What made Cnn decide to start covering the nevada rancher story after a couple of weeks of pretending it didn't exist?
I have the answer. You would think armed federal agents showing up at Cliven Bundy's ranch and a bunch of armed citizens there to confront them over the issue of Cliven Bundy refusing to pay cattle grazing fees would warrant the attention of CNN. But it wasn't until Cliven Bundy's racially charged comments that CNN decided to give this story the light of day. This gave CNN an angle through which they could attack conservative commentators, Fox News, and most importantly, republicans. Anyone who watched CNN could clearly see they are trying to turn this into some kind of republican scandal. But there is really no evidence that republicans were all that supportive of Bundy. The only republican I found that had been outspokenly supportive was Senator Dean Heller of Nevada. He said he thought the armed supporters were patriots. It should be noted these people had a right to carry those weapons. He also made some very tempered comments such as such as urging everyone to go home after the BLM left and said we desperately need a peaceful resolution to this conflict. Dana Bash accused republicans of kissing up to Cliven Bundy to gain favor with the right. Where is the evidence of it? I've looked high and low and I can't find any republicans, including Dean Heller who said Cliven Bundy shouldn't have to pay his cattle grazing fees. CNN is dipicting republicans as having been burned by sucking-up to right-wing extremists and it seems to be a completely made up story.
Carol Costello attacks republican's in my view, by putting them on the defensive and it's utterly unwarrented. She references some women who calls herself 'conservative black chick', and says this incident brings to light that republicans don't invite blacks to the party. That is such a dumb statement on so many levels. First of all, republicans were hardly supportive of Cliven Bundy and secondly, once he made the racisist comments they were nothing but critical of him. Many conservatives who did support him were as quick and agressive as they could be about condeming him. It's amazing CNN doesn't care about:
What they do care about:
- the evidence displaying we were intentionally misled about the nature of the
Benghazi attacks. - evidence, including emails
showing the IRS deliberately targeted conservative groups but not
liberals - Robert Gates Book stating that Barack Obama and
Hillary Clinton admitted they agreed with the Iraq surge but were publicly
against it.
What they do care about:
- Attacking the republicans because of Cliven Bundy's remarks.
- Attacking Chris Christie because of bridgegate even if they have to accuse him of setting a tone that would allow for something like this to happen.