Reply With Quote
Yeah those guys who outed the Clinton Foundation antics... laughable, right?are they truly reporters? come on now... activists yes but reporters?
Far Righty...
as well you do know hunter has a history with drugs, right? first he's an alcoholic that's been in an out of rehab, then he binges crack, gets kicked out of the navy for cocaine, and now has strippers claiming he smoked crack in the strip club where he gets a dildo in his ass at his request.Oh the ironing
Yeah those guys who outed the Clinton Foundation antics... laughable, right?are they truly reporters? come on now... activists yes but reporters?
Far Righty...
and got us into plenty of unnecessary wars with proven lies. don't forget that!
they were reporting on the fact that an investigation was ongoing. they were reporting on the work mueller was doing which culminated in a hundreds of pages long report.
now did they really? it wasn't until that hillary lost for a second time that the well dried up on their QPQ/P2P foundation scheme while plenty of outlets went all in for hillary.
you've been duped whinehole. sorry but it's the truth!
What did they say that you did not like?
Seriously?
bull ing ! they had a role in all this and were playing to the dems. don't act like they're not partisan in their pol ideology.
This is a very generous description. I think the big media outlets took a huge hit to their credibility during this period. Time will tell.
pundits like maddow certainly did.
the investigation of a sitting president and has campaign is pretty big news tbh... would be journalistic malpractice to not follow that closely and report on it regularly
First 4 are DNC mockingbirds, BBC is European CNN.
All my sourcea are journalists who write for their respective papers and also use twitter which triggers you for some reason.
Your chronology sucks.
And, you are wrong.
Both wrote articles on how the Clinton’s had been told by advisors they had too many “cronies” on the payroll.
BEFORE THE ELECTION. While Hillary was still Secretary Of State.
So do you want to take your fact machine back? You just lied. Or was it an honest mistake?
you think i care about a timeline? the fact of the matter is their foundation took a huge hit once hillary was dethroned! whether or not some watchdog claimed this or that prior means nada. we saw the same with her illegal server but did they press the issue and throw her ass in jail?
that stupid hillary and anyone that stands behind that dumb .
Absolutely.
Not the commentary or analysis.
Actual reporting.
Give it to me, just like kori did.
Both have made errors, both lean left imo, and both have retracted articles and said they were wrong about a number of things. But if you want good stuff by people who are there and connected to foreign government avenues as well as ours, you can’t beat them. I would add the WSJ as well.
What are your trusted news sources, Darrin?
They're commentators, Qhris.
I like some commentators too but I don't pretend they are news sources.
You just gave me a timeline that indicated AFTER the election the 2nd time you lying sack of .
Their reporting was part of the reason she lost to Trump. The Bernie people brought this up as well.
fckn disingenuous liar.
You should know better by now. You have done this before and got spanked.
I go to sites that aggregate multiple sources from differing narratives.
News shouldn't have narratives, but it does.
i guess you just aren't getting it... my timeline is specific; she lost the cash cow for her bull foundation the moment she lost the election/power.
she didn't lose to trump due to her bull server nor her foundation... she lost because she lost! she rigged it all and still lost! she rigged it all with the help of those same bull activist "reporters" you claim hurt her!
you're deluded.
What sources?
And it’s obvious which narratives you believe.
All those you listed and many more.
That is patently NOT THE SUBJECT.
You griped about Wapo and NY Times.
I brought up their News on the Clinton foundation well before the election.
Then you randomly state the cash dried up after the election.
This has NOTHING to do with these papers being critical of the foundation.
NOTHING. And, now that you bring up her cavalier use of government work at home, THEY both were on this as well. You have no idea what you are writing about.
This is a prime example of how you fit The Far Right like a glove perfectly.
Dont lie again or you will be batted about again.
So you trust the same sources I do.
What are the others?
i didn't gripe whatsoever about the WaPo nor the NYT... you want to point fingers and claim liar well point that er right back at yourself.
as for those publications doing hillary any harm, they didn't.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions