They certainly take a close, hard look with a skeptical eye when the evidence doesn't fit the political narrative. Try to find any skepticism whatsoever when it does serve.
Points, though, for even acknowledging it exists. They could have simply given it the old "unsubstantiated" and "no evidence" and "widely circulated Russian disinformation".
They certainly take a close, hard look with a skeptical eye when the evidence doesn't fit the political narrative. Try to find any skepticism whatsoever when it does serve.
Points, though, for even acknowledging it exists. They could have simply given it the old "unsubstantiated" and "no evidence" and "widely circulated Russian disinformation".