What I find most concerning is, where are all the "normal" reporters - and I don't mean the unicorn unbiased ones, but regular, biased but not actively pushing their fringe ideas.
(I mean, it's ok to have fringe ideas. But if you are pushing them without having much to back them up with, and at the same time acting as a reporter, lets just say I wish we had more to choose from.)
Can you name any "fringe" idea in his 11 days of reports, that he claimed himself? As in, not supported by other sources, or that weren't said directly by somebody else?
I haven't noticed a single one.
For example, it's obvious that the judge actively did everything they can to limit the chance that the case gets proper coverage in the press.
