Jump to content

Fact Checkers are nothing more than a rear guard for the Democrat Party...but they finally got one right


Recommended Posts

On 2/10/2021 at 8:34 AM, concha said:

 

So, probably folks facing charges and looking for a way out?

People who can hear sounds up to 50,000Hz like the family pooch?

Folks with selective hearing who supposedly traveled from the speech to the Capitol and got started long before Trump's speech was actually done?

 

 

God damn you're a full blown idiot and that post seals it for you....

bgw

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just wanna thank the democrats for getting trump acquitted , would not have been acquitted if y’all weren’t out there telling people to revolt against trump and to get in the face of Congress, 

bgw 

Do they send out videos edited to manipulate timelines and remove inconvenient quotes (aka "lying") in order to sway opinion in their favor?  🤡   And love the "vague directive" thing. Is tha

Posted Images

33 minutes ago, imaGoodBoyNow said:

Just wanna thank the democrats for getting trump acquitted , would not have been acquitted if y’all weren’t out there telling people to revolt against trump and to get in the face of Congress, 

history will show a majority in the House and Senate voted to impeach Trump...#loser

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Atticus Finch said:

The New York Times has not retracted the story.

Wrong, wrong wrong. Nine google pages full of stories showing your latest face-plant. Here is just the page 1 stories. Take your pick.

nytimes retracts sicknick story

Search Results

Web results

16 hours ago — Like so many fake news stories about Donald Trump and his supporters, millions of Americans believe the Sicknick story as truth; even a ...
8 hours ago — The KHOU story made no mention of the officer's being struck by a fire extinguisher. It did claim, however, that the stroke occurred “at the Capitol ...
4 hours ago — The New York Times has updated an initial report from last month claiming that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was killed due to blunt ...
9 hours ago — The New York Times quietly corrected a major story about Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick as the Senate impeachment trial came to a close ...
22 hours ago — In a quiet but stunning correction, the New York Times backed away from its original report that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was killed ...
14 hours ago — The New York Times quietly updated an explosive story about Capitol ... of record" quietly updated its story, retracting the claims about Sicknick ...
11 hours ago — In a quiet but stunning correction, the New York Times backed away from its original report that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was killed by ...
1 day ago — The ⁦@nytimes⁩ just retracted its January 8 report that claimed Brian Sicknick was killed by a Trump supporter using a fire ... Not only is the original story untrue, they lied about the anonymous sources linked to the story.
16 hours ago — The NY Times Retracts the Sicknick Story | RealClearPolitics. 2 hours ago. www.realclearpolitics.com. 1 min read. difficult. Politics · New York Times. The NY ...
 

Page Navigation

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Slotback Right said:

Wrong, wrong wrong. Nine google pages full of stories showing your latest face-plant. Here is just the page 1 stories. Take your pick.

nytimes retracts sicknick story
 
                       

All those "articles" link to the same "story" from American Greatness, a conservative website.

I repeat.

The New York Times has not retracted the story.

Don't you ever get tired or being a dipshit?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

All those "articles" link to the same "story" from American Greatness, a conservative website.

I repeat.

The New York Times has not retracted the story.

Don't you ever get tired or being a dipshit?

Lol 😂 ur so fucking stupid, it’s frightening 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2021 at 9:32 AM, Atticus Finch said:

The New York Times has not retracted the story.

Technically correct. They issued a correction wherein they finally removed their widely shared lie that Sicknick was killed by a Trump supporter with a fire extinguisher.

Carry on stomping your feet over some dumb semantics though...it's always a great look. 

5 hours ago, Atticus Finch said:

Still too stupid and lazy to actually know things.

Speaking of which, I took five seconds and googled the article for you on the British COVID restrictions in the other thread that you were too stupid/lazy to do yourself lol. 

How's the job hunt going? 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

Technically correct. They issued a correction wherein they finally removed their widely shared lie that Sicknick was killed by a Trump supporter with a fire extinguisher.

Carry on stomping your feet over some dumb semantics though...it's always a great look. 

Speaking of which, I took five seconds and googled the article for you on the British COVID restrictions in the other thread that you were too stupid/lazy to do yourself lol. 

How's the job hunt going? 🤣

That is "technically" incorrect....

They retracted their story....as in took it back, corrected themselves, and are now saying their story was false.

Once something is put in print for posterity, you can never undo it, only say that you were wrong.

 

See what associating with anal morons does ?

Technically they did RETRACT the STORY...

 

 

re·tract
/rəˈtrakt/
 
verb
verb: retract; 3rd person present: retracts; past tense: retracted; past participle: retracted; gerund or present participle: retracting
  1. 1.
    draw back.
    "she retracted her hand as if she'd been burnt"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

They issued a correction wherein they finally removed their widely shared lie that Sicknick was killed by a Trump supporter with a fire extinguisher.

No, they made an update to the original story stating that, after a month, the prosecution was having trouble filing charges since the autopsy found no blunt trauma to the head.

You fulfill your duties as a typical Trump toady when you claim that their reporting was a lie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

Carry on stomping your feet over some dumb semantics though...it's always a great look. 

I will carry on calmly correcting imbeciles who whine about fake news and then perpetrate complete lies about standard reporting.

A confirmed Trump stooge like you would definitely claim that a factual understanding of an issue is semantics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever zulu1128 pops in to say something stupid I'm always reminded of his crack predictions of......well.....everything since this board was created.

On 6/13/2017 at 1:21 PM, zulu1128 said:

Trump could freaking bomb Canada tomorrow, and it would still be a 100% lock that the GOP will hold the house in 2018.

On 1/23/2017 at 8:55 AM, zulu1128 said:

Most conservatives I speak with love the riots...they hope you people keep it up as long as possible. They're already taking bets on how far north of 60 seats they'll finish with in 2018.

On 1/23/2017 at 9:09 AM, zulu1128 said:

Smart money as of today is 61.

Burn Baby Burn!

On 1/23/2017 at 9:29 AM, zulu1128 said:

58 is a lock. 60+ is a distinct possibility, especially if you people continue masking up and burning shit in lieu of re-crafting your message.

You repeatedly stated the same about the mere idea of a Trump presidency...so you'll have to excuse the class if we take your rant with a grain of salt.

On 1/23/2017 at 9:40 AM, zulu1128 said:

They'll get 6 even if Trump sets the planet on fire. The ceiling is 10-11.

Possible...but highly unlikely. The democrats are the ones with bench issues, not the GOP.

On 1/23/2017 at 9:42 AM, zulu1128 said:

They might...however the graveyard is gonna take 8+ years to get all the way through.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

No, they made an update to the original story stating that, after a month, the prosecution was having trouble filing charges since the autopsy found no blunt trauma to the head.

 

Right. There was no evidence present that showed he was hit with said fire extinguisher, so they corrected their widely shared lie that he was.  Not sure why you're struggling with that. 🤷‍♂️

They also corrected their lie that the original story was "according to the CHP," now stating that it came from "sources close to the CHP."

8 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

You fulfill your duties as a typical Trump toady when you claim that their reporting was a lie.

They falsely reported that he died from being struck in the head with a fire extinguisher, while lying about where the information supposedly came from. 

I mean, it's clearly a lie to any reasonable person lol. But carry on with your partisan boobery by all means. 

Guess the job search isn't going that great, huh? 🤣

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...