[6stringronin]

He tried to make sense of numbers, as a point that it serves the US geopolitical goals at the time to have a distraction from their own atrocities.

"We do not pretend to know where the truth lies amidst these sharply conflicting assessments; rather, we again want to emphasize some crucial points. What filters through to the American public is a seriously distorted version of the evidence available, emphasizing alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities and downplaying or ignoring the crucial U.S. role, direct and indirect, in the torment that Cambodia has suffered."

Calling it downplaying genocide is a nice strawman. In any developing situation the media wants to jump yo a conclusion, that's his point overall.

He wasn't denying or downplaying just stating, if its happening how can we know to what degree when we have unreliable sources?