After announcing its intention to abandon journalistic standards of objectivity when covering Trump, the NYT demonstrates what it meant

 Another black eye for "the paper of record"

Another black eye for "the paper of record"

Totally bogus story on Rick Perry published on the eve of his confirmation hearing

New York Times reporters David Sanger and Coral Davenport claim in the story that Perry didn’t know his position as energy secretary in the new administration would entail safeguarding the nuclear arsenal. Their report is based on one quote from a former Trump transition official — who has already told The Daily Caller his words were taken out of context — and ignores publicly available evidence refuting its claims.
“‘Learning Curve’ as Rick Perry pursues a Job he Initially Misunderstood,” the headline reads, asserting Perry initially “believed” he was taking on a role as ambassador for the oil and gas industry, only to learn later he would be in charge of the nuclear arsenal. The out-of-context quote the story is based on doesn’t appear until the fourth paragraph.
Perry explicitly mentioned “safeguarding the nuclear arsenal” in a statement accepting the nomination in December. “I look forward to engaging in a conversation about the development, stewardship and regulation of our energy resources, safeguarding our nuclear arsenal, and promoting an American energy policy that creates jobs and puts America first,” he said.

I had thought that what little legitimacy the Times might have left would be destroyed by the end of Trump's first term; it's looking now as though it won't survive to the beginning.