On this interview and on issues like the Estancia aquatics fiasco and, say, Fairview Park, I'd agree there is little (if any) apparent bias or agenda. However, on the three part Dana Rohrbacher interview, Costa Mesa Brief certainly showed their hand.
I mean, loosely transcribed, from the intro... "What we found was a humble man who has been instrumental in many historical events that few could imagine. His list of accomplishments is extensive but he is purely a team member and lets others take credit..." I mean, that's some objective journalism. And that's just the intro. He broaches the subject of Russian election meddling and Dana's ties with Russian politicians and Oligarchs by saying "let's go the beginning... Comey and Hillary's emails..." This is not an interview it is fanboy worship.
One can't characterize Mr. Peotter as a neutral commentator. My comment was about CMB and their actual treatment of interviewees and this one, specifically. I'm pretty sure getting Scott to do that interview was central to obtaining access to the Hider-In-Chief, Dana.
Sandy seems cogent in her answers, perhaps a little aged in her view of our city and society, but there are worse attributes for Mayor than being cautious, I'm still up in the air on who to vote for.
