Bill Maher Offers a Simple Explanation for Why He Trashes the Left More...
Trump Continues to Increase His Lead Over Harris in Latest Electoral College Projection
Did You Miss This Damning Article About Kamala Harris on Axios?
Trump Spills What He'll Never Do Again If Elected Again
Why the SAVE Act terrifies Democrats
Josh Shapiro Warns Dems Not to 'Underestimate' Trump's Debate Skills
This Small Ohio Town Is Being Overrun By illegal Haitian Immigrants
U.S. Cuts Another Massive Check to Ukraine
Netanyahu Fears Hamas Will Smuggle Hostages Into Iran
Wait Until You Hear Joe Scarborough's Latest Lunacy Claim
Teacher Who Refused to Refer to Students by 'Preferred Pronouns' Jailed for the...
Trump Announces a Role for Dr. Ben Carson In His Administration
Longtime Democrat Alan Dershowitz Leaves His Party: 'Absolutely Disgusted'
Tim Walz Won't Like This Attraction That Drew Crowds at His Own State...
Antisemitism From the Right
Tipsheet

Hill's Best Friend is CNN?



CNN has long been called the "Clinton News Network," but after last night's debate, many today are asking if the name is more than just a joke reserved for Republicans. 
Advertisement


If you watched the debate -- or even just saw clips -- it was obvious that the audience was stacked with Clinton supporters who not only applauded her -- but booed any criticism of her.

Now, I'm not speculating that CNN helped "stack" the audience in her favor -- that would be conspiratorial.  But CNN clearly broke protocol by allowing the audience members to applaud and boo.  Traditionally, a moderator will order the audience to keep quiet.  That did not occur last night.

In football, you've probably heard of "the 12th man."  Well, last night, Hillary definitely had home field advantage.  I can't think of another debate, ever, where the audience was allowed to take control of the debate to this extent.  By allowing this to occur, CNN was essentially helping guarantee a Hillary advantage.

So why was it allowed to occur?

As you'll recall, after the last debate, the Clintons actually threw some elbows at moderator Tim Russert.  At the time, I speculated that their attacks on Russert were meant as a warning for other moderators.  Could it be that Wolf got the message?
Advertisement


According to Drudge: 

CNN debate moderator Wolf Blitzer did an 'outstanding' job in Vegas, a senior adviser to the Hillary campaign said early Friday. 'He was outstanding, and did not gang up like Russert did in Philadelphia. He avoided the personal attacks, remained professional and ran the best debate so far. Voters were the big winners last night.'
... But it wasn't enough for CNN to help Hillary during the debate.  By booking pro-Clinton "independent analysts" like James Carville and David Gergen, they ensured the post-debate spin would go her way.   Obviously, both Carville and Gergen have worked for Bill Clinton -- Carville in the campaign and Gergen in the Administration.  How on earth could they be deemed to be impartial analysts?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement