Posted on 12/05/2014 6:41:59 PM PST by TigerClaws
Full title: CNN Spends 26 Seconds on Bridgegate Report Clearing Christie; Devoted 8.5 Hours to Allegations on First Day
Back in January, when the Bridgegate scandal surfaced, CNN offered wall-to-wall coverage totaling just over eight hours and 35 minutes of coverage on its first full day and featured the Republican Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, at the center of it all.
So, when news surfaced on early Friday morning that a Democrat-led investigation cleared Christie of any wrongdoing, CNN chose to adopt a different approach and all but ignore this news. Through 5:30 p.m. Eastern, the cable network had spent a scant 26 seconds on the report’s exoneration of Christie. [MP3 audio here; Video below]
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
The Scott Walker 'story' they manufactured this year was equally repulsive.
Also a symptom of post-modernism. If there is no 'truth' to report, only perspectives/opinion/spin, why not report whatever the heck you want? As long, that is, it's 'fake but accurate.'
They wonder why people stopped watching them?
I’m surprised they even gave it 26 seconds
They need him as the GOP pick in 2016.
They did this to Bush, Palin, and so many others, too.
Good point.
I don’t see him as a strong national candidate.
He’s gruff, fat, not likeable, and won’t play well outside NY/NJ at all.
I will also never forgive him for the Obama tarmac hug which helped Zero look competent right before a presidential election.
From all I’m reading, New Jersey is failing in so many areas. . Why would anyone vote for the leader of a failing, negative place to lead the USA?
Forget this guy, people.Christie is what in some psychological circles would be called a tough-fragile. He puts up a strong talking front but crumbles easily (and on national TV, no less). We really should not care what CNN does to him. He would be the worst possible Republican candidate or, more correctly, pseudo-republican candidate.
Exactly right. And when the story first broke, a lot of folks here were convinced he had to be guilty without a shadow of a doubt.
It was a classic Liberal take-down from the word go. I’ve seen it so many times. They focus on an issue, depict the very worst case scenario with one of two facts that seem irrefutable, and do their best to take the person out.
Too often, it works.
Seldom do people last it out long enough to be exonerated.
I don’t like Christy either, but I’ll be damned if I’ll sit still and watch bottom feeders take him out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.