WTF!? CNN continues to publish blatant lies.

[politicaholic]

Look at how the first paragraph of this article is stated as fact rather than opinion.

Hastert: Democrats protecting their own

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Democrats in the House are blocking the ethics committee from organizing so they can protect several fellow party members from ethics investigations, Speaker Dennis Hastert said Wednesday.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/21/hastert.ethics/index.html

Why would they print what they KNOW is an all out lie? The hacks at CNN know that the rethugs want to lower ethics standards. How would democrats protect their own by raising ethics standards? That MAKES NO SENSE. AHHHHHHHGGGGGGG!!!! :banghead:

[KurtNYC]

1. Free ink for Hastert

typical.

[SteppingRazor]

2. Eh?

They're just printing what Hastert said, and then attributing it to him. I'd like it if they followed up and asked, "Who are these Democrats facing ethics questions?" But I don't see anything too wrong with this.

[gratuitous]

5. Well, Hastert has his own opinion

Which is, I'm sure, wholly uninformed by politics, so his allegation must be true. Of course, any Democratic protestations that they're blocking yet another reorganization of the Ethics Committee for other reasons (Republicans playing politics yet again, another round of changes designed to shield DeLay a little longer, or something else) somehow don't quite make into the lede.

"Stilted" is the word that comes to my mind to describe CNN's reporting here.

[Caution]

6. They should be real journalists and ask Frist to provide examples.

[Individualist]

8. real journalists on Conservative News Network?

:rofl:

[politicaholic]

7. If Hastert said it then why didn't they put in quotes?

because he didn't say it, he implied it and that's the way they interperated it. Then, in the article they systematically slander upstanding democrats on such things as "eaves dropping".

[fishwax]

9. because it's paraphrased

news reports paraphrase sources all the time. The opening sentence makes it clear that they're attributing the assertion to Hastert, not stating it as irrefutable fact.

[in_cog_ni_to]

3. Of course they turn this on the Dems.

:eyes: Where's their article about Delay changing the damn rules to save his own ass? Where's their article about Delay removing members from the ethics committee who voted against him and REPLECED THEM WITH REPUKES WHO WILL KISS HIS ASS? :grr: Have I told you yet today how much I HATE these people? :grr:

[bowens43]

4. It's not a lie, Hastert did say that.

[Toots]

10. Under new ethics rules unless Democrats join in asking for investigation

There can be none.All the Democrats are doing is using the rules as they are while asking for them to be changed. No investigation can be started unless it is decided to do so on a bipartisan request.