After all the times the media blatantly lied about leading up to/shortly after the election combined with becoming a lot more busy I've just stopped even trying to check if the media is lying, and default to assume that they are. In this case however, the pictures are (while funny) pretty blatant awkward pandering and I can't think up any justification for it.
Can anyone provide additional context the mainstream is leaving out? Additionally, there's the narrative that he had innocent protesters tear gassed to get the photo. I heard that the church where the photo was taken was set on fire previously during the protests, so are the media lying and the protesters were actively destructive when they were tear gassed, or were they at separate times and it was peaceful protesters who were attacked?
After all the times the media blatantly lied about leading up to/shortly after the election combined with becoming a lot more busy I've just stopped even trying to check if the media is lying, and default to assume that they are. In this case however, the pictures are (while funny) pretty blatant awkward pandering and I can't think up any justification for it.
Can anyone provide additional context the mainstream is leaving out? Additionally, there's the narrative that he had innocent protesters tear gassed to get the photo. I heard that the church where the photo was taken was set on fire previously during the protests, so are the media lying and the protesters were actively destructive when they were tear gassed, or were they at separate times and it was peaceful protesters who were attacked?