I'm sorry but it's not 'bad faith arguments' to take the word of the mayor of DC at face value. Nobody seems to have provided here any evidence against the fac

I'm sorry but it's not 'bad faith arguments' to take the word of the mayor of DC at face value. Nobody seems to have provided here any evidence against the fact that she has very publicly stated that she was prepared, two days before the event. Just the opposite - the 'convenient' 'bad faith' argument is to blame racism without a single iota of evidence, and cover up possibly the negligent actions of a mayor who happens to be Black and Female. In the eyes of CNN, no female of colour will ever be blamed for anything - that is a problem. I have no stake in the game - I don't care one way or the other. I don't doubt for a second that a kind of assumptive racial issue could have led to less people on the hill, that it could have been a more general misunderstanding, but it's entirely possible that the major really screwed up (among more complex conspiracy theories which I highly doubt). But the National Review using the Mayors own signed and publicly projected document is not even bias frankly. It looks really bad for her at first glance, and it seems blatantly biased of CNN not to highlight her public statements and have her on to talk to her about what happened instead of 'blaming racism' which is really lazy. I'd love to know more actual details about the situation instead of lazy propagation of bias.