IMO, nobody really is in the corner of CNN except for the fact that the R gets 90% of its news from FOX that is COMPLETELY corrupt yet R run around with their hair on fire over CNN.
If you are all about legit reporting you should be bashing FOX even MORE than CNN.. why does FOX get the pass? You go after CNN because it's left slanted not because its fake.. FOX is more BS than these "lefty" issues you keep going on about.

This post was edited by theCrossbones on Feb 17 2020 07:32pm

cnn (among many other media outlets; they’re not the only culpable news group) started putting a glorified ambulance chaser front and center as a ‘serious’ means to “take down” the President, with little-to-zero vetting of said individual, Avenatti.

Avenatti ended up being ‘known’ for his two main clients during this time: someone who tried to profit off of claiming to be a homewrecker and violated an NDA requiring her only to buzz off and go away for money (Stormy), and someone who claimed to have attended multiple “gang-rape” parties, yet kept attending them over the course of many months without reporting said accused crimes, supposedly hosted by underaged teenagers when she was an adult (Swetnick)

most people would at the least raise a skeptical eyebrow but the media was too busy trying to “get drumpf” and avenatti’s tall tales were all too useful at the time

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-12/the-u-s-government-s-china-crackdown-comes-to-harvard?fbclid=IwAR1IMwCdRn7T1-tei2CQ1eSA6GQf9bvWbQeZrjW-VJ-49VNzFLCFgNq5EHA


WH eroding the value of facts.. who's right youtubers?
lol

No offense, but I would take all anti-Trump stories reported by bloomberg.com with a barrel of salt while Michael Bloomberg himself is running to oust Trump.

no offense, but your deflection attempts are getting lazier and worse. those are easily verifiable facts that other outlets also reported about, 20 seconds on google could have told you that - but you just can't help your hacky self and have to suggest that it might be "fake news" because someone chose to link a "bloomberg" source? pathetic.

https://www.npr.org/2020/01/28/800442646/acclaimed-harvard-scientist-is-arrested-accused-of-lying-about-ties-to-china
https://www.nae.edu/?id=224584

there you go, wanna give it another shot, or are you already out of ammo?

Sounds more like an anti-LIEBER article to me. I don't think we've yet reached the point where we start accusing the US govt., of "questionable behavior" because it seeks to uphold/enforce it's own laws.

It's entirely possible that the defense team ran out of strikes. They're limited to 3 peremptory challenges: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1870

If you can substantiate bias you can remove jurors without using a strike

Insinuate is not substantiate. That sounds like it could be a pretty high hurdle.

People can say lots of dumb shit on social media and then act very differently when theres consequences.

If they had good reason they had tools at their disposal to remove her is my point.