biden regime uses known mouthpiece at NY Times to signal they're abandoning Zelensky (thus Ukraine)

Every savvy adult knows that other countries have a single paper that is essentially the "voice of the regime."  It's indistinguishable from the government and prints nothing contra to the regime.  And anything it does print is the regime's position.

In this country several papers would compete for that title, but the two closest to Democrat regimes are the NY Times and WaPo.  So if either paper prints a story that would shock most Americans, it's at the instructions of the White House or CIA or similar.

At the Times, the person who most faithfully carries water for the White House is a dirtbag named Tom Friedman.  So, two days ago the Times published a piece by Friedman, ostensibly wailing about Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taiwan.  But down in the tenth paragraph the piece took a sudden turn. Recall that the title was wailing about Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, so see if you can spot the change in topic:

Let's take it from the top: "Privately, U.S. officials are a LOT more concerned about Ukraine's leadership than they are letting on."

Boom: The White House--via their favorite mouthpiece at the NYT--just threw Zelensky under the bus.

There's more: In the next 'graf Friedman (echoing the White House) writes "And there is funny business going on in Kiev:  On July 17 Zelensky fired his prosecutor-general..."

Wait, that sounds familiar!  Ah yes: when biden was Obozo's VP, he travelled to Ukraine to announce that the U.S. was guaranteeing a loan of one BILLION dollars to 'em, but he told the president of that country that unless he fired the country's top prosecutor, the U.S. wouldn't guarantee the loan?  And gave him six hours to fire the man.  And we have Joe on video bragging "And son of a bitch, they fired the guy!"

biden demanded that the prosecutor fired because the prosecutor was investigating Burisma Energy, which had bribed Hunter biden with a million-dollar-a-year salary for serving on the company's board, despite having no qualifications or expertise.  The Times didn't say a word about THAT firing of the prosecutor, but Zelensky's firing of THIS prosecutor is suddenly "funny business," eh?

And then Friedman says "It's as if we didn't want to look too closely for fear of what corruption we might find."  

Wow, what utter hypocrisy!  Corruption, ya say?  You mean like Joe Biden demanding that the president of Ukraine fire the prosecutor who was investigating his own corrupt bribery there?  THAT kind of corruption?

Classic gaslighting.  "Dere weren't no corruption befo'.  Couldn't be found.  But NOW...and we're, like, TOTALLY shocked!  So since we Democrats absolutely HATE bribery and corruption, we'll be forced--sadly--to end our support for this noble resistance!" 

So why do you think the White House asked the Times to print this letter announcing Zelensky's termination?

Many analysts think it's because biden's handlers realize Americans don't like giving Ukraine billions of dollars to continue what seems to be a hopeless war against a vastly better armed Russia, so the handlers need someone to blame for the disaster:  Zelensky.

As one wag commented "By tomorrow, savvy Democrats will be removing their Ukranian flag icons from their social-media profiles.  And by a week from now you won't be able to find a single savvy Democrat who will admit to ever having supported Ukraine.  

And yet they'll still praise biden for "standing up to Russia"--which is true, but at the cost of thousands of Ukrainian lives and perhaps half a TRILLION dollars in destroyed cities, bridges and other vital infrastructure there.