Aw, how charming the background noise can be without a hint of color.
One tends to elect candidates into office because one believes a candidate or other is better equipped to forward one's own well being. Let's examine this.
You said you wanted non-White non-male candidates; you elected White male politicians. You said you wanted candidates who ensured fair treatment for constituents Black, Brown, et cetera; you elected politicians whose policies increased crime rates, drove away businesses, and weakened public services guess where (does this look like a counterweight network to you?). You lot chose the Big Guy (that second one's a counterweight network) and "it's true because it's true" (that's not from any network - that's your channel, dud, with your own unfiltered words in their original context - comments section scary?). You elected these politicians for their 'ethics' and ended up instead with a demonstration not only that those who have the money and connections continue to get away with treason, nepotism, and incompetent leadership, but that those who chose them are perfectly happy with that.
Too bad the only way you can make yourselves feel better about that abject failure in judgment remains to scapegoat those who point out ad nauseam what, according to the values you yourselves listed, should make you sick; and too bad the reminders of being caught creating and using bad information are going to smack you in the face the more you use your standard method to sell your used toilet paper. (Then again, considering the trickle of those regretting their prior endorsements, the tragic word counts Static at Halloween are starting to sound like a rhymes-with-cake defense of what you try so hard to bury with bodily functions and someone else's infidelity. Maybe, just maybe, you're not so perfectly happy with the unenviable situation you chose to paint.)
Reassure yourselves that there's no need to fear the judgment of those who hold up a mirror in screenshots and links and quotes and your own SEO terms. Know that your usefulness continues only because the tech developed to replace you is hobbled by its own growing pains, and that it's long been noted that while the tech is capable of further growth, the people involved can always choose to get worse, knowing what's right and going against it anyway.
Noting of course study material reading 中東 (yay multi-IME!) matches listening exercise context 哈马斯, and taking this opportunity for a reminder to have multiple translators handy:
Penultimate this because, while I enjoy it enormously, having recently run into a garden channel with a well-known nature narrator prompts some suspicion of the authenticity (I should rather say humanity) of this speaker; besides, oughtn't it to be the Watson actor's voice used, considering it's Watson's writings - his words - that shape the story to begin with?
Ending with this because curious.