Media liberals used to denounce FBI abuses
-
https://nypost.com/2020/05/16/media-liberals-used-to-denounce-fbi-abuses-until-it-went-after-trump/
NY Post is a conservative rag but if true this could be the article of the decade.
-
I still don't think anything will rival the white house insider admitting, in the NYT, to being part of a cabal actively subverting the president. And literally every leftist Trump hater I am aware of accepting the situation with barely contained joy. It was a very sad display of low personal integrity, I was very disappointed by a lot of people at that time.
-
OK, I read the article.
What I got out of it, was the following which I copied and paste here for your perusal:"Democrats blamed former FBI Director Jim Comey for losing Hillary Clinton the election in 2016 when he announced days before that agents were newly-surfaced emails — but now hold him up as a paragon of virtue whose."
Usually, I can fill in the blanks of sloppy news writing. In this case, it's too sloppy. So, if the author or editor is allowed to let something this sloppy get into print, as if they do not care about accuracy at a certain level, then when or where does the truly accurate stuff occur? Or, am I supposed to learn only from those sentences that are wrapped in enough syntax that they make sense, and disregard the rest?
Funny how slop like this would get a high schooler marked down to maybe a "C." At the New York Post, it seems it's "as long as most paragraphs are somewhere close to being reasonably comprehendible but more importantly, appropriately biased, hey-well that's good enough"
-
And here's why nothing will happen:
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jeffrey-lord/2020/05/16/inside-medias-desperate-cover-obamagate
-
@Improviso said in Media liberals used to denounce FBI abuses:
Maybe they'll change their tune once the indictments start.
Ever the optimist.
Nah, the lead story will be a Trump tweet. The indictments will be on page 6.