Apologies in advance to anyone with delicate stomachs. You may just want to take my word for how awful this is. An A-10 couldn’t provide this much cover. For every negative brought up, a counterpoint, mitigating circumstance or blame-reducing qualifying word is offered. There is no serious discussion of whether she is actually guilty, but when they do get around to talking about it, this gem is offered:
Although she wouldn’t discuss these issues at the behest of her lawyers, Lerner said it is unrealistic to expect public servants not to have opinions: “What matters is that my personal opinions have never affected my work.”
Not everyone is convinced. Reagan-appointed former Federal Election Commission Commissioner Lee Ann Elliott and Craig Engle, a former executive assistant to a GOP commissioner, who worked alongside Lerner in her role prosecuting campaign finance violations at the FEC, think she was biased against big political spenders. They say she was tough on certain groups because she didn’t like them influencing elections.
After letting her offer an unchallenged blanket statement about her lack of bias, Politico does its good puppy duty and informs the public that two of her detractors were–GASP!–Republicans. They even go on to prop up the original blame of an office in Ohio with some flimsy “evidence.”
This is certainly an in-depth profile of a woman who we were constantly told by the president of the United States wasn’t involved in a scandal at all because it was “fake.”
David Harsanyi has more about this nauseating fluff “journalism” over at The Federalist.