Telemundo anchor Nacho Lozano showed off his whodunit and judging skills during an early morning analysis of the Rittenhouse trial where he had to admit, not once, but twice, that he was making things up, and that after switching the jury's verdict, first saying he was found guilty, then correcting himself.
Watch Lozano get all worked up in a two-minute fantasy speech where he questions the jury's decision, accuses the judge of bias and influencing the jury, blames Rittenhouse for the five counts he was absolved of, and defends the felons chasing Rittenhouse with an "All that was missing was for them to be told not to play the victims here, because you got in the way of the bullets that were defending someone else’s property. But the judge didn’t say that, although it seemed that way."
Un Nuevo Día
11/22/2021 7:00:00 AM
NACHO LOZANO: It’s 8AM, the time in which I ask you, what’s your take on these two very problematic ironies of life, ironies of the news outlook in this country. First, the trial against Kyle Rittenhouse, of which he was cleared of all charges of which the accused was accused which was then no longer accused who then became happy because he was found guilty of the shooting- not guilty. He was found not guilty of the shooting that he got himself into in August of 2020 when he killed two persons and injured a third. You’ve already seen the details we showed you earlier today. Relatives of the victims had already imputed the crimes but got even more upset at the judge who, unbelievably, asked that the victims not be called victims, because that seemed unbiased to the judge. Because the prosecutors and the defense would have to label him according to the judge’s perspective- the deceased. All that was missing was for them to be told not to play the victims here, because you got in the way of the bullets that were defending someone else’s property. But the judge didn’t say that, although it seemed that way. He was ultimately absolved and almost hailed as a hero, because the jury said that the young man fired upon the victims in self-defense, although it was not his own defense- hold up. The funny thing is that he lived in another city, so his self-defense was in defense of someone else- you figure out who that might have been- because he defended the property of others because his own (property) was far from the scene, and this brave person, armed with an assault rifle, defended an empty car lot and killed two individuals in a town that was not his own, getting into a fight that was not his own, but ended up being in self-defense of someone else. Is that clear? Well, the trial kind of ended up that way.
Taking a shot at being witty (he wasn´t), Lozano started with a play of words about “a problematic irony of the news in this country”, “...he was cleared of all charges of which the accused was accused which was then no longer accused who then became happy because he was found guilty of the shooting- not guilty. He was found not guilty of the shooting that he got himself into in August of 2020 when he killed two persons and injured a third."
Ironies indeed, after delivering the senseless rant, Lozano ended up admitting his fabrication: ...."his self-defense was in defense of someone else- you figure out who that might have been- because he defended the property of others because his own (property) was far from the scene, and this brave person, armed with an assault rifle, defended an empty car lot and killed two individuals in a town that was not his own, getting into a fight that was not his own, but ended up being in self-defense of someone else. Is that clear? Well, the trial kind of ended up that way."
No, it didn't. But this opinion piece passing for news could well end up in trouble for Telemundo. We will keep you posted.
Join the MRC in its fight against bias in the liberal media, including Telemundo. Follow this link.
