Got an unbiased source for that?
Are you suggesting The Washington Times is fabricating DHS numbers? Look I know they lean right, but is that really your suspicion here?
I can try to find a left-leaning source reporting on this. How successful do you think I’ll be, if you had to guess?
To clarify, the importance of this is to demonstrate not that using tear gas is fine or not fine, but to demonstrate that it’s much less about the tear gas use itself but rather who’s doing the gassing.
There was no national conversation about war crimes when it happened under Obama, so why are we talking about war crimes when it happens under Trump? There’s only one variable here. Tear gas use remains constant, only the president changed.
Ask yourself if you’re selectively outraged depending on who’s doing the thing.
Let’s just grant it isn’t a “war crime”. It is merely the sort of beastly behavior civilized people should be ashamed of. But *not *a war crime. You won that point, hands down.
Just like all the dictators he admires, Donnie Do-wrong now wants to have his very own fake news organization. Of course, he doesn’t want to pay for it; he wants you, Mr./Ms. Taxpayer to foot the bill!
So you believe that media sources in general distort the news. But the one that happens to agree with your view is reporting the straight unvarnished truth.
I recall a lot of discussion. Many people, including people who generally supported Obama, expressed their opposition to the drone attacks he authorized.
Offer him a million dollars if he can provide a DNA test showing that the loofah and orangutan are not his parents.
You could try finding the actual numbers, since the Washington Times didn’t see fit to provide a cite in their story.
And yes, the Washington Times has been known to fudge things occasionally.
Ah, then you saw that magellan backed down from his original assumption that Soros financially backed a caravan of criminals bent on destroying the US. I take it you prefer to keep your rejoicing private. 
You seem to still be confused, Here is my original claim regarding Soros:
That’s still my opinion. And if you don’t put it through your “Let me read into this and magnify x 1000 into something I can be apoplectic about filter”, it’s really an unremarkable claim. But since your x1000 filter seems to be set to automatic, yawn.
I like it!!!
But he’s already got a propagandist news organization – Fox News reporters have been campaigning for Trump and his policies thus erasing the line between reporter and reported.
Hannity is the poster child but there are others. FN management harrumphed a lot for maintain the fig leaf but didn’t immediately fire Hannity’s ass, as any reputable news organization would have done.
Did you also accuse Medicins Sans Frontieres of supporting Saddam?
SDMB: August, 2016: Coming Soon: Trump News Network
I just imagine Trump News being little more than a constant supercut of Trump saying 'The very Best…the best… the very best… best…best guys…best" from his various comments.
I just wonder what percent of the US population imagines Trump sitting in a room watching the scene at the border unfold, then slowly picking up a telephone and whispering, “Gas 'em.”
Trump, on black Democratic candidate for Senate Mike Espy: “How does he fit in with Mississippi? I mean, how does he fit in?”
I think trump meant that he doesn’t fit in because Espy’s (according to him) far left, in a state that trump assumes is right leaning.
Shit, that makes it sound like I’m defending trump 
That’s the beauty of the whistle: the people its aimed at get it, and the phrasing leaves the option of claiming he meant something else.