Another absolutely perfect example of the BIASED MSM!!!!

[candycorn]

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Journalism is very simple, they report the who, what, when and where, then leave it to the consumer to determine the why. When they try to tell us why, they leave the realm of journalism and enter one of the commentator. That's not their job.

Advocacy journalism is part of journalism. Look it up.

Not when it's portrayed as just news the way most are doing it today. An individual has an ethical obligation to make the advocacy clear up front, not pretend they're being objective.

Does a poster on a message board have an ethical obligation to research something before posting it? Or do ethics depend on the size of the audience?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

 

[bripat9643]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Is undocumented a poor description, or just not one that fits your own bias?

It fits your biases, douche bag. Illegals are illegals. The term is perfectly accurate.

 

[OKTexas]

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Journalism is very simple, they report the who, what, when and where, then leave it to the consumer to determine the why. When they try to tell us why, they leave the realm of journalism and enter one of the commentator. That's not their job.

Advocacy journalism is part of journalism. Look it up.

Not when it's portrayed as just news the way most are doing it today. An individual has an ethical obligation to make the advocacy clear up front, not pretend they're being objective.

Does a poster on a message board have an ethical obligation to research something before posting it? Or do ethics depend on the size of the audience?

Funny, I don't see any links in your post.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Journalism is very simple, they report the who, what, when and where, then leave it to the consumer to determine the why. When they try to tell us why, they leave the realm of journalism and enter one of the commentator. That's not their job.

Advocacy journalism is part of journalism. Look it up.

Not when it's portrayed as just news the way most are doing it today. An individual has an ethical obligation to make the advocacy clear up front, not pretend they're being objective.

So why don't you condemn Foxnews?

 

[OKTexas]

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Journalism is very simple, they report the who, what, when and where, then leave it to the consumer to determine the why. When they try to tell us why, they leave the realm of journalism and enter one of the commentator. That's not their job.

Advocacy journalism is part of journalism. Look it up.

Not when it's portrayed as just news the way most are doing it today. An individual has an ethical obligation to make the advocacy clear up front, not pretend they're being objective.

So why don't you condemn Foxnews?

What makes you think I don't? They have lapses just like all the rest.

 

[EverCurious]

"We all rely heavily upon the media to give us the facts without bias, but the media abuse that power entrusted to them; twisting the facts so as to elicit the highest ratings, sowing the seeds of hatred and discord across our great nation, and selfishly reaping their fields of 'green' with no remorse for the painful division they leave in their wake. Like ravenous swarms of locus, the propaganda machines are decimating the very idea of compromise."

 

[healthmyths]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Healthmyths, you leave out where to look for 'real news' or 'unbiased news'. Where do you go to learn news "fully, accurately and fairly"? I have often cited headlined links here that the attached reports belie, so that the headline implies one thing and the following article states the opposite. So there is at least one more person who challenges implied news reports from all sources, and I suspect most others are discerning too. You appear to think of yourself as the only one. Please also allow me to point out that it was no media, but Trump himself, that spoke clearly 'anti-immigrant-ese' (and not legal or illegal) when he told a cheering mob of Americans that an Indiana judge couldn't be fair towards him because his parents came from Mexico...land of rapists and murderers.

Then prove to me the exact words Trump said!
Where is your link?
BECAUSE HERE IS EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID!!!! Prove me wrong!
Here are excerpts from his past statements.

Rally in Bentonville, Ark., Feb. 27, 2016
Donald Trump: “We have a very hostile judge because, to be honest with you, the judge should’ve thrown the case out on summary judgement. But because it was me and because there’s a hostility toward me by the judge, tremendous hostility, beyond belief. I believe he happens to be Spanish, which is fine. He is Hispanic, which is fine. And we haven't asked for recusal, which we may do. But we have a judge who is very hostile. Should’ve been thrown out. Wasn’t thrown out.”
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2016/06/11/what-trump-has-said-judge-curiel/85641242/

AGAIN I've shown you my proof. WHERE IS YOURS?

 

[bullwinkle]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Healthmyths, you leave out where to look for 'real news' or 'unbiased news'. Where do you go to learn news "fully, accurately and fairly"? I have often cited headlined links here that the attached reports belie, so that the headline implies one thing and the following article states the opposite. So there is at least one more person who challenges implied news reports from all sources, and I suspect most others are discerning too. You appear to think of yourself as the only one. Please also allow me to point out that it was no media, but Trump himself, that spoke clearly 'anti-immigrant-ese' (and not legal or illegal) when he told a cheering mob of Americans that an Indiana judge couldn't be fair towards him because his parents came from Mexico...land of rapists and murderers.

Then prove to me the exact words Trump said!
Where is your link?
BECAUSE HERE IS EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID!!!! Prove me wrong!
Here are excerpts from his past statements.

Rally in Bentonville, Ark., Feb. 27, 2016
Donald Trump: “We have a very hostile judge because, to be honest with you, the judge should’ve thrown the case out on summary judgement. But because it was me and because there’s a hostility toward me by the judge, tremendous hostility, beyond belief. I believe he happens to be Spanish, which is fine. He is Hispanic, which is fine. And we haven't asked for recusal, which we may do. But we have a judge who is very hostile. Should’ve been thrown out. Wasn’t thrown out.”
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2016/06/11/what-trump-has-said-judge-curiel/85641242/

AGAIN I've shown you my proof. WHERE IS YOURS?

Trump's racially tinged attacks on judge alarm legal experts

 

[healthmyths]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

You can probably expect responses using a technique I call "isolation".

What they will do is completely ignore the fact that this story is just a drop in the ocean of examples of media bias. They'll single this one story out, isolate it, mock it, minimize it, deny it -- which is their attempt to minimize the whole "biased media" meme down to an inconsequential pebble.

Watch.
.

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Do we all remember when the left, here, there, and everywhere, denied the fact that the MSM was biased. In fact, both they and the MSM denied it, claimed we were overly sensitive, etc.

People ask-------->why is the country so divided. Hellllloooooo! When you have the media leaning so far one way for so long, once new media comes online as it has, it must lean as far right as possible to prove it is not MSM. Therefore, what you have is the left listening to fabrications their guys create, and the right following suit in the opposite direction.

To the people on the left--------------> I am sure you realize that YOUR guys, the MSM; has now gotten caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar with the WIKI releases. What this means is----------->none of these sources for any reason are now credible. Doesn't mean they aren't ever telling the truth, but rather, they have an ax to grind so can be ignored. It is kinda like those e-mails that proved climate people were cooking the books. You can't get passed their duplicity with regular people. Doesn't mean they are now not telling the truth, but they can't be trusted any longer for accuracy, since they to have an ax to grind.

This is what happens when those we look to are caught being crooked. Do not blame the right for this at all! Even you people could see how ridiculous it was, and instead of demanding accuracy, you went along because it was in your favor. Well, good luck now convincing anybody but like minded individuals with MSM, or lefty links, of anything that does not think like you! Anything you bring to the forefront with their links as proof can now be pushed aside, and that is sad. Again, you helped do it to yourselves, so don't expect us to feel sorry for you.

I want to know what UNBIASED news sources all you sanctimonious conservatives are using that you feel give you the standing to criticize where liberals get their news.

Can you do that for me? Or admit that you all just patronize rightwing biased media, which makes you just the other side of the same coin.

Can you?

Unlike you I guess I don't just get NEWS from one source. But more importantly I then do a little more research based on the EXPERIENCE
that the MSM has presented BIASED NEWS.
Fortunately for me I had several courses in college in journalism and one of them was called "Backgrounding the News" meaning looking a little deeper
then just the headlines.
See that's the problem with many people and possibly you. You take the "headlines" Trump anti-immigrant" and make it sound like the rule.
Thus you form an opinion. Unlike me with my experiences I doubt the headlines and dig deeper and for instance TRUMP is married to a LEGAL immigrant".
My personal experience is my "legal" immigrant daughter-in-law both of whom followed the laws of America and became citizens.
So I and millions like me find the MSM bias when they declare Trump Anti-immigrant as that makes ME also "anti-immigrant" which is so far from the
truth!

----------------------

You're just a loser who happened to guess right on Trump:

Tell us what independent corroboration did you did before posting this shit?

The CLINTON Body-Count

OK... let's take a look at the most famous "suicide" around the Clintons!!!
Vincent Foster
Deputy White House Counsel
Died: July 20, 1993
Found dead in Ft. Marcy Park in Washington, DC, of a supposed suicide by gunshot.
A suicide note was supposedly found a few days later, torn into several pieces, in his briefcase, after his office had been entered by White House staff and materials removed.
The "suicide" note, (leaked despite official efforts to keep it from view) has since been revealed to be a forgery. [Forgery]

The gun which he supposedly used to kill himself was reported to be still in his hand, but the person who first found the body reports that there was no gun at that time.
Many irregularities surround the death and the investigation of it.
For one thing, neither Foster's fingerprints or blood were on the gun he supposedly inserted into his mouth and fired.
There was no blood on Foster's hands.

Foster was also from Hope, Ark., like Clinton, and also worked for the Rose Law firm. Foster had intimate knowledge of the Clintons' personal finances. Foster was involved in an investigation of their finances, and reportedly made a phone call to Hillary Clinton, in Los Angeles, just hours before his death. Foster had been called to testify to Congress about the records Hillary refused to turn over. Another possible motive for the murder relates to the Clinton Presidential Blind Trust, being prepared by Foster, but six months late. Testimony during the Whitewater hearings suggests the trust was fraudulent, with the Clintons retaining control over much of their finances, in order to profits from inside information.

Recently, the signed report of M.E. Dr. Donald Haut was uncovered at the National Archives, proving that Foster had a previously unreported gunshot wound to his neck.

Finally, an FBI memo surfaced dated the day after the date of the official autopsy, in which the pathologist informed the FBI that there was NO exit wound.

 

[healthmyths]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Healthmyths, you leave out where to look for 'real news' or 'unbiased news'. Where do you go to learn news "fully, accurately and fairly"? I have often cited headlined links here that the attached reports belie, so that the headline implies one thing and the following article states the opposite. So there is at least one more person who challenges implied news reports from all sources, and I suspect most others are discerning too. You appear to think of yourself as the only one. Please also allow me to point out that it was no media, but Trump himself, that spoke clearly 'anti-immigrant-ese' (and not legal or illegal) when he told a cheering mob of Americans that an Indiana judge couldn't be fair towards him because his parents came from Mexico...land of rapists and murderers.

Then prove to me the exact words Trump said!
Where is your link?
BECAUSE HERE IS EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID!!!! Prove me wrong!
Here are excerpts from his past statements.

Rally in Bentonville, Ark., Feb. 27, 2016
Donald Trump: “We have a very hostile judge because, to be honest with you, the judge should’ve thrown the case out on summary judgement. But because it was me and because there’s a hostility toward me by the judge, tremendous hostility, beyond belief. I believe he happens to be Spanish, which is fine. He is Hispanic, which is fine. And we haven't asked for recusal, which we may do. But we have a judge who is very hostile. Should’ve been thrown out. Wasn’t thrown out.”
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2016/06/11/what-trump-has-said-judge-curiel/85641242/

AGAIN I've shown you my proof. WHERE IS YOURS?

Trump's racially tinged attacks on judge alarm legal experts

Did you READ the article???


Trump statements.... where is he anti-immigrant, accuses all illegals of being drug dealers etc, in ANY of these comments???

"I have a judge who is a hater of Donald Trump, a hater. He's a hater," Trump said at a campaign rally in San Diego, adding that he believed the Indiana-born judge was "Mexican." Did he say anything about Trump himself HATING Mexicans? Or this Judge???

"I think it has to do with perhaps the fact that I'm very, very strong on the border," Trump said then. "Now, he is Hispanic, I believe. He is a very hostile judge to me."
Trump returned to ethnicity at last week's San Diego rally, where he erroneously suggested Curiel was from Mexico: "The judge, who happens to be, we believe, Mexican, which is great. I think that's fine. You know what? I think the Mexicans are going to end up loving Donald Trump when I give all these jobs, OK?"

ONCE again you are proving that taking statements and twisting them to fit your means is exactly what the MSM does.

Tell me in any of the above statements where any of them prove Trump is a racist. Hates Mexicans. Hates immigrants?

Prove it!

 

[candycorn]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

You can probably expect responses using a technique I call "isolation".

What they will do is completely ignore the fact that this story is just a drop in the ocean of examples of media bias. They'll single this one story out, isolate it, mock it, minimize it, deny it -- which is their attempt to minimize the whole "biased media" meme down to an inconsequential pebble.

Watch.
.

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Do we all remember when the left, here, there, and everywhere, denied the fact that the MSM was biased. In fact, both they and the MSM denied it, claimed we were overly sensitive, etc.

People ask-------->why is the country so divided. Hellllloooooo! When you have the media leaning so far one way for so long, once new media comes online as it has, it must lean as far right as possible to prove it is not MSM. Therefore, what you have is the left listening to fabrications their guys create, and the right following suit in the opposite direction.

To the people on the left--------------> I am sure you realize that YOUR guys, the MSM; has now gotten caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar with the WIKI releases. What this means is----------->none of these sources for any reason are now credible. Doesn't mean they aren't ever telling the truth, but rather, they have an ax to grind so can be ignored. It is kinda like those e-mails that proved climate people were cooking the books. You can't get passed their duplicity with regular people. Doesn't mean they are now not telling the truth, but they can't be trusted any longer for accuracy, since they to have an ax to grind.

This is what happens when those we look to are caught being crooked. Do not blame the right for this at all! Even you people could see how ridiculous it was, and instead of demanding accuracy, you went along because it was in your favor. Well, good luck now convincing anybody but like minded individuals with MSM, or lefty links, of anything that does not think like you! Anything you bring to the forefront with their links as proof can now be pushed aside, and that is sad. Again, you helped do it to yourselves, so don't expect us to feel sorry for you.

I want to know what UNBIASED news sources all you sanctimonious conservatives are using that you feel give you the standing to criticize where liberals get their news.

Can you do that for me? Or admit that you all just patronize rightwing biased media, which makes you just the other side of the same coin.

Can you?

Unlike you I guess I don't just get NEWS from one source. But more importantly I then do a little more research based on the EXPERIENCE
that the MSM has presented BIASED NEWS.
Fortunately for me I had several courses in college in journalism and one of them was called "Backgrounding the News" meaning looking a little deeper
then just the headlines.
See that's the problem with many people and possibly you. You take the "headlines" Trump anti-immigrant" and make it sound like the rule.
Thus you form an opinion. Unlike me with my experiences I doubt the headlines and dig deeper and for instance TRUMP is married to a LEGAL immigrant".
My personal experience is my "legal" immigrant daughter-in-law both of whom followed the laws of America and became citizens.
So I and millions like me find the MSM bias when they declare Trump Anti-immigrant as that makes ME also "anti-immigrant" which is so far from the
truth!

----------------------

You're just a loser who happened to guess right on Trump:

Tell us what independent corroboration did you did before posting this shit?

The CLINTON Body-Count

OK... let's take a look at the most famous "suicide" around the Clintons!!!
Vincent Foster
Deputy White House Counsel
Died: July 20, 1993
Found dead in Ft. Marcy Park in Washington, DC, of a supposed suicide by gunshot.
A suicide note was supposedly found a few days later, torn into several pieces, in his briefcase, after his office had been entered by White House staff and materials removed.
The "suicide" note, (leaked despite official efforts to keep it from view) has since been revealed to be a forgery. [Forgery]

The gun which he supposedly used to kill himself was reported to be still in his hand, but the person who first found the body reports that there was no gun at that time.
Many irregularities surround the death and the investigation of it.
For one thing, neither Foster's fingerprints or blood were on the gun he supposedly inserted into his mouth and fired.
There was no blood on Foster's hands.

Foster was also from Hope, Ark., like Clinton, and also worked for the Rose Law firm. Foster had intimate knowledge of the Clintons' personal finances. Foster was involved in an investigation of their finances, and reportedly made a phone call to Hillary Clinton, in Los Angeles, just hours before his death. Foster had been called to testify to Congress about the records Hillary refused to turn over. Another possible motive for the murder relates to the Clinton Presidential Blind Trust, being prepared by Foster, but six months late. Testimony during the Whitewater hearings suggests the trust was fraudulent, with the Clintons retaining control over much of their finances, in order to profits from inside information.

Recently, the signed report of M.E. Dr. Donald Haut was uncovered at the National Archives, proving that Foster had a previously unreported gunshot wound to his neck.

Finally, an FBI memo surfaced dated the day after the date of the official autopsy, in which the pathologist informed the FBI that there was NO exit wound.

So we can believe the cops who investigated the suicide or a dumbfuck on the internet named "healthmyths"?

you lose.

 

[Mac1958]

"We all rely heavily upon the media to give us the facts without bias, but the media abuse that power entrusted to them; twisting the facts so as to elicit the highest ratings, sowing the seeds of hatred and discord across our great nation, and selfishly reaping their fields of 'green' with no remorse for the painful division they leave in their wake."

Yep.

The biggest factor in this has been the advent of the 24-hour news cycle and the internet. The biases of those who work in the profession have been amplified by a factor of about ten thousand.
.