PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER: …[[Kane spokesperson Chuck] Ardo said Kane issued her new statement Friday “to clarify that she had not seen the Granahan emails prior to their being made public.” He said he was unaware until then that Kane had not played a role in the earlier review.
While Granahan’s emails contained no pornography, they included suggestive photographs of men and women, and jokes that mocked minorities, immigrants, obese people, anorexics, and domestic violence victims…
Kane, who faces perjury conspiracy and other charges and has had her law license suspended, has blamed her legal woes on Harrisburg’s male-dominated political establishment. She said her enemies had “manufactured” the criminal case to punish her for her campaign against pornographic emails… (more)
EDITOR: It is interesting that Inquirer coverage of the attorney general has become a bit more professional over the past couple of weeks, we suspect because national media and some of the public have come to recognize how discriminatory and manipulated it has been.
However, notice that even now two adversaries of Kane are quoted. Unlike the recent New York Times article, there is no word from those who who view things differently.
The did contain nudity, especially photos including male genitalia. It that regard, it as graphic, if not more graphic, that ones Eakins received.
Kane had also indicated that her sister had no e-mail.