This article presents a perfect example of liberal/leftist bias. First of all, McClatchy has been on the Democrat Left for decades so anti-conservative/Republican bias is expected.
However, the example below is an illustration of how the writer changes the words of the subject of the article, Inspector General McCullough III.
The writer, Anita Kumar, wrote that
“The comments came after Inspector General Charles McCullough III told senators that he believes at least several dozen emails Clinton sent and received while she was secretary of state (a title should be with Capitals) contained classified material at the highest levels, according to a letter obtained by McClatchy.”
Notice the “he believes” distortion. In the 3rd from last paragraph of this article, Kumar wrote:
” In a Jan. 14 letter sent to the chairman of the Senate Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees, McCullough said some of the information in Clinton’s emails was classified as “top secret/SAP” or “special access program.” That is a more restricted category than previously thought. The letter was first reported by FOX News.
There is a helluva difference between “he believes” in paragraph three at the start of the story, and “McCullough said”.
This is how a biased or incompetent writer tries to downgrade the significance of what someone said about an issue.
Given that she writes for McClatchy, I’ll take “Both” for $1,000, Alex.
And then she quotes Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon on whether there was a coordinated leak by Republican senators to get McCullough to say that the materials were classified.
Any spokesman or woman for Hillary or Obama are automatically lying, demented propagandists and smear-artists. Just look at the past statements of Jay Carney and Josh Ernest for absolute proof. Then ask yourself, has Hillary ever told the truth? If she hasn’t, then her Joseph Goebbels’ mouthpieces haven’t either.
Lesson - Writing bias 101.
Excellent post your #17. It is good to point out the left-wing bias of the enemedia.