Ironically, the writer uses this information to claim it wasn’t an October surprise. Yet here it is, a story that was out there and unpromoted until October. (
Harpers) Another story declared “The timing of the e-mails' release appears to be more of a coincidence than an "October surprise," designed to affect the outcome of the elections. It took more than a year for the e-mails to be published because one publication after another decided not to print them.” Still, they held the story until October, then promoted the story relentlessly. That’s not suspicious? (
Washington Post)
No comments:
Post a Comment