It also turned out that one of the two gauges used to measure the psi before and during the AFC Championship game was faulty, overstating the pressure by one-third to nearly one-half psi, a further complication in assessing what happened with the footballs.
But Wells, like so many legal counsels whom I've witnessed in government, settled on a conclusion and then arranged the facts to best support that verdict. He "credited" information that he liked and brushed aside evidence that went in another direction.
In journalism, we call that a "jam job," stacking the facts to build toward only one conclusion. I don't like it when I read such "white papers" or "committee reports" from U.S. government officials and it annoyed me to see it in this context, even if we are "just" talking about the reputation of a football player.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
