unfair and biased. 85% of us, democrats, republicans and independents do not trust the print and television media. note it is not just republicans, but everyone, 85% of us. the either 15% either work in media or live under a rock or both. having no confidence in the fairness of media may be single most unifying thing we have going for us, when everyone thinks you are wrong, that should be calls for self reflection. but not for the media, they don t blame themselves, they blame you and the internet and lack of diversity, except a lack of political diversity. the questions are two-fold, why have we lost trust in the media? why does it matter. the first question is easy, public does not trust media and believe that media is area because it is not fair. it tries to influence who is in power. our country is split 50/50, but the poll is 85/15. most still value and recognize fairness. a country and a culture cannot survive without fairness. we need a referee, a detached judge, the
safety concerns for witnesses or it could impact on going investigations. prosecutors have until thursday to propose redactions, then the judge will decide whether they are reasonable. there are a couple things worth thinking about between now and then, even if we see the affidavit, it is just one side of the argument, the government s side. the target of the search doesn t get to appear in front of the judge or argue. the information has not been cross examined. secondly. it takes probable cause to search, but it takes a lot more than that to convict. whatever is affidavit may wind out to be true or certain. only the government participates in seeking a search warrant, we don t know and we won t know until both sides present their facts and test the echedz on evidence on the other side, we should ask ourselves why? why do we want to read the affidavit? how will it help us arrive at the truth? do we arrive at the facts. credible evidence is to move us to persuade us, can we s
he said, i am watching, and i will be watching all of the hearings, i can assure you that january 6 prosecutors are watching all of the hearings as well. nothing wrong with watching television, there is a lot of good stuff on lately, college baseball, nba finals, u.s. open golf, men s and women s, curtis company. i have been watching a lot of tv, but difference is, you and i don t have much of a choice when it comes to getting information, we get to have an army of investigators and prosecutors at our disposal, garland does with federal law enforcement as his beck and call. and prosecutors and search warrants and he can access financial record thes and phone records and seize computers and e-mail accounts, if done lawfully and compel witnesses to testify, and offer immunity. to anyone he wants, why is he watching television? why does the chief prosecutor, the managing partner of most powerful law firm in the world need to watch television to gather facts? he can interview any
quickly, it only took once, i do not pull irons any more. what about other types of pain? do we learn our lessons first time or in such a rush to feel better we leave before class ending? when something terrible happens we want to move on, it is human nature, a defense mechanism. we change the subject. we avoid the topic, we move on so the pain will stop. but in our haste to feel better, do we sometimes leave before the lesson is learned? not a single person of good conscious who does not grieve in the aftermath of a mass killing. because the weight is heavy, we don t want to linger and move othe risk is we leave before the lesson is learned. so the pain hurts but it does not alter us. there is yet another classroom full of dead children and teachers, will this time be different? history says no. what did we learn? what changed? did the pain hurt or did the pain alter. if we re open to change, the question is what, how, what would work, what is a real solution versus anothe
that lesson was learned quickly, it only took once, i do not pull irons any more. what about other types of pain? do we learn our lessons first time or in such a rush to feel better we leave before class ending? when something terrible happens we want to move on, it is human nature, a defense mechanism. we change the subject. we avoid the topic, we move on so the pain will stop. but in our haste to feel better, do we sometimes leave before the lesson is learned? not a single person of good conscious who does not grieve in the aftermath of a mass killing. because the weight is heavy, we don t want to linger and move othe risk is we leave before the lesson is learned. so the pain hurts but it does not alter us. there is yet another classroom full of dead children and teachers, will this time be different? history says no. what did we learn? what changed? did the pain hurt or did the pain alter. if we re open to change, the question is what, how, what would work, what is a rea