In 2012, Candy Crowley collaborated with the Obama campaign to ambush Romney; when Romney criticized Obama (accurately) on refusing to call the Benghazi attack terrorism, Obama claimed he had called in terrorism in a speech. Candy Crowley, moderating the debate, jumped in to support him. The combination left Romney flustered and not sure where to go next.
But as it turns out, Candy was relying on a transcript of a speech Obama gave in which he did not in fact call the attack terrorism. He made some references to terrorism but not including the Benghazi attack among them. Romney, and everyone on the Internet criticizing the cover-up, was in fact correct. Candy got that speech in advance of the debate from the Obama campaign. It was, in other words, a planned collaboration.
Moreover, CBS News was sitting on a recorded interview with Obama in which Obama explicitly declined to call the Benghazi attack terrorism. Candy Crowley lied by commission, collaborated unethically with one of the candidates, and lied again by omission.
It has been alleged that someone at NBC provided Hillary with the debate questions in advance, allowing her to memorize prepared answers. I don't know if that's accurate; if it turns out to be true, it would be unethical collaboration. But even if it does not, Lester Holt was pressured by Hillary's campaign and a compliant media to "fact check" Trump live during the debate. He attempted to do that multiple times, with relatively limited success, but very persistently.
He did not try to fact-check Clinton even once.
That's clear and obvious bias, and arguably collaboration.
Lester Holt threw away his reputation and the trust of the public in that debate. He should be ashamed of himself, and the rest of the media should be ashamed of him. He should never be trusted to moderate such an event again.
This entry was published Wed Sep 28 09:46:17 CDT 2016 by TriggerFinger
and last updated 2016-09-28 12:11:58.0.