The Fourth Estate

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby uscbucsfan » Tue May 29, 2018 4:57 pm

PrimeMinister wrote:What non mainstream news sources do you all use?

allsides.com mostly.
Image
User avatar
uscbucsfan
 
Posts: 4371
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:21 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 118 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Zarniwoop » Tue May 29, 2018 5:03 pm

PrimeMinister wrote:What non mainstream news sources do you all use?



Here are the sites I use most.

Daily Stuff:
Wall Street Journal
Bloomberg


Longer form stuff:
Reason.com
Cato.org
Personalliberty.com


Podcasts:
Joe Rogan
Dave Rubin
Ron Paul liberty report
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5428
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 247 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby WalterGronkite » Tue May 29, 2018 5:58 pm

I would strongly urge some people to listen to Scott Adams...

Very smart man
WalterGronkite
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2016 4:15 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Caradoc » Thu May 31, 2018 7:16 am

I'd like to talk about Tommy Robinson, but I can't
Caradoc
 
Posts: 4136
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:30 pm
Has thanked: 204 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Thu May 31, 2018 8:11 am

Caradoc wrote:I'd like to talk about Tommy Robinson, but I can't

Yes you can.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Caradoc » Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:55 pm

:roll:
Caradoc
 
Posts: 4136
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:30 pm
Has thanked: 204 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Fri Jun 01, 2018 3:09 pm

Caradoc wrote::roll:

Do you understand why the media wasn't allowed to report on it?
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Caradoc » Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:53 pm

deltbucs wrote:
Caradoc wrote::roll:

Do you understand why the media wasn't allowed to report on it?



Report on which? The rape gang trials, or the arrest of the man who tried to cover them? The two are different issues.
Caradoc
 
Posts: 4136
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:30 pm
Has thanked: 204 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby bucfanclw » Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:08 pm

Caradoc wrote:
deltbucs wrote:Do you understand why the media wasn't allowed to report on it?



Report on which? The rape gang trials, or the arrest of the man who tried to illegally film and broadcast them? The two are different issues.

Fixed.
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 3655
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 156 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Caradoc » Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:55 pm

WOW. I figure this would be a pretty universal thing here. Surprised to see so much love for Big Brother. Guess some people never saw a censor they didn't like. "Illegally covering" means coverage which would be legal here, so it's not a moral thing. And considering how much the British government has been sweeping that particular issue under the rug, I'd argue a moral imperative to cover it.
.
But even if you think he did something deservedly illegal and his arrest was appropriate, making it illegal to talk about his arrest is straight out of 1984.
Caradoc
 
Posts: 4136
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:30 pm
Has thanked: 204 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:29 pm

Caradoc wrote:WOW. I figure this would be a pretty universal thing here. Surprised to see so much love for Big Brother. Guess some people never saw a censor they didn't like. "Illegally covering" means coverage which would be legal here, so it's not a moral thing. And considering how much the British government has been sweeping that particular issue under the rug, I'd argue a moral imperative to cover it.
.
But even if you think he did something deservedly illegal and his arrest was appropriate, making it illegal to talk about his arrest is straight out of 1984.

So you're throwing this hissy fit because they have different laws in the UK and you dont like them?
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Sat Jun 02, 2018 10:35 am

Ah yes... I love flying straw.

Image
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 883 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Sat Jun 02, 2018 5:35 pm

deltbucs wrote:
Caradoc wrote:WOW. I figure this would be a pretty universal thing here. Surprised to see so much love for Big Brother. Guess some people never saw a censor they didn't like. "Illegally covering" means coverage which would be legal here, so it's not a moral thing. And considering how much the British government has been sweeping that particular issue under the rug, I'd argue a moral imperative to cover it.
.
But even if you think he did something deservedly illegal and his arrest was appropriate, making it illegal to talk about his arrest is straight out of 1984.

So you're throwing this hissy fit because they have different laws in the UK and you dont like them?


Smh..
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12018
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 500 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby RedLeader » Sun Jun 03, 2018 6:13 pm

deltbucs wrote:
Caradoc wrote:WOW. I figure this would be a pretty universal thing here. Surprised to see so much love for Big Brother. Guess some people never saw a censor they didn't like. "Illegally covering" means coverage which would be legal here, so it's not a moral thing. And considering how much the British government has been sweeping that particular issue under the rug, I'd argue a moral imperative to cover it.
.
But even if you think he did something deservedly illegal and his arrest was appropriate, making it illegal to talk about his arrest is straight out of 1984.

So you're throwing this hissy fit because they have different laws in the UK and you dont like them?


What in the ****.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2601
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 94 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Sun Jun 03, 2018 10:12 pm

I read a couple quick articles from both sides about this. Robinson was arrest for broadcasting details of the case. In England there are laws that are put in place for the media to avoid prejudicing a jury. I don't see that as a terrible thing, personally. For the case he was reporting on, the media wasn't allowed to report any details. He was breaking the law and reporting details and filming (and trying to confront) witnesses so he was arrested...and has been arrested before for the same ****. News about Robinson's arrest/sentence was also not allowed to be reported by the media temporarily until after that trial was over, again to avoid jury prejudice. Once that trial was over everything could be reported on. Those laws are different, but I don't see the big deal. Seems to me that he should have learned his lesson and waited until the trial was over to report on it.

Ok Team trump, tell me what I'm missing.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Rocker » Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:36 am

deltbucs wrote:I read a couple quick articles from both sides about this. Robinson was arrest for broadcasting details of the case. In England there are laws that are put in place for the media to avoid prejudicing a jury. I don't see that as a terrible thing, personally. For the case he was reporting on, the media wasn't allowed to report any details. He was breaking the law and reporting details and filming (and trying to confront) witnesses so he was arrested...and has been arrested before for the same ****. News about Robinson's arrest/sentence was also not allowed to be reported by the media temporarily until after that trial was over, again to avoid jury prejudice. Once that trial was over everything could be reported on. Those laws are different, but I don't see the big deal. Seems to me that he should have learned his lesson and waited until the trial was over to report on it.

Ok Team trump, tell me what I'm missing.


I like the idea of restricting release of information that could prejudice a jury; in certain circumstances.
Image
User avatar
Rocker
 
Posts: 3504
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:23 am
Location: Upper deck of the Old Sombrero
Has thanked: 195 times
Been thanked: 187 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Zarniwoop » Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:46 am

Rocker wrote:
deltbucs wrote:I read a couple quick articles from both sides about this. Robinson was arrest for broadcasting details of the case. In England there are laws that are put in place for the media to avoid prejudicing a jury. I don't see that as a terrible thing, personally. For the case he was reporting on, the media wasn't allowed to report any details. He was breaking the law and reporting details and filming (and trying to confront) witnesses so he was arrested...and has been arrested before for the same ****. News about Robinson's arrest/sentence was also not allowed to be reported by the media temporarily until after that trial was over, again to avoid jury prejudice. Once that trial was over everything could be reported on. Those laws are different, but I don't see the big deal. Seems to me that he should have learned his lesson and waited until the trial was over to report on it.

Ok Team trump, tell me what I'm missing.


I like the idea of restricting release of information that could prejudice a jury; in certain circumstances.



Unless there is a very special case involving national security (and even then its iffy), I’m not in favor of it whatsoever.

We already have jury selection methods that help reduce the risk of an unfair trail. We also allow course cases to be moved. And we give special instructions to juries as to what information they should and shouldn’t consider when making their decision


Any additional restrictions beyond that can simply be used as a tool for the government for corruption

I haven’t read a lot on this specific case, but what I have read doesn’t lead me to classify this case in my exemption
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5428
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 247 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:55 am

Zarniwoop wrote:
Rocker wrote:
I like the idea of restricting release of information that could prejudice a jury; in certain circumstances.



Unless there is a very special case involving national security (and even then its iffy), I’m not in favor of it whatsoever.

We already have jury selection methods that help reduce the risk of an unfair trail. We also allow course cases to be moved. And we give special instructions to juries as to what information they should and shouldn’t consider when making their decision


Any additional restrictions beyond that can simply be used as a tool for the government for corruption

I haven’t read a lot on this specific case, but what I have read doesn’t lead me to classify this case in my exemption

The restriction is only until the case is over. I don't see how waiting a little bit to report on it makes it a tool for government corruption.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:17 pm

deltbucs wrote:I read a couple quick articles from both sides about this. Robinson was arrest for broadcasting details of the case. In England there are laws that are put in place for the media to avoid prejudicing a jury. I don't see that as a terrible thing, personally. For the case he was reporting on, the media wasn't allowed to report any details. He was breaking the law and reporting details and filming (and trying to confront) witnesses so he was arrested...and has been arrested before for the same ****. News about Robinson's arrest/sentence was also not allowed to be reported by the media temporarily until after that trial was over, again to avoid jury prejudice. Once that trial was over everything could be reported on. Those laws are different, but I don't see the big deal. Seems to me that he should have learned his lesson and waited until the trial was over to report on it.

Ok Team trump, tell me what I'm missing.

Buc2, DN, RL?
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:50 pm

deltbucs wrote:
deltbucs wrote:I read a couple quick articles from both sides about this. Robinson was arrest for broadcasting details of the case. In England there are laws that are put in place for the media to avoid prejudicing a jury. I don't see that as a terrible thing, personally. For the case he was reporting on, the media wasn't allowed to report any details. He was breaking the law and reporting details and filming (and trying to confront) witnesses so he was arrested...and has been arrested before for the same ****. News about Robinson's arrest/sentence was also not allowed to be reported by the media temporarily until after that trial was over, again to avoid jury prejudice. Once that trial was over everything could be reported on. Those laws are different, but I don't see the big deal. Seems to me that he should have learned his lesson and waited until the trial was over to report on it.

Ok Team trump, tell me what I'm missing.

Buc2, DN, RL?


My issue is with penchant to side with big brother in free speech matters like these in western society. It's dangerous imo.

I'm not disputing or upset that TR broke the law. He violated what he judge had instructed and is paying the price. My issue is the lack of free speech protection from the government occurring here and how that could manifest in America in the future.

I know we talk alot about free speech in this country and it gets conflated to align w/ specific narratives (see NFL protests). But the thing I believe we all (should) agree on is that Free Speech should be protect individuals, and especially the press from 'the state' fining or imprisoning them. That doesn't seem to be the case in this situation w/ TR and that is the angle I'm viewing it from.

I don't care if it's some white guy like TR covering rape/grooming gangs, or some POC investigating neo-Nazis. They stories should be allowed to be covered regardless of the narratives.

The fact is that these grooming gangs are an under reported issue in the UK. When muslim reformers mention them it's ignored in the MSM, and when a non-muslin covers them he's met with -phobia tags and government intervention.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12018
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 500 times
Been thanked: 521 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby RedLeader » Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:21 pm

The fact that the public at large isnt even aware of these cases, the accused, or the danger they present in their communities is disturbing.

The fact that you will get arrested for mentioning the case in public is absurd on many levels.

And that they intend to put the reporter in gen pop, along with the very hardened criminals he speaks up against on a daily basis seems more like capital punishment, as well.

Whats hilarious, though, is how delt decided the matter wasnt even worth discussing, quickly labeled any talk about it as ‘whining’, and then somehow found a way to try and make it about trump... lol.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2601
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 94 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:26 pm

deltbucs wrote:
deltbucs wrote:I read a couple quick articles from both sides about this. Robinson was arrest for broadcasting details of the case. In England there are laws that are put in place for the media to avoid prejudicing a jury. I don't see that as a terrible thing, personally. For the case he was reporting on, the media wasn't allowed to report any details. He was breaking the law and reporting details and filming (and trying to confront) witnesses so he was arrested...and has been arrested before for the same ****. News about Robinson's arrest/sentence was also not allowed to be reported by the media temporarily until after that trial was over, again to avoid jury prejudice. Once that trial was over everything could be reported on. Those laws are different, but I don't see the big deal. Seems to me that he should have learned his lesson and waited until the trial was over to report on it.

Ok Team trump, tell me what I'm missing.

Buc2, DN, RL?

I haven't done any reading about this case other than the little bit discussed here, so I don't know all the particulars. Muzzling the press is very slippery slope stuff and I mostly disagree with what happened with the UK reporter(?) as far as what I've read here. In other words, I wouldn't want to see this kind of policing in America. Perhaps the part of your post I bolded might fall under US witness tampering laws, so I can maybe see a legality issue there. Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with what the reporter did.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 883 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Zarniwoop » Mon Jun 04, 2018 4:16 pm

I just count myself lucky to be born into a country that has the greatest constitution and protections of freedom in the world and that this kind of BS doesn't happen here (at least yet)
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5428
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 247 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:15 pm

DreadNaught wrote:
deltbucs wrote:Buc2, DN, RL?


My issue is with penchant to side with big brother in free speech matters like these in western society. It's dangerous imo.

I'm not disputing or upset that TR broke the law. He violated what he judge had instructed and is paying the price. My issue is the lack of free speech protection from the government occurring here and how that could manifest in America in the future.

I know we talk alot about free speech in this country and it gets conflated to align w/ specific narratives (see NFL protests). But the thing I believe we all (should) agree on is that Free Speech should be protect individuals, and especially the press from 'the state' fining or imprisoning them. That doesn't seem to be the case in this situation w/ TR and that is the angle I'm viewing it from.

I don't care if it's some white guy like TR covering rape/grooming gangs, or some POC investigating neo-Nazis. They stories should be allowed to be covered regardless of the narratives.

The fact is that these grooming gangs are an under reported issue in the UK. When muslim reformers mention them it's ignored in the MSM, and when a non-muslin covers them he's met with -phobia tags and government intervention.

Again...The media is allowed to report on it. They just had to wait until the trial was over. I don't recall any of you being upset about this until now. This isn't an attempt to stop free speech/freedom of the press. This law is in place specifically to protect civil liberties and guaranty a free trial. I guess it's just the world that we live in now with the 24-hour news cycle and some people need their news right now.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:19 pm

RedLeader wrote:The fact that the public at large isnt even aware of these cases, the accused, or the danger they present in their communities is disturbing.

The fact that you will get arrested for mentioning the case in public is absurd on many levels.

And that they intend to put the reporter in gen pop, along with the very hardened criminals he speaks up against on a daily basis seems more like capital punishment, as well.

Whats hilarious, though, is how delt decided the matter wasnt even worth discussing, quickly labeled any talk about it as ‘whining’, and then somehow found a way to try and make it about trump... lol.

You're very bad at reading if you think that I somehow tried to make this against Trump. The media can report on any case that it wants to as soon as it's over. I don't see why that's so difficult for you to understand. If the reporter didn't want to go into general pop, maybe he should have thought twice about breaking the law for a second time. This isn't rocket surgery here.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:20 pm

Buc2 wrote:
deltbucs wrote:Buc2, DN, RL?

I haven't done any reading about this case other than the little bit discussed here, so I don't know all the particulars. Muzzling the press is very slippery slope stuff and I mostly disagree with what happened with the UK reporter(?) as far as what I've read here. In other words, I wouldn't want to see this kind of policing in America. Perhaps the part of your post I bolded might fall under US witness tampering laws, so I can maybe see a legality issue there. Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with what the reporter did.

You see no issue with the reporter breaking the law that he'd already been arrested for once?
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby MJW » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:44 pm

deltbucs wrote:
Buc2 wrote:I haven't done any reading about this case other than the little bit discussed here, so I don't know all the particulars. Muzzling the press is very slippery slope stuff and I mostly disagree with what happened with the UK reporter(?) as far as what I've read here. In other words, I wouldn't want to see this kind of policing in America. Perhaps the part of your post I bolded might fall under US witness tampering laws, so I can maybe see a legality issue there. Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with what the reporter did.

You see no issue with the reporter breaking the law that he'd already been arrested for once?


This is the wrong question. The question is not whether or not someone who breaks the law is going to be arrested, or whether or not it should matter to us that he already knew he'd be arrested. The question is if this law is a just one. It's a reasonable question. I don't think this law was conceived from an ideological place, even if the response to it is ideological. But that doesn't mean ideological questions shouldn't be asked.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8432
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 191 times
Been thanked: 370 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby deltbucs » Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:12 am

MJW wrote:
deltbucs wrote:You see no issue with the reporter breaking the law that he'd already been arrested for once?


This is the wrong question. The question is not whether or not someone who breaks the law is going to be arrested, or whether or not it should matter to us that he already knew he'd be arrested. The question is if this law is a just one. It's a reasonable question. I don't think this law was conceived from an ideological place, even if the response to it is ideological. But that doesn't mean ideological questions shouldn't be asked.

It's the wrong question because you don't like it.
Image
deltbucs
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:28 pm
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 288 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby Buc2 » Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:50 am

deltbucs wrote:
Buc2 wrote:I haven't done any reading about this case other than the little bit discussed here, so I don't know all the particulars. Muzzling the press is very slippery slope stuff and I mostly disagree with what happened with the UK reporter(?) as far as what I've read here. In other words, I wouldn't want to see this kind of policing in America. Perhaps the part of your post I bolded might fall under US witness tampering laws, so I can maybe see a legality issue there. Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with what the reporter did.

You see no issue with the reporter breaking the law that he'd already been arrested for once?

I was clearly extrapolating this incident as it would apply in America. I have no comment on their law in this case other than I don't agree with their law in this case.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 10414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 883 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Re: The Fourth Estate

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:57 am

deltbucs wrote:
DreadNaught wrote:
My issue is with penchant to side with big brother in free speech matters like these in western society. It's dangerous imo.

I'm not disputing or upset that TR broke the law. He violated what he judge had instructed and is paying the price. My issue is the lack of free speech protection from the government occurring here and how that could manifest in America in the future.

I know we talk alot about free speech in this country and it gets conflated to align w/ specific narratives (see NFL protests). But the thing I believe we all (should) agree on is that Free Speech should be protect individuals, and especially the press from 'the state' fining or imprisoning them. That doesn't seem to be the case in this situation w/ TR and that is the angle I'm viewing it from.

I don't care if it's some white guy like TR covering rape/grooming gangs, or some POC investigating neo-Nazis. They stories should be allowed to be covered regardless of the narratives.

The fact is that these grooming gangs are an under reported issue in the UK. When muslim reformers mention them it's ignored in the MSM, and when a non-muslin covers them he's met with -phobia tags and government intervention.

Again...The media is allowed to report on it. They just had to wait until the trial was over. I don't recall any of you being upset about this until now. This isn't an attempt to stop free speech/freedom of the press. This law is in place specifically to protect civil liberties and guaranty a free trial. I guess it's just the world that we live in now with the 24-hour news cycle and some people need their news right now.


Underage girls are being kidnapped and raped. It should be reported on regardless of whatever trial(s) are occurring. Shining a light (in the form of coverage) on things like this is how you put an end to it. It's one of the big reasons press freedom is such an important freedom and covered in the very first amendment of the US Constitution.

It seems like a pretty cut and dry issue for me.

I think where TR got himself in trouble legally might have been not so much that he covered the issue, but how and who he covered specifically.

It seems like the alleged crimes of people like Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby shouldn't have been allowed to covered by the press until their trials were completed by this logic b/c doing so could interfere with the bias of potential jurors. That simply is not a position I agree with.
Last edited by DreadNaught on Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12018
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 500 times
Been thanked: 521 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron