CBS lied abouT Rittenhouse crossing state line armed...

[metis]

I look at the Wall Street Journal, hardly a far left outlet because they score high in accuracy and provide an alternate view of events from a business viewpoint. "The Hill" also is center right and high in accuracy.

Fox's reality is illustrated by them requiring vaccinations for employees while their commentators say the opposite.

The irony with the WSJ is that it still does a good job in objectively reporting the news but its editorial board tends to reflect much of what you hear on Fox.

 

[sun rise]

The irony with the WSJ is that it still does a good job in objectively reporting the news but its editorial board tends to reflect much of what you hear on Fox.

I don't expect a right wing publication to have a left wing editorial board. But I'm beyond tired of propaganda pretending to be news from slandering war heros such as Max Cleland through Obama's birth certificate to lies about Biden's mental capacity - the "big lie" continues. And now we have naked attempts to subvert American democracy and institute a vote "counting" procedure that comes from dictator's playbooks.

 

[ecco]

Because I am also aware that courts are the best determiners of Justice, not opinions of internet denizens.

I agree the courts are better than the internet. That doesn't mean the courts always get it right. Juror bias is just as great as the bias of internet denizens.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I’m aware of that and that guilty people are also not convicted. Which isn’t relevant. Because I am also aware that courts are the best determiners of Justice, not opinions of internet denizens. Something you seem to overlook.

... says the internet denizen.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I agree the courts are better than the internet. That doesn't mean the courts always get it right. Juror bias is just as great as the bias of internet denizens.

And jurors look at a different standard, anyway.

If all of them thought he was most likely guilty but couldn't say this with absolute certainty, that gets a "not guilty" verdict.

@Shaul would have us believe that this jury all decided that Rittenhouse did nothing wrong. Unless he was in that deliberation room, he's talking out of his butt.

Courts don't declare people "innocent," despite the narrative @Shaul is selling. The jury only answered one question: considering only the evidence and arguments presented in this courtroom, is it clear beyond a reasonable doubt that Rittenhouse was guilty of the specific crimes for which he was charged? Yes or no.

Inferring the answers to other questions from this verdict (e.g. that Rittenhouse is innocent of the crimes he was charged with, or that he has no moral culpability for what he did) is unjustified.