StarOcean said:
Funnily enough, besides his lack of care for the environment and inability to pick competent people, I don’t necessarily disagree with most of what he’s doing. You only see my mocking the right. Trust me, some of my biggest political gripes come from the white-knighting left *cough*culturalappropriationisfuckingstupid*cough* So you believe in your heart of hearts that Trump is 100% innocent? Just because most people hate him, and it is most people, doesn’t negate that he’s a shady af guy. We’ve known for years he’s got his hands deep in shit like the mafia, hell that’s why Australia denied him property in the past. There’s nothing innocent about him. Yeah, that worked out well for Nixon |
Do I think he's innocent of the russia allegations and anything related to it? Yep. I think it's a flaky attempt at getting rid of him. They need actual evidence to prove their claims. Do I think he's innocent in nature? Hell no. I think he's an asshole and arrogant to no end. People didn't elect him because he's a nice person though.
Torillian said:
Other than the use of anonymous sources how would you suggest we get news that those in power don't want us to hear about? You think Trump would just tell us if this were the case or that someone from his administration needs to sacrifice their job everytime we learn something about this administration so that we can know the name of who is saying it? |
How about they show evidence or actual witnesses so we can verify the tales they tell. They obliterated their credibility awhile back. It would go a long way towards to rebuilding the people's trust in the news and actually damaging trump. Otherwise, most of everything they report is considered bullshit and only legitimises his claims about fake news. They have to show their sources or no one is gonna believe them.
Several news groups have been caught lying, falsifying news stories, endless biased versions of events and not confirming what their "sources" tell them before reporting a story.








