2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum‘Fair And Balanced’ Wallace Parroted Lies About Clinton Foundation - Joe Conason
Joe Conason
While many news organizations and websites checked the utterances of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in real time and after their final debate on Wednesday night finding her more accurate than him by an order of magnitude nobody checked moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News Channel.
That was unfortunate because despite his widely praised performance, Wallace badly needed fact checking (and perhaps a slap upside the head) concerning several of his pat assumptions and most of all, a challenging assertion he made about the Clinton Foundation:
Secretary Clinton, during your 2009 Senate confirmation hearing, you promised to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest with your dealing with the Clinton Foundation while you were Secretary of State. But emails show that donors got special access to you, those seeking grants for Haiti relief were considered separately from non-donors, and some of those donors got contracts government contracts, taxpayer money. Can you really say that you kept your pledge to that Senate committee and why isnt what happened and what went on between you and the Clinton Foundation, why isnt what Mr. Trump calls pay to play?
Nearly everything the Fox anchor said in framing that question was wrong.
There is no evidence that Clinton Foundation donors got special access to her at the State Department, as the debunking of the Associated Press big story on that subject proved. Nor is there any evidence that donors seeking grants for Haiti were considered separately from non-donors.? And his claim that some of those donors got contracts government contracts, taxpayer money is likewise damning but incorrect.
-snip-
http://www.nationalmemo.com/fair-and-balanced-wallace-parroted-lies-about-clinton-foundation/
uponit7771
(90,346 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)thought to myself, "Hm...that's a RW talking point with no basis in fact".
I especially 'liked' how he framed the question as if it's a proven done deal.
Fact remains, Wallace is a Republican. He loathes both Hillary Clinton as well as Tangerine-Trump. So of course people thought he was being 'fair and balanced' since he didn't give Trump a pass.
If you listen to Republicans on cable, you'll hear how much they actually loathe Trump. They nearly froth at the mouth when talking about him. But it's got more to do with the fact that they can't bring him to heel and have him do as they say as they've done with other Republican presidential candidates, rather than Don-the-Con being such an ass and espousing the most racist, bigoted, misogynistic tripe, which is what most Republicans are. Because just look at Steve King and Gohmert - they spew the same racist, bigoted, and misogynistic crap as Trump and they're never called on it by their fellow Republicans.
Clearly, the Republicans approve of everything Don-the-Con stands for. They just don't like it that he doesn't ask 'how high' when they tell him to 'jump'. And that's what's sticking in their craw.
Raster
(20,998 posts)...off the rails (at least not much), Wallace got a pass as Mod because he did not go full Faux. However, IMHO, just about every question he presented was carefully "presented" to make sure it was from a Faux talking point framing.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)false question framing editorials, literally rewrote reality for questions. He totally sucked as the moderator for that reason alone.
BSdetect
(8,998 posts)No pass from me.