How this post came to be. Saw this promo from the wrecked icon called the New Yorker and was reminded of a post put up here some months ago:
Why didn’t I crop out the squatting woman? Truth in advertising.
That’s not true, actually. In fact, it’s a lie. I wouldn’t have stumbled on this lovely screenshot if it weren’t for an image I’d used in a Facebook post some days before:
You won’t believe this, but while Iwas posting the pic just above, my wife showed me her ROFL pic from the The Babylon Bee…
…Which is obviously directly relevant to the rantings of the Glasser person who thinks everything Trump has ever done or will do is a mortal sin against the Manhattan scripture called The New Yorker.
Don’t get me wrong. I used to love The New Yorker. Then they surrendered it to the Smart Women, under the subscription-shrinking stewardship of Tina Brown, whose legacy has led gradually to the dollar-a-copy pitch shown in the first graphic above. Today’s mag looks a like the old one, but that wonderful typeface is about all they have left of their original grace and style. What the current rag looks like to me…
No you can start to see why I tried to begin the post with a simplifying lie instead of the ping-ponging associations that cause writers to write what they do when they do. I won’t apologize. It’s a good think for the nonwriters out there to see what us creative mutants go through in order to maintain the pretense that we are mostly on top of everything all the time, without much effort or false steps or sheer accidents.
You see, and now here’s the real truth, I’ve been playing with these AI apps (you may have seen some of my FB hijinks with ‘Reels’), and I got the idea it might be fun to try a variation in which a still photo of a targeted lefty might be force-talked to read an unflattering piece of writing about herself. An experiment. I did it. To me it’s funny, an example of what we used to call humor until it turned into Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel monomanialogues about Trump. But I needed an excuse for having done it and a catchy title because the inspiration post wasn’t exactly new. You can see how complicated things get.
The title’s up there. The “fun with Dick and Jane” is a reference to the old days when children had reading books in school starring perfect kids namedDick and Jane. My target was named Jane, the one shown up top as the New Yorker’s partner-in-crime with Susan Glasser. Jane does not look like the sophisticate portraiture employed these days by ‘New Yorker Today.’
I dunno, maybe the hint of brown nose is a faithful rendering…
In reality, she looks like this, and the reason we’re focused on her is this story from November:
What the Gateway Pundit reported at the time:
FTA: <<29-year-old Afghan National and terrorist, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, ambushed two West Virginia National Guard members and shot them at close range in DC on Wednesday.
Rahmanullah Lakanwal entered the US in September 2021 after Joe Biden’s botched Afghanistan withdrawal. He overstayed his visa and was in the US illegally at the time of the Wednesday’s terrorist attack.
It was also revealed that Lakanwal worked for the CIA as a member of a partner force in Kandahar, Afghanistan.
Instead of condemning the terror attack, Jane Mayer, a staff writer at The New Yorker, blamed President Trump.
President Trump deployed National Guard members to DC to make the nation’s capital safer.
“This is so tragic, so unnecessary, these poor guardsmen should never have been deployed. I live in DC and watched as they had virtually nothing to do but pick up trash. It was for political show and at what a cost,” Jane Mayer said on X.
Steven Cheung dropped in and put Jane Mayer in her place:
“Jane, respectfully, shut the fuck up for trying to politicize this tragedy.
They were protecting DC and trying to make the nation’s capital safer.
People like you who engage in ghoulish behavior lose all credibility. Not like you had any to begin with.”>>
My own post about this story was dated November 28, 2025, and is linked here. But the experiment is what I’ve done with the story since. Just to be sure about the fact that she had misread the DC crackdown, I asked Google’s AI Forman update on the DC crime stats. Here’s what I got:
The BBC?!
Yeah, the strikeout text is mine. So Google delegates the updating of crime stats in the U.S. Capitol to the most left-wing biased news organization in the western world, the closest any nation in the so-called Free World to state media, and they can’t be bothered to confirm that 1) murder rates have remained phenomenally low in all the time since, and the weak counterclaim that crime was already falling in DC was the result of fraudulent underreporting of crimes as mandated by police department management. So I struck out the excuse and developed my own Exhibit backgrounder on the BBC.
I knew there had to be a Dick in there somewhere, since the title felt so right…
All right. I’ve delayed as long as I can. Here’s the video of Jane Mayer force-talked into some serious questions about her real credentials for telling us how the world works and why The New Yorker and the New York Times should be in charge of it.
They say nobody wants to see how sausage is made. Now you know why. You might not even think it’s funny sausage. But at least it’s made from real suppurating pork you can smell even through the Internet.
Comments