CNN's Hill Shilling

The Nevada Democrat Debate was even more of a travesty than I originally understood.

It turns out that CNN tried every tacky trick in the book in an effort to bolster their preferred candidate: Hillary.

Pathetic!

Not only was the viewing public terribly ill-served, but CNN may have caused real harm to the nation's democratic process as a result of its naked manipulation.

Here are just a few of CNN's journalistic sins:

- stacking the audience in favor of one candidate
- Wolf turning deaf and dumb when it came to questioning Hillary
- serving up Democrat party operatives as "undecided voters" and allowing them to ask questions (including the infamous "Do you prefer diamonds or pearls?' question to Hillary
- pretending that Hillary campaign advisor James Carville was an unaffiliated pundit during the post-debate review (Of course, Carville thought Hillary won.)

Related:

Questions About Carville and CNN
CNN's and Carville's lack of ethics
Diamonds and Pearls and Girls for President
“Random” questioner at debate was Arkansas Democratic Party officer in 2003?