1/ Other people are mocking the lame clickservative trope that it was the *coverage* of Pruitt that's at fault here.
Let Daddy say a few words about why this is such a bad look for you, kids.
Let Daddy say a few words about why this is such a bad look for you, kids.
2/ First, I get it. You've abandoned every shred of conservative principles in favor of a statist, nationalist, bullying, shitbird president, so your left clean to the thin reed of - say it with me! - "Duh librul media!"
3/ Save some tiny iota of dignity. Do you really believe that the coverage of Pruitt was driven by anything other than actions he took himself? Did the New York Timesmake him send his minions out seeking hand lotion? Did the Washington Post force him to live with a lobbyist?
4/ Was a crack team of CNN mind control operatives responsible for Pruitt hitting up his aides to cover hotel rooms? Who at MSNBC forced him to travel first class, and to demand an army of security dudes more more suited to a third world dictator than a Cabinet official?
5/ But hey, you got your go-to villain, and I get that you're all out of other ideas. I am curious if any of you can explain to me when a tolerance for corruption and criminality became a conservative value as long as you're getting the policy outcomes you want.
6/ Bonus points if you can explain it without using the construction of "But Obummer!" or "But Hillary would be worse."
Fin.
Fin.
