Reposted by Jake Tapper
The statement appears to be part of a public discourse as it engages with a public figure (Stephen Miller) and addresses a public issue (safety comparisons between Caracas, Venezuela, and the United States). The statement raises questions about the credibility of government statistics and implicitly critiques the trustworthiness of information provided by the Venezuelan government.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It is a straightforward question about the credibility of data. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others. It does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding by questioning the reliability of data, which is a valid part of public discourse. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by asking a relevant question and does not resort to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly by questioning the credibility of information in a public context. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.