The Ultimate Test of YOUR Trusted Media

I know there's already a Kyle Rittenhouse thread, but this one is about how your dishonest media has covered it, start to finish.

If you've watched any of the trial or have seen the key highlights, then you know this is clearly a legitimate case of self defense. (If you disagree, please explain)

The true measure of your source's integrity and honesty would be to simply look back at their coverage of the days following the riot and shootings and then look at their coverage after the verdict has been made. What was the narrative they wanted you to believe? Maybe they were honest and wanted to wait to see all the evidence before pushing their company narrative. Or, more likely, they told you Rittenhouse was a white supremacist or a dangerous Trump supporting vigilante that went to the riot so he could kill people.

If you want to convince me or anyone else that you have trustworthy sources, please post one or more that actually used journalistic integrity when reporting this story. I haven't searched for all the usual dishonest suspects, but I will be SHOCKED if you can find one that did not convict this young man from the start.

Agree. It used to be politicians hired spin doctors to limit damage from bad decisions. Now the press puts spin on evidence presented.

Not only that, they taint future juries the second they start making judgements before a court trial. They could at least have the decency to not call him a white supremacist, or domestic terrorist, or Trump loving racist… just report the damn facts for once and give EVERY American the presumption of innocence, not just for those on your side!

Oh yeah, how would you like to be one of those jurors, knowing that a not guilty verdict would be a potential risk to your health. He took out a couple worthless communists (my opinion) in a sea of violent communists. We’ve seen the damage these animals can do to a city… how about 12 jurors?

Normally I am not a fan of televised trials but since the press has become so partisan and twisting the words of the people in the courthouse, I now think they need to be videotaped.

Hard to believe Rittenhouse was put on the stand, but sounds like he did well even though the prosecutor is an inept Douchebag. I wonder how much damage the leftist hoards will inflict on that town after a not-guilty verdict ?

The left is busy attacking the judge. This is a gem.


www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/judge-in-kyle-...AQBk3c?ocid=msedgntp

""It harms our community and puts us in the crosshairs of micro aggressions as well as actual physical violence," said John Yang, president and executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC.

Yang said it's clear the judge doesn't have cultural sensitivity. His remarks were meant to denigrate or minimize Asian Americans and "any Asian American that sees or hears his statement will understand that he is making fun of or mocking our community."

"This is a great illustration of how Asian Americans are not immune from racial bias and discrimination in our criminal justice system," Yang said.

Since it appears that the prosecution has screwed the pooch the left has to go after the judge to discredit the trial and have the verdict thrown out.

Today we have another great way to weed out the good from the bad sources. Try to find the Durham probe that shows Hillary's campaign spied on Trump and created the whole Russia collusion narrative.

The truth matters, even if you cover your ears and eyes because you don't want to admit it.

Great point. The liberal press refuses to even rebut the Hillary Clinton Durham story. They want it to fade away. Same with the BLM supporter who targeted a Christmas parade.