“To have a former attorney for the president go on the defensive for him in a large chunk of the first episode (presumably in the name of some sort of objectivity) is poor journalism at best, and a dereliction of journalistic duties at worst). A one-sided explainer from a man who has every motivation to lie about the president’s conduct, in the face of no less than 6 indictments of his campaign staff, and what is already known about the extent of Russian interference (not to mention money funneled into the NRA and various congressional super PACs) amounts to nothing more than a PR spin for the “president”. Having the host ask questions in quick succession in a an anxious tone doesn’t pass muster as an honest intellectual inquiry into the issues at hand.”
Timbot5000 via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
02/21/19