The Washington Post -- through its hot-shot lawyers at Williams & Connolly -- has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit by Nicholas Sandmann over the paper's overwrought and thoroughly biased coverage of the so-called "mob" of Covington Catholic high school students. However the judge rules on the merits, the Post's argument is humorous on its face in its overbroad self-defense:
"The inflammatory rhetoric of the Complaint and the nonstop public promotion of the suit by Plaintiff’s counsel suggest one motive: to strike a blow against the Post’s allegedly 'biased agenda against President Donald J. Trump.' There is no fact alleged, however, to suggest that the Post’s coverage was motivated by an anti-Trump bias—and the prominent, front-page coverage given to Plaintiff’s version of events and the investigative findings in his favor belie any such motive. Politics has nothing to do with this case, and law warrants its dismissal."
It's transparently phony to claim "politics" had nothing to do with the Covington-kids mess. Yes, the paper did eventually publish a front-page story noting the Diocese of Covington found no fault in the students' behavior -- which also included left-wing analysts still smearing the kids for their "MAGA" hats.
As the story came to light, the "no-bias-here" Post complained "The pro-Trump Internet has, for years, worked to create a media environment that is designed to destroy the traditional news media and replace it."
This line is also a knee-slapper: ""Indeed, the Post’s overall coverage — including the articles that the Complaint fails to mention — was not only accurate; it was ultimately favorable to him."
This is like arguing that if someone accused Post executive editor Martin Baron of vile racism in the press, and then concluded after days and weeks of hostile "news" coverage that the accusation turned out to be false is "ultimately favorable to him."
The first story was an imbalanced, fact-mangling mess from Native American activist (and liar) Nathan Phillips. The Post lawyers argued they had a right.....to get it wrong, including Philllips falsely claiming he served in Vietnam:
“Most of the statements that referred to [Sandmann] were statements of the subjective feelings and motivation of the Native American man who saw himself as a peacemaker trying to calm a rowdy crowd of young people and protestors. That man was entitled to offer his subjective point of view, and the Post had a right to report it.”
Their second "oops, it's more complicated" story only quoted from a written statement from Nick Sandmann, and that was easily outnumbered by leftists, including the Black Hebrew Israelites, Women’s Marcher Jessica Travis (who claimed “The kids really went into a mob mentality”) and Nathaniel Dimof, who ran a parody page on Facebook called “Covington Catholic White Male Entitlement High School.”
The Post flunked on the teenaged victims of this story. Point and laugh at the Post saying they deserve respect as an "independent arbiter of facts." These stories were heavily saturated with hostile opinions. Facts were slow to arrive.
