So by your standard, Blitzer simply interviewing a conservative is "balanced"?
You don't think giving all sides an opportunity to present their case is balanced?
Have you considered the softballs that they throws to Democrats versus the cross examination that CNN gives Republicans?
Yet another stereotypical whine.
They "grill" each side to different degrees depending on the person, not their political affiliation. For example, CNN essentially let Donald Trump say nearly anything he wanted unchallenged when he first declared his candidacy. Yet there were numerous times they gave Jeff Weaver a tough time (and other times when they let him off easy).
It's dependent upon the person and the things they say, not the political affiliation they hold.
Today, they are bending over backwards trying to defend the Obamacare rate hikes. They're trying to say it's not really any big deal for most people. Never mind the catastrophic failure it's been even before the hikes.
You mean the Obamacare rate hikes they talked about nonstop for the past week or so and discussed at length how damaging it could be for Clinton (you know, before Comey's letter gave them another way to criticize Clinton)? Those rate hikes? That's your evidence?
That's a terrible argument. If they had spent a week speaking negatively about the Trump campaign before finally saying, "Meh, it may not be that bad", there's no way you'd consider that conservative bias. You're just cherry-picking the things you want to make your argument. It's not an honest argument.
No they are not. Clinton supporters are, but the hosts are not. The hosts and actual commentators are simply discussing the situation. This, of course, after spending nearly 24 hours straight implicating Clinton in a way Comey never did.
They go to great lengths to do all they can to ignore the CONTENT in those emails.
Nonsense. They've talked about the contents numerous times. You obviously don't watch.
Never have they mentioned the numerous crimes that have been committed by simply having an outside server and destroying evidence, nor have they been bothered by the immunity granted to so many people, some of which turned around and worked for Hillary's legal counsel.
So your problem is they are not spewing false propaganda? They've covered the Clinton e-mail situation ad nauseum. Simply having an outside e-mail server was not against the law at the time. That is false. Granting immunity is common in investigations, that's just more partisan hackery.
So your claim CNN is biased towards liberals is because they don't spew conservative partisan nonsense. Gotcha.
They have this Russian fascination, which is just a deflection for Hillary.
And they talked about "locker room talk" ad naseum, which was just a deflection for Trump. Once more, both sides.
They know that's being leaked from within, and they can't figure out who, so just blame it on Russia without a hint of evidence.
Completely untrue. Numerous agencies have come out and said there is strong evidence it is Russia. You are just making up more stuff now.
Yes, I've been watching a lot of CNN for decades.
You've said nothing to suggest your statement here is true. Your entire argument seems to be because they don't engage in baseless conspiracy theories and e-mail rumors, they are liberal. And that's just stupid and is indicative of the biggest problem with Republicans these days.
They are currently interviewing Jim Gilmore, a Republican former governor of Virginia. So they've had two Republican politicians on in my last two posts and zero Democrats. I think I'll just keep a running tally.
