Good morning. It's September 10th. It is another fine bright morning in New York City. A bird is chirping. The humidity is low. People are having loud conversations in the middle distance and then firing up power tools, and this is your Indignity Morning Podcast. I'm your host, Tom Scocca, taking a look at the day and the news. 

Years ago when Rupert Murdoch's UK newspaper, The Sun, would decide it was time to attack a public figure, the editor, Calvin McKenzie, would tell the newsroom to “stick a ferret” up the person's trousers. And then when Murdoch or McKenzie decided things had gone far enough and it was time to call off the crusade, McKenzie would go into the newsroom and shout, “reverse ferret,” upon which the paper would begin to pursue the opposite line from what it had been writing before, as if that were what it had been doing all along. Just a little bit of colorful journalistic history for you. 

Anyway, yesterday, in the span of a few hours, The New York Times published and featured on its homepage prominently. “Trump campaign amplifies false claim about Haitian migrants in Ohio.” A story about how JD Vance, among others, had promoted as fact a spectacularly racist hoax post claiming that Haitian immigrants were eating people's pets. “Trump steps up threats to imprison those he sees as foes,” a four byline story taking seriously the former president's campaign rhetoric in which, as the Times writes, “the former president has escalated his vows to use the raw power of the state to impose and maintain control and to intimidate and punish anyone he perceives as working against him.” And completing the requisite set of three examples. “As debate looms, Trump is now the one facing questions about age and capacity,” as none other than Peter Baker writes at 78, “former president Donald J. Trump exhibits more energy and speaks with more volume than president Biden does at 81, but he, too, has mixed up names, confused facts, and stumbled over his points. Mr. Trump's rambling speeches, sometimes incoherent statements and extreme outbursts, have raised questions about his own cognitive health and, according to polls, stimulated doubts among a majority of voters.” That's right. They did a “raises questions” on the subject of Donald Trump's mental fitness. 

To sum up, the Trump campaign is racist and eager to tell lies in the service of that racism. Trump is campaigning on a platform of authoritarian, abusive power, and Trump's mental acuity and self -control appear to be in steep decline with his advancing age. 

Somehow, as of yesterday, all of those long -standing facts became important top of the home page news. If anything has really shifted, it has not made it into the print edition. Of those three stories, the only one to be found in the paper-paper is the one about Trump being too old, which lands in the secondary position in a double column lead package on page one under the headline, “Rivals Face Different Tests in Crucible TV Debate.” The lead item under that heading is “Harris aims to offer change while not forsaking Biden.” As a concept, it's pretty fatuous, just milking the Times' own polling story from yesterday in which the paper reported that its survey had found Kamala Harris stalled out, a whisker behind Donald Trump in the popular vote, as the voters in the poll sample said they wanted a change from Joe Biden and they didn't know much about her. 

You do have to hand it to the headline writers for meter though. [doubletime claps on each word] “Harris aims to offer change while not forsaking Biden.” Pretty catchy. Should have done it with the whole package though. 

Peter Baker just gets “Too old? The focus is now on Trump.” How about, “Too old? The focus falls upon Trump's gaunt and babbling head.” Anyway, it is debate night tonight. To mark the occasion, there are four full pages inside the paper with the package headline, “How They Stand.” 

“The most important election of our lifetimes is a political cliche,” the Times writes, “but the 2024 presidential election is certainly one of them.” Certainly “one of them.” Way to go out on a limb, team. 

But if you think it would be useful to have the election framed up as a set of policy choices, here it is. The areas in which you can consider the candidate's different positions, and weigh which one you prefer include “democracy,” the Times writes. “Ms. Harris's campaign has framed the election in part as a fight to preserve American democracy. She has condemned Mr. Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, and she supports legislation to expand voting access and counter restrictions in Republican -led states.” Meanwhile, and on the other hand, “Mr. Trump is the only U .S. president who has refused to accept his loss,” the Times writes. “He tried to overturn the 2020 election and has sought to delegitimize the electoral system. He has used dehumanizing terms like ‘vermin’ to describe his political opponents.” So you certainly do have a choice. 

In the climate section, the Times notes that Harris has now reversed her position on a fracking ban and no longer supports one. Meanwhile, on the Trump side, “as president, Mr. Trump rolled back more than 100 environmental regulations, including many aimed at reducing planet-warming emissions and protecting clean air and water. He has pledged to rescind every one of the Biden administration's electricity regulations, and to end its rules permitting electric vehicles. In April, he promised oil executives and lobbyists directly that he would reverse regulations that hurt their businesses.” Also further down, “he has repeatedly attacked and spread misinformation about renewable energy, including statements claiming falsely that wind turbines cause cancer and are driving whales crazy, and that relying on solar power would leave older Americans without air conditioning.” Also, “Mr. Trump has called for unlimited oil and gas drilling, pledging to end Biden's delays in federal drilling permits and leases and remove all red tape that is leaving oil and natural gas projects stranded. He has also called for building more coal plants and eliminating a Biden regulation that would force many existing plants to close.” Also, “Mr. Trump did not enact and has not called for policies to help communities prepare for extreme weather events, such as droughts, wildfires and hurricanes that are becoming more frequent and intense because of climate change. His administration froze hiring at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, resulting in fewer inspections of workplaces for conditions including dangerous heat, and he signed budgets that reduced funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency.” And, “in withdrawing the United States from the Paris Agreement, Mr. Trump formally disavowed emission reductions as a goal. His campaign says he would withdraw from the Paris Agreement again if re -elected. While Mr. Biden undid many of Mr. Trump's climate policies, their damage may not be fully reversible.” 

Anyway, be sure to tune in to see who is able to project the most commanding and forceful presence, and to seize control of the narrative and momentum in tonight's televised debate. 

And back on page one, below the fold, the Times has resumed after a pause at many months, running a placeholder story to indicate that New York Mayor Eric Adams is in trouble, even if no one will confirm how much trouble he's in. “When the federal authorities last week seized the phones of top city hall officials in New York,” the Times writes “it was another stunning public move by investigators who had already taken Mayor Eric Adams' devices, searched his age homes, and issued subpoenas to members of the mayor's staff.” So that's old news. 

Next. “The intensity and sheer volume of the federal scrutiny has raised urgent questions about the scope of what federal agents are seeking and how much longer they intend to seek it, especially with the Democratic mayoral primary approaching next year.” And that is just a description of the news void with an arbitrary note of urgency. Yes, it would be nice to know what's going on before Adams is up for re -election, but it would also be nice to know what's going on every single day he keeps on being mayor, as is. Unfortunately, the feds don't seem to be in any hurry to tell anyone. 

That is the news. Thank you for listening. The Indignity Morning podcast is edited by Joe MacLeod. The theme song is composed and performed by Max Scocca-Ho. We depend for support on paid subscriptions—and now tips—from you, the listening audience. So please click those buttons to keep us going, and if all goes well, we will talk again tomorrow.