West

How is my source of news narrow? I've allowed academic type resources such as UNESCO to shape how I would view the world and have emerged myself in other cultures. When you meet someone who, as an example, was an orphan in a 3rd world country because their parents were murdered because of minor appearance differences had them determined to be a people group worthy of being hunted and murdered that'll shape your world view more than reading about it on your preferred news website Fair to some extent. However, part of that is we live in an era where they've been somewhat weaponized. Honestly I couldn't watch CNN mostly because I saw what they do on their network as having major red flags for me based on lived experience abroad. The Rwandan genocide, as one example, used mass media to label one group of people as termites and everything else. CNN used different language, but with similar outcomes from what I could tell.

In another thread, there was a discussion with another poster about developing opinion based on the information that's recieved. For the sake of improving communication, and to help in moving discussion along in a manner that helps to see others perspectives, here's how I would develop opinion. If I'm doing it wrong, or if you have further suggestion, I would open it up to bring that forward: 1. I have education and lived life experience, experienced other culture, and have learned extensively about the histories of varying countries who've had atrocities. This would include: -The killing fields of Cambodia -Holocaust memorials in Europe -Genocide memorials in Rwanda -Various educational tours to learn of the history of South Africa -UNESCO heritage sites in Canada -Slavery in the US Based on using this as a framework, I see some parallels in society that are not heading in the right direction imo. 2. I would consider myself leaning right of center but can understand the value of economic social policies to improve the livelihoods of people who are vulnerable in society I.e. people with varying disabilities, children, etc. I try to root my worldview in fairness and is why I would feel passionate about some of the nonsense that I feel is coming out of the USs legal system under Biden. 3. I haven't watched CNN since probably the 2016 election cycle. Prior to that I would have considered myself to support Obama, but this was probably more the product and power of the media to prop him up and maintain his image. I believe social media and platforms like YouTube had have removed somewhat that "filter" where you have to interpret the world through the lense of journalism and exposed in a way the spin machine. This likely contributes to a level of distrust in the press. I believe Harder has made some decent points in the past on some of the downsides of social media, and now essentially giving ill informed people a bull horn in a sense; to me the answer is learning how to siphon through the noise which I'm sure will come with time. 4. Usually what I'm responding to is what's currently the broader discussion going on on places like Fox or even influencer accounts on social media. Feel free to critique.

In my view they had a theory and Smith manufactured circumstantial evidence at best to fit his theory. Opposite of how any functioning legal system should operate

Your evidence you accept is very narrow. Any time previous I've pulled an article you find a reason to reject it. Again, I'm posting opinions like anybody else based on reading news articles, listening to nightly news, and just a general concept of fairness within society. I'm not going to go back over the past few years that Smith has turned your system into a circus just to demonstrate how I reached my conclusion. If you think going after Trump and his allies with the legal system is okay, or trashing a guy because of an issue in his marriage is okay, you are seriously bankrupt of any sort of morals and I doubt we will ever share the same opinions on politics.

I've never once claimed to have a legal background on here. And again, I'm not going to go through every nightly newscast to crop out the discussion on Smith. When I hear you say this bullshit I know you are a leftard just trying to control the narrative by only accepting information that confirms your bias. So if you aren't a serious person, perhaps just put me on ignore like you do to everybody else.

You observe his behavior and form an opinion. That's what I'm doing. Another poster has already demonstrated his questionable conduct on other cases.

No, it wasn't. It very likely would've been slapped down had he brought the case. Of course I'm giving my opinions. That's the whole point of a political forum.

You are right. Which is why I rely on the ruling of the Supreme Court. And as I've already explained to you, Canadians have been deployed to fight in wars alongside the US in no small part because of lawlessness. The US under Biden was a lawless country who settle political disputes through gossip columns and lawfare against their political adversary. Choose a better way, America or stop championing yourself as a beacon of democracy

Thank you.

It's my opinion based on his behavior that he's a danger to a functioning legal system. For all the talk about Trump abusing the institutions, that was done way more these past four years to smear Trump's base as well as to silence oppisition to the Biden regime

I'm just not a delusional lefty who reads my delusions into everyone's statement.

He can't be tried on this because he was a presiding president and securing elections is within his perview. They lied about him inciting violence even though he said to peacefully walk to the Capitol. Smith is a partisan and a danger to a functioning legal system

Except the fact the Supreme Court has already ruled on this nonsense

The American people are getting confirmation today for why they rejected wokeism in the last election

It's funny that most Democrats in the senate have not ran any organization but feel they are qualified to determine who's qualified to run an organization

The leftists are really being dishonest in the hearings today The only qualifications for the SOD is that they are a civilian who's been in combat. Vile people

Predictable lefty smears. Next they'll get a black person to say he doesn't like black people

No matter how you try and spin it, 85% of the population is repulsed by this no matter how you try to normalize it Sorry I doubt you are going to convince people to accept it Alot of left wing insurrectionists trying to take over today's hearing.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/weiss-report-hunters-drug-use-cant-explain-away-not-paying-taxes-money-earned-last-name

Just cause you live in denial doesn't make it lies

It's been all over the news clips where they've declared it to be top priority. I'm not going to go through the hastle of cropping out clips for a woketard who's already shown they won't accept the evidence anyway. User has also already provided this to you but you are too big of coward to take them off ignore

This has been a major point of discussion over the past year. If you don't want to participate, then don't.

I find the left to be mostly hypocritical when it comes to this type of stuff. They had no problem blaming Trump for Covid, DeSantis for the hurricanes, etc. But when you criticize them for spending valuable tax payers resources on spray painting fire hydrants rainbow colors to virtue signal about the homosexuals and refuse to do proper forestry management around major parts of the civilization to prevent significant incidences like this one they go off. Very dishonest people.

Nothing but opinions from you. You deny that news sources have been discussing this story for close to a week now. There were many that I could choose from based on a simple google search. I watch the nightly news and form opinion based on the reporting through critical thinking. This story has been all over the place since the fires broke.

Sarah Carter is a contributer on Fox. Just because you refuse the source doesn't mean it hasn't been provided to you You've already been provided with this multiple times. Their top priority is diversity, equity and inclusion. In her lingo/world, that means this is where the resources are allocated to. You've been provided with evidence that 100 million was cut and that they were warned they were shorting disaster management funding. https://www.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/megyn-kelly-torches-la-fire-chief-for-prioritizing-diversity-over-wildfires-as-city-burns-who-gives-a-flying-fig-about-who-she-sleeps-with/amp_articleshow/117089609.cms Democrats allowed this to happen. Sad