America under President Trump

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

That's, of course, a lie.

Trump said some of those protesting the removal of Civil War statues were good people. Not the tekke torch Nazis.

Most of those statues were put up in the early 20th century during the Jim Crow era. They were intended to help keep black folks in their place.

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, BubberMiley said:

Didn't catch that. Can you provide a link?

It wasn't a reply to reefer, it was to MH. This link will take you there though.

Feel free to try and make the case that CNN didn't blatantly lie about any one of those stories. And there are more. Plenty more.

CNN's coverage of almost 100% of the main stories that have been in the news in the past 6 years has been mostly lies and propaganda. They literally can't cover a story without being deceptive and slimy.  

[BubberMiley]

 1) Dr Ford's story has credibility

Absolutely.  All you ever did was attack her character. No one provided any evidence that she wasn't completely truthful.

2) Brionna was killed in bed

i didn't follow that story, but I understandshe was in bed when the police broke in. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

3) Antifa doesn't exist,

Nobody ever said that. They said it isn't an organization with an identifiable leadership structure, which is true.

4) the riots were mostly peaceful,

nobody said that. They said the protests were mostly peaceful, which is true.

5) Trump committed sedition but Waters/Pelosi/Omar/M.Obama/Kamala etc never did,

I'm not aware of them instigating a riot to overthrow the democratic process. Do you have evidence they did?

6) Rayshard was killed just for sleeping at a drive thru,

I don't know who that is.

7) cops walked up on Floyd with guns drawn just because he was black and then murdered him while he wasn't resisting,

Everybody saw exactly what happened in the video. They described what we all saw.

M Brown was a gentle giant,

They aren't allowed to say nice things about murdered Black guys you don't know? Fake news!

9) anonymous sources are always 100% trustworthy but people who attended meetings can't be trusted to report on what was said there,

 I call BS. Cite?

10) Bombshell evidence is coming out 156 weeks in a row on Russian collusion and yet at the end there's still zero,

it's not zero. Not even close.

11) Trump asked Zelenski for a favour and then he asked about Biden's QPQ (the transcripts clearly show that to be a straight-up lie),

I am unfamiliar. Provide more details and maybe you have something here. We'll see.

12) there's no reason whatsoever to question Biden's actions in Ukraine,

No one said that, but maybe someone said there was no evidence to implicate him.

13) Trump was so crazy that he should have been removed by the 25th Amendment but Biden's cognitive abilities are perfect fine, etc?

Trump instigated a riot where 5 people died. He even ignored calls for help while he watched on TV. Biden outdebated Trump. Sounds like fake news on your part.

Edited January 19, 2021 by BubberMiley

[BubberMiley]

I looked up the Rayshard Brooks incident, but no report said he was killed while sleeping in the drive thru. They all said he was shot in the back after stealing the police taser. This can be verified by watching the video. The cops were fired and charged with murder.

So it appears you're the one spreading fake news again.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/14/us/atlanta-protests-rayshard-brooks-sunday/index.html

 

[Cannucklehead]

4 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

I looked up the Rayshard Brooks incident, but no report said he was killed while sleeping in the drive thru. They all said he was shot in the back after stealing the police taser. This can be verified by watching the video. The cops were fired and charged with murder.

So it appears you're the one spreading fake news again.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/14/us/atlanta-protests-rayshard-brooks-sunday/index.html

 

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000007198581/rayshard-brooks-killing-garrett-rolfe.html

 

The incident was recorded.  

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, BubberMiley said:

 1) Dr Ford's story has credibility

Absolutely.  

That's an absolute lie.

She 'can't name a year' (or doesn't want to because it makes her story easier to disprove), she can't say where it happened (same reason), she pretended to have witnesses but she doesn't, she never talked to the cops or a counsellor or a teacher or her friends or anyone one earth but theoretically it was 'traumatic', she pretended to have claustrophobia as a result of the incident but she lived her life like she did, she pretended not to know that the GOP offered to bring her a polygraph but even I knew that they had and I live on the opposite side of the continent in a different country.

She was such a huge liar that her 'credibility' was 100% shot.

In any courtroom in NA she'd be kicked out. She'd never get her lame story before a judge. 

CNN pimped that like it had credibility, much like you're doing. They aren't that stupid though, they were lying. 

What's your excuse?

Quote

2) Brionna was killed in bed

i didn't follow that story, but I understandshe was in bed when the police broke in. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

When people on CNN talked about Brionna they made it seem as though she was killed in her bed during a no-knock raid, and she was just a hard-worker with no criminal record. 

They use her story to protest against no-knock raids.

Yes, police had a no-knock warrant. But they knocked and that's an accepted fact.

She was killed in the hallway.

She was killed after her boyfriend started a gunfight by shooting a cop. 

The cops were there because her ex-boyfriend was a major drug dealer who had packages dropped at her house.

The whole "innocent Brionna" thing was used to incite riots and CNN let that happen.

Quote

3) Antifa doesn't exist,

Nobody ever said that. They said it isn't an organization with an identifiable leadership structure, which is true.

LMAO. That's the weakest defence of a blatant lie that I've ever seen. This one isn't even up for debate dude. 

Quote

4) the riots were mostly peaceful,

nobody said that. They said the protests were mostly peaceful, which is true.

By your standards all protests are peaceful because they aren't riots 'til they're riots. 

But the protests turned into riots on a consistent basis. 

People were killed all over the place. Elderly people were sucker-punched. Cops were assaulted in dozens of cities. There was billions of dollars worth of property damage. Businesses were permanently closed. Lives were ruined. All over America.

CNN reporters were filmed calling protests "mostly peaceful" while there were buildings burning behind them. 

Give it up Buber. Now you're a liar too.

Quote

5) Trump committed sedition but Waters/Pelosi/Omar/M.Obama/Kamala etc never did,

I'm not aware of them instigating a riot to overthrow the democratic process. Do you have evidence they did?

You can't re-invent the crime of sedition to fit your narrative Buber. That's like lying. 

When Pelosi says "I don't know why there aren't uprisings all over the place" that's a call to action.

When Waters talks about "taking out the President" that's an appeal for action. 

Sedition isn't limited to 'starting rioting which leads to attacks on buildings' dude. Calling for an attack on the POTUS is sedition.

Quote

6) Rayshard was killed just for sleeping at a drive thru,

I don't know who that is.

That was a direct quote from CTV. They started off a broadcast by describing the night's leading stories.

I pasted a link here at MLW in a different thread that shows it.

The exact quote is "Killed after falling asleep at a drive thru".

It could as easily have been "Killed after the 1954 Super Bowl."

Rayshard was killed after he passed out drunk behind the wheel, assaulted a cop and shot a taser at his face. The fact that he was at Wendy's is irrelevant. 30 people are killed by drunk drivers in the US every day, and in Georgia, shooting a taser at someone is legally equivalent to shooting a gun at them. It wasn't a case where the police had 'guns' and Rayshard was unarmed in the eyes of the law. 

FYI just 2 weeks earlier a police officer in Atlanta named Willie Sauls was charged with aggravated assault just for pointing a taser at someone.

A taser isn't a 'non-lethal' weapon, it's a 'less lethal' weapon, but using it with any modicum of safety requires proper training. Shooting a taser at someone's head/neck can result in blindness or death.

Quote

7) cops walked up on Floyd with guns drawn just because he was black and then murdered him while he wasn't resisting,

Everybody saw exactly what happened in the video. They described what we all saw.

They put a screen over the picture with a quote, basically:

"The Floyd family lawyer released a statement saying that the officers approached the van with their guns drawn because Floyd was black". 

That quote is 99.9% accurate. Maybe a word is different but that is the exact sentiment expressed on that clip.

They didn't even have to show that quote because the video was already out showing police approaching the van properly, and pulling out guns AFTER Floyd was told to put his hands on the wheel MULTIPLE TIMES while he was rummaging under the passenger seat.

Cops would pull a gun on anyone in that scenario. Even a cute girl.

Quote

M Brown was a gentle giant,

They aren't allowed to say nice things about murdered Black guys you don't know? Fake news!

Wrong.

They aren't allowed to let the "Gentle Giant" story be their fake narrative when there's video evidence that he was a violent criminal just moments earlier. Then he got into an altercation with an officer who was there to do his sworn, lawful duty. Is that "gentle"?

If someone raped one of your family members and CNN was calling them a "gentle soul", and refusing to show video of their violent crime just moments before the rape would you think that they were lying?

"Why are police prosecuting that 'gentle soul'. He gave his teacher flowers in the 3rd grade. C'mon man! Let him loose!"

Quote

9) anonymous sources are always 100% trustworthy but people who attended meetings can't be trusted to report on what was said there,

 I call BS. Cite?

CNN: "An anonymous source in the WH said that Trump called all soldiers/veterans "losers"."

It doesn't matter to CNN and their sycophant dolt horde that several people on hand, some Trump haters among them,  said that the story wasn't true. CNN presents it as fact and their dolts gobble it up.

Bobulinski was another example of a witness who put his face right on camera and gave a very detailed and apparently truthful testimony. CNN wouldn't even give it a half-hearted mention.

Twitter blocked the NY Post from posting about the Bidens. That was true too.

Quote

10) Bombshell evidence is coming out 156 weeks in a row on Russian collusion and yet at the end there's still zero,

it's not zero. Not even close.

Trump's team did not collude with Russia, but Steele confessed that he sent in the dossier for no other reason than to influence the election. 

Quote

11) Trump asked Zelenski for a favour and then he asked about Biden's QPQ (the transcripts clearly show that to be a straight-up lie),

I am unfamiliar. Provide more details and maybe you have something here. We'll see.

You can google the transcripts. The charge against Trump is well-known. I'm not sure what you need help with here, but CNN lied 100%.

Quote

12) there's no reason whatsoever to question Biden's actions in Ukraine,

No one said that, but maybe someone said there was no evidence to implicate him.

CNN won't entertain the story, period.

Their reporters won't ask a question, period.

Biden was caught in serious lies after the photo with Hunetr and Devon Archer came out. The people/networks that Joe lied to never admitted to even being offended. They never asked why he lied. They let it go quietly.

Quote

13) Trump was so crazy that he should have been removed by the 25th Amendment but Biden's cognitive abilities are perfect fine, etc?

Trump instigated a riot where 5 people died. He even ignored calls for help while he watched on TV. Biden outdebated Trump. Sounds like fake news on your part.

This is more obvious lying from you.

1) The 25h Amendment crap came out dozens of times over the last 4 years. Jan 6th was just 12 days ago. 

2) Biden dodged debates, and then Trump was interrupted over and over in the ones they did have while Trump was rebuked if he dared to talk over sleepy Joe.

Joe also took the better part of a week off to rest up for the dbeates while Trump was holding a rally in a different state every day.

3) Trump did not instigate a riot, he asked for a peaceful protest, so that was a lie on your part.

4) In the very few, brief interviews that Biden gives there is no shortage of very serious breakdowns in his ability to speak the language that he was once fluent in.

Plus he forgets where he is. He says he's running Senate when he's running for President. He says he's wearing a Philadelphia Eagles jacket when he's not even wearing NFL apparel. Etc.

Biden is a total disaster when he's not appearing in public until after noon, and even then he's only doing brief appearances, a couple days a week. 

When the 24/7 job of being POTUS is on him and he has a busy schedule he will fold like a cheap tent.

The only way that we won't won't be saying "President Harris" by 2023 is if we're saying "President Xi". 

I'll give Obama credit for one thing: he was smart enough to not endorse Joe even when he was younger. 

Edited January 19, 2021 by WestCanMan

[BubberMiley]

All your examples are you either misrepresenting their reporting, you misrepresenting the facts, or you declaring your feelings to be the undisputed truth.

There are, for example, no news reports that said Brooks was killed just for sleeping in the drive thru. They all mention the taser. Your portrayal of their reporting is an outright lie. 

So now I can cite specific incidents where you have reported a verifiable lie without retraction. But you still haven't managed to do that with the MSM.

Edited January 19, 2021 by BubberMiley

[WestCanMan]

11 hours ago, BubberMiley said:

All your examples are you either misrepresenting their reporting, you misrepresenting the facts, or you declaring your feelings to be the undisputed truth.

There are, for example, no news reports that said Brooks was killed just for sleeping in the drive thru. They all mention the taser. Your portrayal of their reporting is an outright lie. 

So now I can cite specific incidents where you have reported a verifiable lie without retraction. But you still haven't managed to do that with the MSM.

Oh BS. 

You can’t refute a single thing I said so you’re using one blatant lie as a catch-all. 
 

The comment about Brooks is 100% true, and the video of it is even posted on this forum. You lose, as usual. 
 

And FYI, the CTV comment was just a single example of the MSM’s false coverage. 
 

I promise you that you cannot find an accurate and honest account of the Brooks story anywhere on the MSM, period. 
 

I challenge you to find that anywhere Buber. CTV, CBC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR.....

 

It was widely reported on and talked about for days. This should be easy if you’re not lying. 

[WestCanMan]

Irrefutable proof of the fact that the bodycam footage was actually a lot more exculpatory than the MSM wanted to admit is the fact that after it came out, the riots vanished.

CNN tried to selectively edit what their viewers saw and downplay it, but the dang internet let the unabridged truth out.

It was just June 18th when Kamala Harris gushed that the riots would last until after the election, even after the new year. August 4th the footage came out and the riots fizzled to nothing almost immediately.

Why didn't the Dems release that footage earlier to spare America all of the carnage and lost lives? Keith Ellison had it under lock and key for months. People were killed and billions of dollars worth of damage occurred. America became more divided by the day and the Dems revelled in it. 

[BubberMiley]

What is inaccurate in their report?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/14/us/atlanta-protests-rayshard-brooks-sunday/index.html

[WestCanMan]

52 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

What is inaccurate in their report?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/14/us/atlanta-protests-rayshard-brooks-sunday/index.html

For starters, it's completely inflammatory and one-sided.

The title itself says 'lists manner of death as homicide'.

FYI the fact that it was ruled homicide is not title-worthy. Everyone on earth knew that the cause of death was gunshot wounds, but to the layman, the use of the word homicide proves "legally, the crime of murder was committed". An autopsy doesn't conclude that the police used unjustified force. It determines if he died from a human cause or if he just coincidentally had a stroke and died before he was shot and bled out. 

There are a lot of important points that are absent from it (ie lying by omission), and there is serious disinformation in it which goes unquestioned. They are basically lying by proxy, or taking advantage of someone else's lies so that they can print them and act like innocent rubes.

Quote

An attorney for Brooks' family, L. Chris Stewart, said that officers did not have to shoot Brooks and noted that the Taser is intentionally not a deadly weapon.

This statement is a bold lie. 

The taser is a "less-lethal weapon", not a "non-lethal weapon". That means that it can kill, especially if used improperly (shooting a taser at someone's head is the best example of improperly). Google it and try to find a different definition if you want. The lawyer lied. Shocker.

This is a classic example of CNN "not lying, but propagating lies and not correcting them".

The layman reading this article would be tricked into concluding that the expert opinion of a lawyer could be trusted and that quote was valuable information when it was just pure deception. I knew it was a lie, and that means that people at CNN knew it was a lie as well.

It's worth noting that CNN had just reported on a case two weeks earlier where a police officer (Willie Sauls) was charged with aggravated assault just for pointing a taser at a girl (something 'Pilgrim' is her name iirc). They knew how serious of a crime it is just to point a taser at someone. It's a felony to use a taser during a crime in Georgia, exactly the same way in which it's illegal to use a 9mm gun - the taser is included in the list of items, including guns, on the exact same statute. Look that up too. 

This law pre-dates the Brooks shooting: https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/gsulr/vol2/iss2/62/ 

IE, tasers are firearms in the eyes of Georgia law. Tasers = guns. Brooks was in a firefight. 

The type of taser that he had also fires two charges - he wasn't empty. Can you find any of that info in your article?

Does the article mention that he blew .108? Way over the limit? Or that 30 people are killed in the US every day by drunk drivers?

Does the article mention that, while .108 is bad, healthy <30 yr olds like Brooks don't pass out at 10 pm from just a .108 BA level? He was almost certainly on more than just alcohol, he needed to go in for bloodwork to look for marijuana or narcotics which added to his impaired state. The officers actually needed to bring him in - it wasn't a situation where they could get his car towed and call him a taxi. 

 

Also, the fact that Brooks would have been a-ok if he hadn't punched a cop, stole a taser, and shot it at a cops head was notably absent. 

At no point does CNN mention that Brooks put the officer in a position where his life was nearly ended, or he could have been permanently blinded. It actually does the opposite, by quoting a lie that said "the taser is intentionally not a deadly weapon".

Brooks was "a violent armed felon who just shot a firearm at police" when he was killed. That's an important distinction notably absent.

So yeah, that article was entirely and itentionally inaccurate. 

Edited January 19, 2021 by WestCanMan

[WestCanMan]

Next....

[BubberMiley]

56 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Next....

So, if I may paraphrase that mess, all you have is you feel it's unfair to refer to the autopsy report calling it a homicide because the "layman" would assume homicide is murder (which the cop has been charged with). You are trying to suppress and adapt the truth based on your feelings. Fake news!

And you say it's unfair to quote a lawyer who said that police use tasers because they aren't as deadly because...tasers can be deadly. But it's still true what the lawyer said---that they use tasers because they aren't lethal like guns are. Again, you're trying to suppress the lawyer's speech because it hurts your feelings. Once again, fake news on your part.

Next...

[WestCanMan]

Just now, BubberMiley said:

So, if I may paraphrase that mess, all you have is you feel it's unfair to refer to the autopsy report calling it a homicide because the "layman" would assume homicide is murder (which the cop has been charged with). You are trying to suppress and adapt the truth based on your feelings. Fake news!

And you say it's unfair to quote a lawyer who said that police use tasers because they aren't as deadly because...tasers can be deadly. But it's still true what the lawyer said---that they use tasers because they aren't lethal like guns are. Again, you're trying to suppress the lawyer's speech because it hurts your feelings. Once again, fake news on your part.

Next...

You're just a total liar Buber.

I proved to you that the whole article was deceptive, pointing their idiotic readers to a conclusion which wasn't at all accurate or fair, and which resulted in a feeling of hostility towards police. 

There are several key points in there which you failed to address, and your understanding of the lawyer's lie is a perfect example of believing what you want in spite of all evidence.

Quote

And you say it's unfair to quote a lawyer who said that police use tasers because they aren't as deadly because...

This is a complete lie Buber. You just lied 100%.

The lawyer didn't say that "tasers aren't as deadly as guns", which would be 100% correct, he said "the Taser is intentionally not a deadly weapon" which is a total lie. The taser can kill. The taser IS a deadly weapon. If you asked the company that makes the taser that was used by Brooks if firing it at someone's head is deadly use of force they would say, "Yes". 

Similarly, I could say that handguns aren't as deadly as rifles and it would be 100% true. Does that mean that I could also say "handguns aren't deadly" and it would still be true? 

You were just caught lying again Buber.

You didn't have to lie. But you knew that you were lying and you did it anyways. You are a total liar.

Quote

tasers can be deadly. But it's still true what the lawyer said---that they use tasers because they aren't lethal like guns are. Again, you're trying to suppress the lawyer's speech because it hurts your feelings. Once again, fake news on your part.

It is not true at all what the lawyer said, and while you can feign ignorance, the lawyer lied and he knew that he was lying. 

The Police use tasers because "if employed properly, and under the right circumstances, tasers can afford officers a less-lethal option of immobilizing someone who is a direct threat to their safety".

And like I said before, a police officer was charged with aggravated assault 'for pointing a taser at someone." Didn't shoot, didn't punch or kick her, didn't physical touch her in any way shape or form to be considered guilty of an offence. He pointed a taser at her in Georgia, and the same AG who is pressing charges against the officer who shot Brooks is charging another cop just for pointing a taser.

How safe is it to point a taser at someone Buber?

Just remember, your last post was irrefutable evidence that you are in fact a liar.

 

 

 

Next....

 

[BubberMiley]

Rather than type that all out, you could have saved a lot of trouble by first figuring out what "intentionally" means in the context of that sentence. He was saying the police do not use the taser with the intent to kill. This is a fact. They quoted his true statement accurately. This is what we want journalists to do.

[WestCanMan]

4 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

Rather than type that all out, you could have saved a lot of trouble by first figuring out what "intentionally" means in the context of that sentence. He was saying the police do not use the taser with the intent to kill. This is a fact. They quoted his true statement accurately. This is what we want journalists to do.

Rather than type all of that out I could have just said that you are a liar, but that's a pretty large accusation to throw around frivolously, so I proved that you are a liar.

You changed the lawyer's words, which were plain for all to see, from "intentionally not a deadly weapon" which was 100% a lie to: "they aren't as deadly" which was 100% true. 

You might get away with this type of lying with most of the population but I have a pretty good command of the English language and I am not afraid to call a spade a spade. You're a liar. Go fish Buber.  

[BubberMiley]

It is 100% true that police do not intend to kill people with their tasers, which is what he said and what you misrepresented. Just like when you lied and said CTV reported he was shot for sleeping in the drive thru.

[Michael Hardner]

19 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

 Just like when you lied and said CTV reported he was shot for sleeping in the drive thru.

You could ask for a retraction but you would have to deal with the paradox:
1) Trumpers say the MSM lies
2) The MSM issues retractions and corrections
3) Trumpers and Trumper media lie and never retract or say they were wrong.  ( This includes Qanon whose first predictions of mass arrest of Democrats were rationalized by claiming that the arrests actually happened but THEY were covered up.

What to do ?  You are doing the right thing by pointing out the contradictions.  That's as far as you can get with it.

[Petros]

Meanwhile, even Mitch McConnell has now admitted that Trump is a habitual liar, and the election results were not rigged.  Furthermore, he condemns Trump for the attempted coup on January 6.  When the house leader turns on the President, you know that people are abandoning the MAGA ship in droves to save their political careers.

Trump will go down as the worst President in American history, and will now attempt to pardon himself and his family. However, that will not protect him from the state of New York laying criminal charges, in relation to his business dealings going back decades.  I hope Trump is held accountable for the damage he has done to America, over the last 4 years.

[WestCanMan]

Busted for telling a straight up lie - BuberMiley. 

Period. 

All of the leftist liars here can rally around buber and pretend like his lies weren’t that big of a deal and that it’s not a big deal that CNN lies just to incite a bit of rioting.
 

Who cares?

It’s not like we didn’t know that you guys were liars before now. Worthless scum, totally busted. 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

You could ask for a retraction but you would have to deal with the paradox:
1) Trumpers say the MSM lies
2) The MSM issues retractions and corrections
3) Trumpers and Trumper media lie and never retract or say they were wrong.  ( This includes Qanon whose first predictions of mass arrest of Democrats were rationalized by claiming that the arrests actually happened but THEY were covered up.

What to do ?  You are doing the right thing by pointing out the contradictions.  That's as far as you can get with it.

For one thing, CTV did say that, the video is here, and I will find it for you soon enough.
 

Another thing, you had your chance to defend CNN and all of their lies and you just ran like a little coward.

You didn’t have anything to say.

You talked big and said that they were “vindicated” and then when it was time to throw down some facts you had absolutely nothing. You had to admit that they are blatant liars. 
 

Why don’t you man up and reply to my posts MH? Lol. 

[BubberMiley]

It's starting to sink in that you completely misunderstood the quote about how police don't intentionally kill people with tasers?

[WestCanMan]

Don't really care what you're going on about Buber.

Are you going to admit that CNN is lying filth or what?

Also, here's the link of CTV's opening monologue, killed after falling asleep at a drive thru. It was already in the Rayshard Brooks thread, like I said.

You guys should know better than to call me a liar by now.

 https://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1970845

[BubberMiley]

There's nothing false in that headline and they provide sufficient context by showing the video of him running with the taser AT THE EXACT SAME TIME.  It would be dishonest if they never mentioned him stealing the taser in their report. But they did. If you were being honest, you would have mentioned that.

In sum, nobody would have the wrong impression of what happened by watching their report. That is all that matters.

[WestCanMan]

10 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

There's nothing false in that headline and they provide sufficient context by showing the video of him running with the taser AT THE EXACT SAME TIME.  It would be dishonest if they never mentioned him stealing the taser in their report. But they did. If you were being honest, you would have mentioned that.

In sum, nobody would have the wrong impression of what happened by watching their report. That is all that matters.

“Killed after falling asleep at a drive-thru” 1) is exactly what CTV said and 2) still lends the impression that Rayshard really didn’t do anything to deserve being chased and shot. It was incredibly misleading and cast the police in a bad light while placing Rayshard squarely in the victim role.

 

I didn’t have time to watch it today.  I will destroy their false narratives later after I plug my nose and watch it again.