I disagree. Journalism that uses as the foundation of its question a generalization of specific comments without establishing that the generalization is substantiated is advocacy, not investigation. If Kelley could have refuted his “only Rosie” retort, then she would have been in the realm of fairness. Instead, she asserted the attitude inherent in the words was universal (using the “some people say” dodge, as I recall).
The basis of the question was a smear.
BTW, I am not particularly enamored of Trump. But I am sick and tired of advocacy masquerading as journalism.