I read the Strib's story on Dayton yesterday. As predicated they softened the blow on virtually any fact which could be used against him.
A week ago the Strib found a lawyer who practiced with Emmer in the early 1990s and who was critical of Emmer's work ethic and ability to work files. They offered no positive comment from any lawyer who has more recent experience with him.
Yesterday, the Strib discussed what it simply couldn't ignore--Dayton's fearful closing of his senate office. But, rather than let readers draw their own conclusions about the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of this act they softened the blow by getting former (and Republican) U.S. Attorney Heffelfinger to defend it.
This distinction in treatment may not seem significant to more casual readers of the Strib, but I think it speaks volumes.
No comments:
Post a Comment