US Politics Thread

[Kieran]

Can’t debate with these people

I wonder why so many people are like this in America, but then we see that the vast majority of tutors in American uni are far left. They don’t teach critical thinking..

 

[Kieran]

This is funny and there’s people who won’t understand why, because they live in that victim bubble where being black is the ultimate victim:

 

[Kieran]

She’s great!

That’s the best breakdown of the problem I’ve seen in a long, long time…

 

[Federberg]

This is funny and there’s people who won’t understand why, because they live in that victim bubble where being black is the ultimate victim:

there are some utterly retarded people out there!

As an aside, I've seen a number of people try to impugn the one holdout juror because he had been arrested in his past. But this was investigated during voire dire and both legal sides accepted him into the jury. As far as I'm aware this guy was arrested yes, but not convicted of anything. But the arrest related to domestic violence I think. So here's the point, the guy was accused of something, nothing came of it, but now Clancy supporters want to use that to invalidate the guy's right to be a juror. When media or idiots on the inter-web try to make out that false accusations aren't a big deal, this is the refutation. If you're accused but you're not convicted then miss me with bringing up shite about whatever issue relates to the accusation. It's just like with Zverev. I saw a post from John Wertheim who I generally like, complaining that Zverev didn't address his "past issues" after his win. Why the fuck did he need to? He was convicted of nothing, but you want him to carry around the stink of the accusation for the rest of his life?? Nah... This is why false accusers need to be dealt with. These folks are trying to have their cake and eat it, and it pisses me off

 

[Kieran]

there are some utterly retarded people out there!

As an aside, I've seen a number of people try to impugn the one holdout juror because he had been arrested in his past. But this was investigated during voire dire and both legal sides accepted him into the jury. As far as I'm aware this guy was arrested yes, but not convicted of anything. But the arrest related to domestic violence I think. So here's the point, the guy was accused of something, nothing came of it, but now Clancy supporters want to use that to invalidate the guy's right to be a juror. When media or idiots on the inter-web try to make out that false accusations aren't a big deal, this is the refutation. If you're accused but you're not convicted then miss me with bringing up shite about whatever issue relates to the accusation. It's just like with Zverev. I saw a post from John Wertheim who I generally like, complaining that Zverev didn't address his "past issues" after his win. Why the fuck did he need to? He was convicted of nothing, but you want him to carry around the stink of the accusation for the rest of his life?? Nah... This is why false accusers need to be dealt with. These folks are trying to have their cake and eat it, and it pisses me off

Yeah, black men kill more black men America than anyone else does - and it’s racist to point this out. Black bloke gets accused but not convicted - and suddenly he’s still guilty?

That’s a lynch mob mentality. Did NBC similarly dig into the past of all the other jurors? Highly unlikely…

 

[Kieran]

This woman nails something fundamentally important for the West to understand:

105K views · 4.6K reactions | Still wondering why the West has become obsessed with Palestine? Watch this powerful clip from @daliaziada speaking in Washington D.C. recently. Help us ring the alarm bell on this by following our page @isgapinternati

Still wondering why the West has become obsessed with Palestine? Watch this powerful clip from @daliaziada speaking in Washington D.C. recently. Help us ring the alarm bell on this by following...

www.facebook.com

 

[Federberg]