As douchless sixtyfoe breathlessly reported on yesterday...WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A HIT PIECE!
All dem pres candidates jump on this propaganda too. Go ahead, keep shooting your feet. LOL
“The Times did not mention Stier's work as a Clinton defense attorney, or Stier's legal battles with Kavanaugh during the Whitewater investigation, and simply called him a "respected thought leader."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nyt-kavanaugh-bombshell-goes-bust-after-2020-dems-use-it-to-call-for-impeachment
1 edit
@mott-the-hoople saidDo you even know what a "lie" is?
As douchless sixtyfoe breathlessly reported on yesterday...WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A HIT PIECE!
All dem pres candidates jump on this propaganda too. Go ahead, keep shooting your feet. LOL
[b]“The Times did not mention Stier's work as a Clinton defense attorney, or Stier's legal battles with Kavanaugh during the Whitewater investigation, and simply called him a "re ...[text shortened]... oxnews.com/politics/nyt-kavanaugh-bombshell-goes-bust-after-2020-dems-use-it-to-call-for-impeachment
Omitting tangential information from an article, even if unwise, does not amount to a "lie". If it were, every single article you have ever cited from your right wing sites would have been a "lie".
1 edit
@mott-the-hoople saidAs douchless sixtyfoe breathlessly reported on yesterday-
As douchless sixtyfoe breathlessly reported on yesterday...WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A HIT PIECE!
All dem pres candidates jump on this propaganda too. Go ahead, keep shooting your feet. LOL
[b]“The Times did not mention Stier's work as a Clinton defense attorney, or Stier's legal battles with Kavanaugh during the Whitewater investigation, and simply called him a "re ...[text shortened]... oxnews.com/politics/nyt-kavanaugh-bombshell-goes-bust-after-2020-dems-use-it-to-call-for-impeachment
Why do so many of you folks on the right wing feel the need to engage in childish name calling? I read this from Whodey and other worshippers of Trump as well. Do you folks enjoy taking like potty mouthed 8 year olds?
@mchill saidits just the way us Trumptards are I guess 🙄
As douchless sixtyfoe breathlessly reported on yesterday-
Why do so many of you folks on the right wing feel the need to engage in childish name calling? I read this from Whodey and other worshippers of Trump as well. Do you folks enjoy taking like potty mouthed 8 year olds?
@no1marauder saidActually the actions were a text book example of a lie...
Do you even know what a "lie" is?
Omitting tangential information from an article, even if unwise, does not amount to a "lie". If it were, every single article you have ever cited from your right wing sites would have been a "lie".
“1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
She was lying when she said she didn't break the vase.
He lied about his past experience.
2 : to create a false or misleading impression”
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie
@mott-the-hoople saidExcept for the "untrue statement" part.
Actually the actions were a text book example of a lie...
“1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
She was lying when she said she didn't break the vase.
He lied about his past experience.
2 : to create a false or misleading impression”
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie
1 edit
@no1marauder saidHold on, No1. Technically - and in one sense, you are correct. But in an all global definition of lying, you are wrong.
Do you even know what a "lie" is?
Omitting tangential information from an article, even if unwise, does not amount to a "lie". If it were, every single article you have ever cited from your right wing sites would have been a "lie".
This is why when you get sworn in to testify in court, you swear to "tell the truth, the *whole* truth, and nothing but the truth".
Clearly if you have engaged in deceit by deliberately omitting pertinent truthful information, you have lied.
Example: If a District Attorney's office hides exculpatory information that exonerates a defendant on trial, they are *guilty* as Shiite.
But taking your tack, they can't be lying if they don't speak about it, right?
Wrong.
@earl-of-trumps saidThey still didn't "lie". Read the definition again.
Hold on, No1. Technically - and in one sense, you are correct. But in an all global definition of lying, you are wrong.
This is why when you get sworn in to testify in court, you swear to "tell the truth, the *whole* truth, and nothing but the truth".
Clearly if you have engaged in deceit by deliberately omitting pertinent truthful information, you have lied.
...[text shortened]... as Shiite.
But taking your tack, they can't be lying if they don't speak about it, right?
Wrong.
@Mott-The-Hoople
I'm curious, when Trump gets his sorry ass booted out in 2020, forget impeachment, and he refuses to leave, will you pick up arms and rush to his aid?
@no1marauder saidthere you go with that guilty until proven innocent again.
Has it been proven false? If not, it can't be a lie.
@no1marauder saidhow do you get past this definition?
They still didn't "lie". Read the definition again.
"2 : to create a false or misleading impression”
@sonhouse saidhave you looked at Trumps competition? LMFAO
@Mott-The-Hoople
I'm curious, when Trump gets his sorry ass booted out in 2020, forget impeachment, and he refuses to leave, will you pick up arms and rush to his aid?
@mott-the-hoople saidKavanaugh is not the defendant at a criminal trial and is not entitled to a presumption of innocence.
there you go with that guilty until proven innocent again.