😂 Total 100% exoneration! 😂

The political hit piece fabricated by a Trumpist operative tried in every dishonest way to impugn his character, proving conclusively that it’s not an investigatory report it’s an editorial opinion article, but even he could not make even a minor case for criminality even to MAGgots willing to believe anything no matter how hard he twisted the evidence.
There’s no evidence of any crimes, that’s why there’s no recommendation for prosecution.

😂 100% exoneration, absolutely zero evidence of any possible criminality, unlike Trump who has provided 100% proof of treasonous criminality in dozens of ways. 😂

Edit: Meanwhile Trump doesn’t know who is president today, who he was in an election against in 2016, or who was president in 2020, does not recall that we already fought WW2, doesn’t know foreign leaders or countries, can’t distinguish Haley from Pelosi, and often doesn’t know where he is…all proven repeatedly in videos of him trying to speak at high school gymnasiums that can’t be filled, videos that include the crowds leaving as he speaks because they’re hearing the dementia unfiltered and it’s a turn off.
When you talk about Biden flubbing words 95% of the time you can’t provide video, just snide comments from biased third parties, and when you can provide video it’s highly edited to pretend a slight stutter is a mental disorder. Every time you actually see him speak unedited even you have admitted he was surprisingly lucid and intelligent. Trump’s gaffs need no such production, they’re unavoidable every time you watch him speak in a rambling stream of consciousness for even just 30 seconds.

For once, Bob is right….CNN is losing viewers, now that it’s becoming another righty propaganda outlet under the new CEO Chris Licht to appease John Malone, a far right-leaning billionaire now on the board of Discovery who just purchased CNN, close friend of the Murdoch family, and key Warner Bros. Discovery board member who has made it well-known that he would like CNN to be more “centrist”—whatever that means, has taken a noticeable shift to the far right in recent months. Firing the most highly rated hosts, cancelling highly rated shows, simply because he didn’t like them personally and hated the fact checking of the right.
It’s reported that they only watch CNN through FOX news….so only the edited clips Fox shows with Fox commentary and editorializing.

Note, when Stelter was fired, Tucker Carlson and Daily Mail seemed to know about it a full day before even Stelter was told….because Malone couldn’t keep from bragging about it in celebration.

CNN is under attack from within by the destructive dishonest right, who is trying their utmost to kill it. Who in their right mind could believe they might attract righty viewers at the outlet they call “the Devil” “evil” “communist”..etc? No one. The changes were blatantly obviously intended to ruin and kill the network the right hates with a passion, not improve it.

Here's a measles virus
https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/c/2c/c2c40270-a385-51ca-9e81-e4e7590c0c29/5ab25d6beef47.im
age.jpg

Here's a covid 19 virus
https://static.wixstatic.com/media/b91cef_2cd215ed15f544c4ae7a3a287e8baf1c~mv2.png/v1/fit/w_740%2Ch_296%2Cal_c/file.png

Here's a common flu virus
https://hms.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/assets/News/2015/images/Sep/flu%20micrograph.jpg

---------------
We have a lot
a WHOLE LOT< < < < < < < < < < < < < of experience fighting viruses that are corona types. We KNOW how to make good vaccines for coronaviruses.
---------------

And you're just wrong about being forced to be vaccinated

"It is within the police power of a State to enact a compulsory vaccination law"

AND furthermore
https://casetext.com/case/matter-of-viemeister-v-white
"independently of any specific menace of disease, a regulation excluding unvaccinated children from the public schools is reasonable, valid and constitutional."
"the case also highlighted that claims of vaccines harms, when the majority of scientists disagree, would not be enough to lead the court to overrule the legislature. "

And i'm pretty sure most scientists agree, but even if they didn't, no, it's not just your choice. The fact is, your health affects the people around you. It's not just you looking out or not looking out for your own best interests.


ORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Even if I think you're an asshole and want you to stop spreading your non-fact-based-rhetoric around, if there's one less person who can get sick and spread covid, we're all better off. Don't mistake me. I'd be happier if you shut the fuck up a lot more. But I don't want you to die. It's like talking to my trump 2024 father over here. Get vaccinated already dumbass.


p.s.
Why aren't you concerned about fiscal matters here? It costs the gov more to let someone become hospitalized than a it costs to vaccinate them. Aren't you worried about all that wasted spending?

You mean an editorial opinion piece? Call me when you have something, not when you find a Trumpster who agrees with Trump. I don't have Wall Street Journal account, so I can only read paragraph one.

There's no question in anybody's mind why Trump's unqualified appointee chose now to dismantle the post offices ability to deliver mail, when it's needed most. Any problems the post office has had existed when Trump came into office, some have worsened since (edit:holy shit! They've doubled annual losses under Trump's perfect business acumen, now nearly $9 billion a year loss and skyrocketing!), but they did nothing about it until months before an election ( that is depending on the post office) to make changes, changes that make them less efficient, cost money, and make them incapable of on time delivery (so incapable of handling the election). Not one bit of that is by accident.

The post office cannot raise postage rates without congressional approval, and have other congressionally mandated costs costing them billions ( https://news.nd.edu/news/postal-service-losing-money-because-of-congressional-mandate-not-low-prices-expert-says/) so the letter side of the business is losing money, the package delivery side Trump complains about has mostly paid the bills for a while now, but they still lose millions/billions as a unit, that's why they asked for I think $23 billion to upgrade to be able to meet historic minimum standards and $3 billion to cover extra costs associated with the election, money Trump says are no go because they'll allow fraudulent voting (the first sitting president ever to go to great lengths to ensure the smallest vote count, btw)...but recently said he would sign a bill including that funding for the post office if Democrats agree to billions more in more tax cuts that mostly benefit people like....wait for it....himself (as if the deficit isn't growing fast enough). If he really thought mail in voting was fraudulent, why would he agree to do it for anything? Isn't that selling out democracy?! Aren't you enraged?!?

Sorry @Buttle it seems you fell for some far right bullshit.
This video is apparently three years old.
It also hides the truth of what's happening, this is not some man on the street, he's a public figurehead of white supremacist organisations in the UK, standing in front of what amounts to their headquarters.


From Reddit-
u/kanyeguisada did the work on this three years ago - here's there very level headed account of this.

"So looking into this...
The place being protested was the LD50 gallery in Hackney, London. They and owner Lucia Diego describe themselves as "neo-reactionary" but they are in fact supporting literal fascists and white supremacists and were trying to become the organizing spot in London for such groups to give them legitimacy and attempt to convert white progressives to their cause through the art world:

In the summer, it held a “Neo-reaction conference” which included a talk by Brett Stevens, a white supremacist who has lauded the “bravery” of Anders Breivik - the Norwegian white supremacist who killed 77 people in 2011.

Mr Stevens' writing was said to be an inspiration to Breivik.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ld50-gallery-protest-lucia-diego-donald-trump-alt-right-hackney-dalston-a7596346.html

http://www.eastlondonlines.co.uk/2017/03/video-protesters-gather-outside-dalston-art-gallery-over-controversial-exhibition/

http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/politics/ld50-gallery-anti-fascist-protesters-march-through-dalston-1-4907083

https://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2017/02/25/ld50-gallery-protest-video-anti-fascists-clash-lone-counter-protester/

https://shutdownld50.tumblr.com/

The "free speech protestor" in this video is Daniel/DC Miller, who not only gave his name to the media, but is a public figure apparently widely known in Hackney for his support of LD50 and who holds (and tries to hold) public lectures on literal white-supremacist fascists:

https://www.facebook.com/events/100614430464838/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola

http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/it-ok-to-punch-nazi-art-gallery

http://thebaffler.com/latest/ld50-nolan

Now I'm all for free speech in the US. I think even white supremacists like the KKK have the right to speak their disgusting speech and hold rallies and people thinking otherwise should ask themselves what happens when speech they support suddenly might become considered hate speech. For instance many people on the left who support BDS/sanctions on Israel are often accused of "hate speech" simply for calling Israel an apartheid state. Free speech isn't just something the right cares about.

However, other people have the right to free speech too, and can yell right back at you and of course https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png. The guy in this video wasn't just some guy off the street supporting free speech rights but was actually a supporter of literal far-right white-supremacist fascism and was known to the community before this happened, so maybe hold off on the outrage about how mean the protestors were to him until you get the whole picture."

*fakenews

www.washingtonpost.com/video/editorial/opinion--sean-hannity-wants-to-rewrite-history-on-foxs-coronavirus-coverage-he-cant/2020/04/03/c3f6bce8-9dfc-4c
fb-8299-f78afbc98a81_video.html

Interesting info, but whoever produced the video made some really questionable editorial decisions. Commas separated values over 1000, except for periods used in #1. What's with the "big stuff" in the background? How do the heights of various buildings compared to things like mountains and the size of Halley's comet relate to these mortality figures?

Just... weird. Good video though, in spite of that

I never know how much of these videos are editorialized or opinion. It's so easy to build a false narrative.

I do believe he believes all this to be true, and I do believe that there is a lot of fact all woven together, but it's still based in belief and opinion.
I'd like to see some of these conjectures investigated, though we all know if it's truth, then none of it will ever be proven. And I think that's the whole problem here.

Nutria don't die off every winter, so the weevils are likely to be less of a problem. There was actually a small scale trial before they built the weevil greenhouses, which didn't uncover any major issues with them.

See https://features.texasmonthly.com/editorial/creature-green-lagoon/ for many more details including the lack of frost tolerance:

Still, their campaign faced a significant obstacle: Caddo’s unfortunate latitude. The bug, like the plant it craves, is tropical. Problem is, weevils are felled by frost, while salvinia can stand slightly lower temperatures. This has proven to be Caddo’s curse, said Julie Nachtrieb, a biologist who raises and studies salvinia weevils at the Lewisville Aquatic Ecosystem Research Facility, part of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In places with mild or even nonexistent winters, weevils can be released a few times and then “you can walk away and let nature take its course,” she said. But at Caddo, the weevil populations must be reconstituted every spring, giving salvinia a running start.

@2:03, it looks like Bernie is there backing senator Feinstein in trying to save people's lives, but the ban on the device didn't go through....

And then this is what happened:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorial-cartoon/2017-10-04-editorial-cartoon

But this is what is going to happen:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorial-cartoon/2017-10-04-editorial-cartoon

i can not handle her theatrical tone and heavy editorialization even when i agree with it.

@newtboy
i agree in theory,but disagree in practice.
as i stated in my comment:discernment.

it appears we approach news and journalism differently.

i do not consume the institution,but rather the individual reporter.which is why i will watch a report by shepard smith from FOX,but ignore anything by tucker carlson or bill o'reilly.

the HUGE mistake you make about hedges,is just that,an assumption.

chris hedges mistake.
is the same mistake that other media personalities have made,such as cenk uynger when he was on MSNBC.

hedges criticized power.
in fact,in the run up to the iraq war hedges was pushing out story after story that was highly critical of the bush administration,and..ironically..was using the very intelligence reports that you mentioned.he was challenged by the new york times editorial board to either cease and desist,or face disciplinary action.

he chose to retain his integrity,and honor his father (great story right there,he always chokes up when telling it) and walked away from a successful career,full of adulation and respect,rather than bow at the foot of the kings throne and kiss the feet of the powerful.

the man has guts,in spades,and i admire him very much.

but if you think my opnion is biased,then let us take phil donahue who was hosting the most popular show on the newly founded MSNBC.

he too,was critical of the bush administration and had guests on that were countering the avalanche of white house narratives flooding the cable news networks.

he was fired,while simultaneously hosting the most popular and highest rated shows on MSNBC.

what i am saying,is exactly what hedges is saying:
criticize power and you will be branded,blacklisted and shunned from the "mainstream media".you will be relegated to the fringe for your defiance to power.

/chuckles..i find it interesting that pretty much everybody uses the term "mainstream media" to epitomize:lazy journalism,propaganda,fake news and yet the media THEY choose to consume..well...thats not mainstream at all.the media THEY choose to consume is top notch journalism.

i am not saying my choices are right,but i do choose them carefully.i do not subscribe to institutions but rather individuals who have proven the test of proper journalistic integrity:chris hedges,matt taibbi,bill moyers,henry giroux,laura poitrus,jeremy scahill,amy goodman,paul jay

you may notice that every one of these people are critical of power,and that..my friend..is the basic premise of the fourth estate.

the washington post,along with the new york times and wall street journal have become rags.just my opinion,feel free to disagree.

@asynchronice @Engels
this is opinion that just happens to be on RT.
the opinion is coming from chris hedges,a pulitzer prize winning,war correspondent for 20 years for the NYT.who has been extremely vocal in his criticism of american neoliberal policies.

he also has a show on RT called "on contact".

as always,the answer is discernment,and for that to happen there has to be a basic understanding of what propaganda actually is,and to dismiss hedges analysis simply due to the venue,is intellectually dishonest.

example:
it has been known for years that FOX news is a meme machine,a message of the day producer of misinformation and obfuscation.

does this mean that every story FOX covers is false? or manipulated?

of course not.

conversely,does this mean that every story RT posts should be taken at face value?

again,the same calculus applies.

i find that when RT deals with the russian state,and stories regarding putin,they tend to lean towards state "message of the day",but when they cover stories that are critical of american foreign policy,they tend to source and back their conclusions in a solid journalistic manner.

in regards to the washington post and their latest appeals to power and influence,is just a symptom of a much larger problem.

if you recall back in 2003.when the bush administration was pushing for an invasion of iraq,the washington posts editorial board was possibly the biggest cheerleader.they outshine even the new york times in their desire to please their masters in the white house and pentagon,and because at that time print news still had credibility and washpo was,indeed,considered a beacon of stellar journalism (remember watergate?).they almost single handedly handed the war powers to president bush to execute an illegal war,based on lies.

so in my opinion,the washington post last it's credibility over a decade ago.this is also a main,driving factor why i abandoned corporate news media.

i prefer independent news outlets.the very same outlets that washpo,and their un-sourced propornot,targeted.

lie to me once...shame on you.
lie to me twice..shame on me.

I think it's not so much not being able to tell them apart but not being willing to investigate them beyond their labels. I spend some time in other online communities with people from the US and the sense I get is Clinton is generally seen as corrupt and criminal and Trump as perhaps sexist / racist but a good businessman. I would argue both labels are to some extent misleading and false.

I don't see much discussion that goes beyond those labels. In both cases from the snippets I've seen of US TV and of some online tabloids, that's about as deep as the discussion goes. To really understand the problem with both candidates you need to read good editorial work from more reputable / long form media (weekly publications, newspapers that aren't tabloids) and frankly I think very few have been willing to do that.

Much of it comes down to politics being treated as entertainment and reading long written articles simply isn't entertaining. Unfortunately it's going the same way here in Australia. Everyone is obsessed about opinion polls. We might have short periods of formal election campaigning (unlike the epic US election process), but because of only 3 years between elections for our Prime Minister (and the fact that he or she can and does get replaced within those 3 years by Parliament, unlike the US President), we have constant personal political battles and recrimination rather than deliberation over policy.

I mean right now, we have a prime minister (Turnbull, re-elected earlier this year), who unseated a previously elected prime minister (Abbott, in the previous term) by a vote of no confidence. Abbott himself (several parliamentary terms before) had successfully unseated Turnbull as minority leader (when another party held the prime minister-ship). Now there are rumors that Abbott wants to challenge Turnbull. And that's just one of our political parties.