Editor,
Gordon Weil’s column “Election could be tainted by conspiracy claims” in Saturday’s paper is rich with targets, but I will limit my rebuttal to a select few:
1.“The Washington Post Fact Checker, generally regarded as the best in the country.”
Regarded by whom? The Washington Post? The New York Times? CNN and MSNBC? Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters?
2. “A conspiracy balloon should be propped by solid facts reported by the independent media relying on evidence.”
Like the Mueller Report popped the “collusion” balloon?
And exactly who is the “independent media?” USA Today? The National Enquirer? People Magazine? CBS News?
3. “Opinion is offered as if it were a news report.”
Have you not proofread any of your own columns?
4. “A wide sense of cynicism exists, making suspect any objective journalism.”
Where can I find some of this “objective journalism” you mention?
Finally, when was the last time a Republican won the presidential election and the Democrats did NOT claim it was an illegitimate outcome?
Rufus T. Firefly
Biddeford
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less