Becker: It just keeps coming from the Washington Post.
Granted, the piece in question only appears at the paper’s “Post Politics” blog. It hasn’t appeared in the hard-copy paper.
Nor do we have any idea who Alexander Becker, the author of the piece, is. He seems to be new to journalism, and to the Post, in the past few months.
In fact, he seems to be new to the world, based upon Google and Nexis searches. Unless he’s the guy from Siena.
That said, Becker’s piece is being pimped on the front page of the Post’s site. It’s the latest attempt by the jihadist paper to figure out how much money Hillary Clinton has.
We’ll also say this—whoever Alexander Becker is, he does know how to parrot a guild or company line.
Headline included, this is the way he begins his piece. Do you catch the drift of his instant explanatory framework?
BECKER (7/30/14): $5 million, $50 million or even more—just how rich is Hillary Clinton? Here’s why we don’t know.These kids today are good!
Ever since Hillary Clinton drew attention to her finances by claiming her family was "dead broke" when they left the White House, speculation has focused on a seemingly simple question: Exactly how rich are the Clintons?
The answer, at least for the time being, is that there's no way for the public to know.
Why is Becker exploring the question of Clinton’s wealth? The gentleman pre-explains his motive as he opens his piece.
According to Becker, Hillary Clinton “drew attention to her finances” when she uttered the words “dead broke!” Why is the Post on its jihadi quest?
Easy! As Mayor Barry might have said, bitch pretty much set them up!
This same narrative was lurking in last week’s pseudo-discussions on Morning Joe. Tomorrow, we’ll show you how Julie Pace worked this framework into her discussion of the millionaire press corps’ wonderful work concerning Clinton’s wealth.
For today, we’ll only note the startling obsession which consumes the spear-chuckers at the Post. And we’ll help you think about why that question of motive is so central.
Why is Becker, and everyone else at the Post, obsessed with the question of Clinton’s wealth? We ask because there’s really no precedent for this type of pre-emptive coverage.
At some point in every White House campaign, the personal wealth of the various candidates does in fact get reported. In some cases, personal wealth may even get over-reported.
That said, no campaign is currently under way. Hillary Clinton isn’t a candidate. Neither is anyone else.
We know of no journalistic precedent for this relentless pre-sliming of a major non-candidate. The Washington Post is off on a quest which has no apparent precedent and no apparent innocent explanation.
We don’t know who Journalist Becker is. His piece hasn’t appeared in the hard-copy Post. That said, his famous paper is pimping the piece on the front page of its web site.
This is a deeply peculiar state of affairs. But as in March 1999, so too today—the career liberal world will tool along, pretending this isn’t occurring.
Journalistic careers move through the Post. This fact helps create a major code of silence.
Rachel Maddow won’t question this highly peculiar jihad. At Salon, a string of the site’s famous “blasphemy rampages” will drown this topic out.
A very strange movement is underway. Your various watchdogs, teeth in jars, are barking about John Boehner.