Breitbart facilitated persecution of credible childhood assault victim for purely political purposes

[kpete]

Breitbart facilitated the continued persecution of a credible childhood assault victim for purely political purposes.

Link to tweet

Breitbart’s Disgrace SHARE ARTICLE ON FACEBOOKSHARE TWEET ARTICLETWEET PLUS ONE ARTICLE ON GOOGLE PLUS+1 PRINT ARTICLE ADJUST FONT SIZEAA by DAVID FRENCH December 27, 2017 11:57 AM @DAVIDAFRENCH

When news cycles are crowded with outrage — some of it justified, much of it hysterical — it’s easy to lose track of the significant stories. There was one last week that conservatives can’t let slide down the memory hole. Breitbart’s editor-in-chief, Alex Marlow, admitted in an interview with CNN’s Oliver Darcy that its full-court-press in favor of Roy Moore was motivated by a desire to protect Donald Trump and that Marlow actually thought Leigh Corfman’s claims against Moore “had a lot of credibility.” Corfman, you might recall, claimed that Moore assaulted her when she was only 14 years old.

So, why did Breitbart double down in support for Moore? It was protecting Donald Trump:

Marlow said one of the factors in Breitbart’s coverage of the allegations against Moore is that, he believes, the news media was trying to use them to set a bar on sexual misconduct “that President Trump cannot match.”

“I think they want to create a standard where President Trump either from past or future accusations, will not be able to match whatever standard is now in place for who can be a United States senator,” he said. “Based off not any sort of conviction or any sort of admission of guilt, but based off of purely allegations.”

“I think that’s the playbook here,” he added. “And I think it’s part of the reason why it was so important for Breitbart to continue our coverage of the way we covered it … and for Steve in particular to hold the line the way he did for — I think part of it is because it’s not just about Judge Moore, it is not even just about establishment, anti-establishment. It’s about what’s coming next for President Trump.”

I’m sorry, but this is vile. It’s one thing to test the claims of a person who publicly accuses a Senate candidate of sexual misconduct. That’s fair, and that’s something journalists should do when considering any claim of wrongdoing. It’s another thing entirely to withhold from readers the judgment that an accuser “had a lot of credibility” as part of an effort to protect an entirely different politician from the possibility of future claims.

In other words, Breitbart facilitated the continued persecution of a credible childhood assault victim for purely political purposes. It subordinated fact-finding to its political agenda. It acted not as a journalist enterprise but as a partisan opposition research firm with a quasi-journalistic platform. It exploited the good name of its founder and the trust of its audience to try to drag a probable child abuser across an electoral finish line.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/454969/breitbarts-disgrace-alex-marlow-admits-roy-moore-accuser-credible

[DBoon]

1. interesting that National Review is on this

Nt

[IluvPitties]

2. The question is: who funds Breitbart?

[comradebillyboy]

3. Robert Mercer via his daughter Bekkah.

[OregonBlue]

4. I thought that was the Mercers.

[NewJeffCT]

5. The "good name" of its founder?

Andrew Breitbart was almost as bad as Steve Bannon. The only difference was that Breitbart himself was very strongly against any sort of racism, something that was dropped when Bannon took over following Breitbart's demise. Otherwise, he was just as deplorable as Bannon, Roy Moore, Donald Trump and James O'Keefe

[gratuitous]

6. Eugh - National Review

Remember when the National Review was "never Trump"? Oh, they were the principled ones for that fleeting moment, weren't they? Now they're all disgusted to find out that their fellow travelers are a bunch of two-faced pigs.