Kessler Caught Flat-Footed: WaPo’s Biden Spin Exposed
Glenn Kessler looked lost. Blank stare. Slow answers. Classic deer-in-headlights stuff.
Mark Halperin pressed him hard. Rightly so. This wasn’t about nitpicking. It was about a major paper brushing off big questions about Joe Biden’s fitness to lead.
What’s striking is Kessler’s admission. He and the Washington Post were more focused on taking down conservative outlets than on chasing the full truth. That’s not journalism. It’s damage control.
Transcript via Real Clear Politics:
MARK HALPERIN, HOST: Regarding Joe Biden. When you looked at the question of whether the videos being played largely in conservative media that showed apparent cognitive decline of the president, what conclusion did you reach in Fact Checker about those videos?
GLENN KESSLER, FORMER WASHINGTON POST FACT-CHECKER: Well, you’re talking about when he supposedly meandered off to talk to the parachutists? Yeah. So that fact check was looking specifically at how that video was being portrayed on news sites.
MARK HALPERIN: Yes, sir.
GLENN KESSLER: And what we did was we went and got the full video in the full context, because it looked like the way it was cut, and particularly distributed by the RNC, it looked like Joe Biden was wandering off and he didn’t show him talking to parachutists. What we showed was that he was talking to parachutists. And I’ve said this before, fact checks are a complement to the news coverage, not a supplement.
Yes, sir. The overall context of the Washington Post coverage, we had coverage about, you know, was he too old? We had columnists saying he shouldn’t be running again.
And that fact was specifically about that video distributed by the RNC.
MARK HALPERIN: Understand, but the power of the Pinocchios and the power of the fact check, when you write that, people say that and say, the Washington Post is saying that that video is not reflective of Joe Biden’s cognitive decline. That’s what people take from that.
Watch all of this:
Kessler recently accepted a buyout and left the Washington Post. Some outlets reported he bailed rather than adapt to pressure for balance.
Good riddance, some would say. The bigger point is this: when your fact-checkers start sounding defensive, you’ve lost credibility. The public deserves straight answers about a president’s capacity. Not PR runs aimed at protecting him.
Watch the clip. Decide for yourself. And ask: who is the press really serving?
Leave a Comment