Wednesday, June 28, 2017

Today in lying

The afternoon's top story at the Formerly Fair 'n' Balanced Network certainly rips the mask off one of the chief miscreants of the 0blamer administration, dunnit? I mean, daring to play the race and gender card when Unmaskinggate is closing in:

Susan Rice, the Obama national security adviser under fire over her alleged involvement in the “unmasking” of Trump associates during the 2016 presidential election, suggested in a fresh interview that race and gender might be playing a role in the scrutiny she’s faced.

Sounds serious! I wonder if it's true.

In an interview with journalist Michael Tomasky for New York Magazine, Rice reportedly questioned the criticism she’s faced dating back to the Benghazi controversy.

Funny, lots of adults do that. What's the problem here?

“Why me? Why not Jay Carney, for example, who was then our press secretary, who stood up more?” she asked.

Tomasky noted in the piece that Carney “isn’t an African-American woman, of course” and apparently asked Rice whether that is the key factor. Rice, in response, left the door open:

“I don’t know… I do not leap to the simple explanation that it’s only about race and gender. I’m trying to keep my theories to myself until I’m ready to come out with them. It’s not because I don’t have any.”

In other words, Susan Rice "links" race and gender to "the 'unmasking' backlash" by ... declining the opportunity to link them to BENGHAZI!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You can see why -- other than the marginally literate prose its staff produces -- Fox doesn't want you to read past the headline. It doesn't just lie about the evidence; it lies about what it's lying about.
But Rice mentioned other prominent female figures – like Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice – who faced “ad hominem” attacks, suggesting a correlation.  

"Suggesting" to anyone other than the reporter? Because if we're into suggestions, I'd suggest we wonder why comments aren't enabled on a story about a scary black female person questioning the conventional wisdom of the Murdoch empire. That's not the sort of opportunity Fox usually passes up. But wait -- there's more!

Asked about the comments, a Republican Capitol Hill source pushed back. “This is screaming out for attention… She’s saying I don’t know why they all started picking on me to begin with.”

You hate to give advice to the seasoned professional journalists at Fox, but -- damn, kids, if you're the party press and you can't find a "Republican Capitol Hill source" to repeat the party line on the record, you aren't trying very hard.

And for dessert:

... Rice initially became a target of Republican criticism back in 2012 for giving misleading information about the origin of the Benghazi terror attack. On Sept. 16, 2012, just days after the attack, Rice appeared on all five Sunday political talk shows to claim the Benghazi attack spun out of a protest over an anti-Muslim video produced in California.

That means we can admire Fox's lead story from the day after BENGHAZI!!!!! again:
Please don't miss the chance to remind Fox -- and the conscience that no doubt lingers among a few of its viewers -- about who blamed the video on what and when.

Labels: , , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home