He wants to poison the well with barely mentioned breaches of trust that aren’t real issues.
In fact, I had to look carefully to discover the author’s evidence of discordance.
Sure, Rollins is a toad but he didn’t attack Palin on Michelle’s orders. That’s the Ed rolls. He’s very competitive and probably thought it was okay to run his mouth.
His crime was dealt with and surprisingly he retreated.
This article has a title to gin up synthetic back stabbing, which isn’t happening and is way short on specifics of the claim by the title.
So while the author answers with a pretentious George Will “The question answers itself” it begs the question:
“We weren’t listening much less paying attention to your glorious intellect. What was the question?”.
Isn't Rollins employed by Bachmann?
Has Bachmann given any indication that she didn't like the type of attack that Rollins made?