We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Bill Maher is getting more red-pilled by the day, and now the attempted assassination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh or rather the Leftist media’s nothing-to-see-here non-coverage of the attempt took him to new heights of clear-sightedness. On Friday, Maher actually agreed with his guest, Kellyanne Conway, that the New York Times’ coverage of the attempt on Kavanaugh’s life was a clear indication that the Times and its establishment media allies are not news outlets but simply propaganda arms for the hard Left. Has Bill Maher been replaced, invasion-of-the-body-snatchers style, by a conservative double?

“If this had been a liberal Supreme Court justice that someone came to kill,” Maher declared, “it would’ve been on the front page,” but “if it’s not part of something that feeds our narrative, f**k it, we bury it.” The New York Times did exactly that: its story on the Kavanaugh assassination attempt appeared in the paper’s print edition on page A20.

In conversation with Conway, Maher recalled the infamous words of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-Sinister) in March 2020: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Referring to the would-be murderer of Kavanaugh, Maher remarked:

Okay, and they stopped him. Okay? But he was, he’s from California, Chuck Schumer said some very inflammatory words, the kind of thing that people on the right to say and there’s a horrible shooting and they blame it — it is rather comparable. And Chuck Schumer did walk it back, nobody on the right ever does that — he did. I saw this. He did. He said “we’re from Brooklyn, we speak too strongly.” He said something about how — they were talking about, this guy was upset that Brett Kavanaugh is going to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Okay? And, interesting he was upset that he wasn’t doing enough to gun control and shows up with guns to kill him. So again, cuckoo people do cuckoo things. Okay. The point is — I think your point and the point I would agree with is The New York Times buried this this.

Maher did compare Schumer favorably to unnamed right-wingers who supposedly never walk back their incendiary statements, but still, it was remarkable enough that Maher even dared to link Schumer’s words to the attempt on Kavanaugh’s life and to acknowledge that there could be a connection. This kind of clarity rarely, if ever, comes from Leftists.

Related: Even Bill Maher Is Telling the Left to Chillax on Abortion

Another guest on Maher’s show, podcaster John Barro, then said: “Yeah, it was a tiny thing below the fold.” Conway specified: “A-20.” And then Maher actually called out the New York Times for its nakedly Leftist political agenda: “If this had been a liberal Supreme Court justice that someone came to kill, it would’ve been on the front page.” Apparently a crowd of OAN watchers had been bused in to watch Maher’s show Friday night: the audience applauded that line. Encouraged, Maher continued: “And that’s what so disappointing about a paper like The New York Times. Because they wear their bias on their sleeves and if it’s not part of something that feeds our narrative, f**k it, we bury it.”

That is true. The Leftist media establishment has a narrative for virtually everything. If a story doesn’t fit the narrative, it is twisted and distorted and trimmed until it does fit. If that cannot be done, then the story itself is ignored or buried, as in this case. There is a narrative for everything, and the agenda is always carried out. This has been going on for years and extends to even the smallest detail. Take, for example, the fact that media reports routinely label pro-abortion activists “pro-choice” and pro-lifers “anti-abortion.” Imagine how different the public debate might be if there had instead been fifty years of media coverage of “pro-life” and “pro-abortion” activists.

In my own work at Jihad Watch, which tracks jihad activity around the world, I’ve seen innumerable times over the years when massacres at mosques get far more extensive and lavish coverage than massacres at churches. Neither is justified and no such massacres should ever happen, but the massacres at mosques, which are much, much rarer than massacres at churches, fit the media narrative of universal Muslim victimhood, while the massacres at churches do not fit the narrative of Christians as racist oppressors. Hence one gets played up and the other buried.

Maher is right. The New York Times is not a news source. Neither is CNN or the Washington Post or any of the others. You want news? Don’t look there. You want the Left’s spin on the news? Then they’re your source for that.