The truth is not ‘elusive’
Consider The Seattle Times headline for The Associated Press article on claims that the N-epithet was hurled: “Did spit, slurs fly on the Hill? The truth has been elusive” [CloseUp, April 14].
One of the congressmen was the hero John Lewis, whose courage and integrity are beyond dispute; the claims were backed up by another congressmen who wasn’t a target; a reporter and a congressional aide, who saw the three as they entered the Capitol, described them as trembling, agitated and wanting documentation; and the claim that there is anything to dispute is based on an irrelevant video and sponsored by Andrew Breitbart, who has been exposed as a liar in his representations about the Acorn videos.
Would The Times cast the headline as a question, and describe the truth as “elusive,” if the testimony of four policemen was disputed by someone with a criminal record who wasn’t even there when an event occurred?
— David Lovell, Seattle