In the interest of fairness, I'll add this bit of news from the Washington Blade:
The Log Cabin Republicans announced Saturday it will withhold its endorsement of Donald Trump, which marks the first time in 12 years the organization hasn’t endorsed the Republican presidential nominee.
Log Cabin announced the decision in an organizational statement from its political action committee, which begins with citing former President Reagan’s famous quote, “Trust but verify.”
“So cautioned former President Ronald Reagan who inspired our founding in 1977 — and it is a solemn understanding of that very instruction from our 40th president that compels Log Cabin Republicans to withhold endorsement from our Party’s current nominee,” the statement says.
The statement says Trump is “perhaps the most pro-LGBT presidential nominee in the history of the Republican Party and cites “unprecedented overtures” to LGBT people, but concludes that’s not enough.
“Log Cabin Republicans have long emphasized that we are not a single-issue organization, nor are our members single-issue voters,” the statement says. “Even if we were, rhetoric alone regarding LGBT issues does not equate to doctrine. As Mr. Trump spoke positively about the LGBT community in the United States, he concurrently surrounded himself with senior advisors with a record of opposing LGBT equality and committed himself to supporting legislation such as the so-called ‘First Amendment Defense Act’ that Log Cabin Republicans opposes.”
That said, the obvious takeaway is that the Log Cabin Republicans - i.e. organized gay Republicans, despite what appears to be the most generous support from Trump, have declined to support him because they don't trust him; largely because of the people from the alt-right that he has surrounded himself with.
But you are pushing it...
Politico is trash.
I think pointing out that the Log Cabin Republicans reject endorsing him shows that I'm not pushing it.
As far as the quality of Politico ... from what I gather from the right in general, all media from the Blaze to the Washington Post and ABC are all trash.
My only takeaway from the right's indictment of the press is that given Trump's position on the press, it is not unreasonable for the press to consider his candidacy a direct, existential threat ... and given that, I think they've been pretty fair.
For instance, I've not seen politico, wapo.com or nytimes.com adopt the editorial position of the Huffpost ... i.e. :
Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.
... which they include as a tag on every article that quotes the Republican nominee for President.
These, after all, are business people who have not only given the Donald three billion in publicity, but have been alternatively banned, threatened with libel and called out for abuse from the podium when the man speaks.
I think they've been imminently fair considering the danger to their economic and even physical well being.