Hmmm...
This is VERY interesting. So you've provided links to some site that supposedly proves your claim that Fox News is biased.
I did a little research based on the links you posted. Specifically this one:
fair.org
ACTION ALERT:
Irresistible Lies: Fox News on White House "Vandalism"
May 21, 2001
During the White House transition in January, one story proved irresistible to many conservative pundits: Departing Clinton staffers had gone on a wild rampage and "trashed" or "vandalized" the White House, even looting Air Force One. Allegations of the Clinton aides' reckless destruction of public property swept through the media. For some, the story symbolized the difference between a morally compromised Clinton presidency and a more dignified, honorable Bush administration.
An official government investigation, however, reveals one major problem with these stories: They apparently never happened. According to statements from the General Services Administration that were reported on May 17, little if anything out of the ordinary occurred during the transition, and "the condition of the real property was consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy."
Too bad for you that I found the final GAO report dated June 7, 2002. On page 22 of this report it states the following:
Damage, theft, vandalism, and pranks occurred in the White House complex during the 2001 presidential transition. Incidents such as the removal of keys from computer keyboards; the theft of various items; the
leaving of certain voice mail messages, signs, and written messages; and the placing of glue on desk drawers clearly were intentional acts. However,it was unknown whether other observations, such as broken furniture, were the result of intentional acts, when and how they occurred, or who may have been responsible for them. Further, with regard to stolen items, such as the presidential seal, because no one witnessed the thefts and many people were in the White House complex during the transition, it was not known who was responsible for taking them.
Moreover, regarding other items reported missing, such as doorknobs, cellular telephones, and television remote controls, it was unknown whether all of them were thefts, and if they were, who was responsible for taking those items and when they were taken. Further complicating our attempt to determine the amount of damage that may have occurred was the lack of documentation directly corroborating some observations and our inability to reconcile certain observations only a few hours apart in locations where some people saw damage, vandalism, or pranks and where others saw none.
gao.gov
Given this apparent LACK of follow through from your source and your apparent glee with respect to further propagating this LIE, I conclude the following:
1. Your source is bogus
2. Your argument is based on a bogus source.
Therfore, I REJECT your argument. Thanks for playing though. We do have some nice parting gifts.
Diz- |
