Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

WestCanMan

Members
  • Content Count

    5,613
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

WestCanMan last won the day on January 15

WestCanMan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,024 Excellent

About WestCanMan

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

4,756 profile views
  1. For starters, it's completely inflammatory and one-sided. The title itself says 'lists manner of death as homicide'. FYI the fact that it was ruled homicide is not title-worthy. Everyone on earth knew that the cause of death was gunshot wounds, but to the layman, the use of the word homicide proves "legally, the crime of murder was committed". An autopsy doesn't conclude that the police used unjustified force. It determines if he died from a human cause or if he just coincidentally had a stroke and died before he was shot and bled out. There are a lot of important points that a
  2. Irrefutable proof of the fact that the bodycam footage was actually a lot more exculpatory than the MSM wanted to admit is the fact that after it came out, the riots vanished. CNN tried to selectively edit what their viewers saw and downplay it, but the dang internet let the unabridged truth out. It was just June 18th when Kamala Harris gushed that the riots would last until after the election, even after the new year. August 4th the footage came out and the riots fizzled to nothing almost immediately. Why didn't the Dems release that footage earlier to spare America all of the
  3. Oh BS. You can’t refute a single thing I said so you’re using one blatant lie as a catch-all. The comment about Brooks is 100% true, and the video of it is even posted on this forum. You lose, as usual. And FYI, the CTV comment was just a single example of the MSM’s false coverage. I promise you that you cannot find an accurate and honest account of the Brooks story anywhere on the MSM, period. I challenge you to find that anywhere Buber. CTV, CBC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR..... It was widely reported on and talked about for days. This should be
  4. That's an absolute lie. She 'can't name a year' (or doesn't want to because it makes her story easier to disprove), she can't say where it happened (same reason), she pretended to have witnesses but she doesn't, she never talked to the cops or a counsellor or a teacher or her friends or anyone one earth but theoretically it was 'traumatic', she pretended to have claustrophobia as a result of the incident but she lived her life like she did, she pretended not to know that the GOP offered to bring her a polygraph but even I knew that they had and I live on the opposite side of the continent
  5. It wasn't a reply to reefer, it was to MH. This link will take you there though. Feel free to try and make the case that CNN didn't blatantly lie about any one of those stories. And there are more. Plenty more. CNN's coverage of almost 100% of the main stories that have been in the news in the past 6 years has been mostly lies and propaganda. They literally can't cover a story without being deceptive and slimy.
  6. Blah, blah, blah. Either tell me why inferring that Trump was a likely motivation for the incident or admit that CNN was lying, as usual.
  7. I told you that CNN tried to infer that "Trump's anti-Semitism" was the most obvious reason for the violence. That was patently stupid, Trump's pro-Israel record and family offer concrete proof that he isn't guilty of anti-Semitism or of supporting it.
  8. C'mon MAAAANNNN! It's time to congratulate Joe Biden, Lance Armstrong, Marion Jones, and Ben Johnson on their victories.
  9. A certain lie was told about how the MSM's (ie CNN and their fellow alt-left dolts) atrocious reporting over the last 4 years was somehow vindicated recently, and I proved that was not the case at all by mentioning a litany of stories that CNN had lied about. I gave you ~ 15 of their narratives to choose from. Now the onus is on the resident alt-leftists here to discredit my post or it stands as a statement of fact. You've had days now. And FYI just saying that "The guy at CNN who said it was just a total idiot, and that's how he honestly felt" falls way short of the mark. There are
  10. All you have to do is prove that one of their stories wasn't a huge lie. Just pick one, and I'll tell you how they lied about it.
  11. It was blatantly idiotic disinformation, like I said many times before, and you only asked for one Buber so don't act like I didn't meet your quota. There are plenty more, and I gave you guys almost 15 stories to choose from so that you could pick your own example of when CNN didn't lie. This should be the easiest thing on earth, right? Just pick one of the 15 topics and act like CNN didn't just lie about it...
  12. 1) Rioting, looting, arson, treason, sedition, attacking police, assassination-style murders of police, and murdering innocent civilians just went out of style on January 6th Boges. Didn't you get the memo? You're literally the only person on earth who didn't. Maybe you need to get a TV or the internet or something hey? You don't wanna be so completely in the dark, it's bizarre. 2) FYI, CNN is pretending to hate sedition now, but they just attempted to legitimize America's poster boy for sedition by acting like he's the kind of guy whose opinions and observations matter (they also go
  13. No, you've simply applied your false narrative to them.
  14. TBH I don't know if Garland is '9th circuit crazy' or just a run of the mill leftist with no regard for the constitution. I never heard any major accusations against him. There's a really good chance that he would have been confirmed if the country wasn't so divided, it wasn't so late in 2016, and if it wasn't Scalia's spot up for grabs.
×
×
  • Create New...