The truth is I like Bruce Metzger a lot as a scholar and theologian; it's just his conclusions are very one-sided. He can detail the facts and then come to the totally wrong traditional conclusions because of his bias, as it appears to me, just will not allow him to draw the unpopular conclusion that the Church may have outright lied.

Lots of these more prominent scholars seem to be that way. Like it's more important to tow the party line than rock the boat. This is part of why I like Bart Ehrman so much, he wasn't afraid to rock the boat.