Liberal Forum

jerrab » Today, 9:09 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:09 pm

they did their jobs and followed the law.

Are you personally acquainted with them? 

If not, then someone told you that, and you believed it.

Who was that bad person? Had that person told you other things that proved to be accurate? Is this a long trusted source - one that you have relied on for solid information in the past?

SOMEONE set you off. I'm just asking who that is. You finally - I won't say answered - you finally addressed the question with a fact claim. Where did you get that fact? You do not simply assume facts, I am confident. SOMEONE lined you out. Are you embarrassed to say who that someone was? 

I can tell you, I am proud of my sources. I present them - regularly. I very often use media bias fact check to determine their leanings and credibility rankings. I am not saying that media bias fact check has the final word in MY opinions of sources - but I find them useful to establish the credibility of the sources I select to back my fact claims. If arguing with a leftist, I am likely to back my fact claims with a left leaning source of high credibility according to media bias fact check. If I am arguing with a conservative, I prefer to use CATO, National Review, Heritage  - something right leaning to back my fact claims. 

You see, neither you nor I know for a fact that these officers are bastions of corruption or integrity. We trust our sources and our intuition and our sense of how the world works. So we have sources. You have sources. I have sources. Everyone has sources. 

And I have spent a lot of time, energy, finger motions, cajoling, word-smithing, and megs of gig and terabytes to get you to name yours. I find it interesting that you don't want to. 

I am starting to suspect that you see me as the type of fella who will mock you and your sources mercilessly. And that hurts, bro. That just hurts.