It's about time someone stood up to this witch hunt!
-
This excellent book describes, in part, the corrupt political and business milieu of Robert S. Mueller, III, The Dirty Cop and James Comey; collectively, "The Dirty ...
-
Judge: Mueller Charged Manafort to Get Dirt on Trump - The Daily Beast
A federal judge in Virginia questioned on Friday whether special counsel Robert Mueller has the authority to bring tax and bank fraud charges ex-Trump ... -
Breaking: Mueller Withheld Exculpatory Evidence from Court to Exonerate Trump – Mueller LIED to the Court!… Will He Be Sent to Jail Too?
Mueller withheld information to the court that would exonerate President Trump.
Will Mueller be tossed in prison for lying?
Or do only Trump associates got to jail for lying to the court? -
mueller is a toad. He needs to be stopped. Screaming and threatening interviewees with false charges, demanding they
lie or else?
mueller is garbage. look who he hired on his corrupt team.
-
mueller is a toad. He needs to be stopped. Screaming and threatening interviewees with false charges, demanding they
lie or else?
mueller is garbage. look who he hired on his corrupt team.
-
Somebody is looking for their 15 minutes...
Jerome Robert Corsi (born August 31, 1946) is an American author, political commentator, and conspiracy theorist.[1][2] His two New York Times best-selling books, Unfit for Command (2004) and The Obama Nation (2008), attacked Democratic presidential candidates and have been criticized for including numerous inaccuracies.[3][4][5]
In other books and columns for conservative sites such as WorldNetDaily and Human Events, Corsi has discussed conspiracy theories, such as the alleged plans for a North American government; the theory that President Barack Obama is not a United States citizen;[6] criticism of the United States government for allegedly covering up information about the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001;[7] and alleged United States support of Iran in its attempts to develop nuclear weapons.[8][9][10]
Somebody is looking for their 15 minutes...
Jerome Robert Corsi (born August 31, 1946) is an American author, political commentator, and conspiracy theorist.[1][2] His two New York Times best-selling books, Unfit for Command (2004) and The Obama Nation (2008), attacked Democratic presidential candidates and have been criticized for including numerous inaccuracies.[3][4][5]
In other books and columns for conservative sites such as WorldNetDaily and Human Events, Corsi has discussed conspiracy theories, such as the alleged plans for a North American government; the theory that President Barack Obama is not a United States citizen;[6] criticism of the United States government for allegedly covering up information about the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001;[7] and alleged United States support of Iran in its attempts to develop nuclear weapons.[8][9][10]
How is that different than literally any liberal and their indictments of Trump?
-
Such a well trained sheep. Good boy..
yet you are a "victim" of my criticism of your stupid-ass posts, troll.
-
-
yet,
cccjwh - mz the pussy or woodypeckerhead
you don't add much of anything good or intelligent to this forum.
-
yet,
cccjwh - mz the pussy or woodypeckerhead
you don't add much of anything good or intelligent to this forum.
-
I don't write all the articles from the sources, asswhole.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/06/opinions/rosenstein-should-curb-mueller-whittaker-opinion/index.html
Mueller's investigation of Trump is going too far
By Matthew Whitaker
Updated 3:46 PM ET, Wed November 7, 2018
-
July 19, 2018
Mueller's witch hunt a growing disaster for national security
-
I think Trump needs to declare Martial Law and end this charade.
-
July 19, 2018
Mueller's witch hunt a growing disaster for national security
July 19, 2018Mueller's witch hunt a growing disaster for national security
RIGHT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
Factual Reporting: MIXED
-
July 19, 2018
Mueller's witch hunt a growing disaster for national security
RIGHT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
Factual Reporting: MIXED
RIGHT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
Factual Reporting: MIXED
MSM BIAS
These media sources are
moderatelytostrongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. MostSomesources in this category may be untrustworthy.FIFY
-
RIGHT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
Factual Reporting: MIXED
MSM BIAS
These media sources are
moderatelytostrongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. MostSomesources in this category may be untrustworthy.FIFY
MSM BIAS
These media sources are
moderatelytostrongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. MostSomesources in this category may be untrustworthy.FIFY
These posts aren't for you Old. You have already stated you don't care about the truth. They are time savers for people who actual do care if their "news" is bias and if the source has a history of factual reporting.
-
MSM BIAS
These media sources are
moderatelytostrongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. MostSomesources in this category may be untrustworthy.FIFY
These posts aren't for you Old. You have already stated you don't care about the truth. They are time savers for people who actual do care if their "news" is bias and if the source has a history of factual reporting.
These posts aren't for you Old. You have already stated you don't care about the truth. They are time savers for people who actual do care if their "news" is bias and if the source has a history of factual reporting.
You seem to take as gospel truth the so called fact checkers. I would maintain news sources that claim to be unbiased and only reporting the unvarnished truth are slim pickings these days. Some of the sources you have claimed for example such as Snopes or the Southern Poverty Law Center are NOT unbiased sources.
OBF sees the bias but still reads and watches the MSM and also reads and watches sources that do lean right and usually I can get to the truth that way. The right wing sources are not lying they are telling the rest of the story the MSM likes to leave out because of their own liberal bias. A good rule of thumb there is almost always two sides to a story. Listen to both and weigh them out and see what side you come down on.
-
These posts aren't for you Old. You have already stated you don't care about the truth. They are time savers for people who actual do care if their "news" is bias and if the source has a history of factual reporting.
You seem to take as gospel truth the so called fact checkers. I would maintain news sources that claim to be unbiased and only reporting the unvarnished truth are slim pickings these days. Some of the sources you have claimed for example such as Snopes or the Southern Poverty Law Center are NOT unbiased sources.
OBF sees the bias but still reads and watches the MSM and also reads and watches sources that do lean right and usually I can get to the truth that way. The right wing sources are not lying they are telling the rest of the story the MSM likes to leave out because of their own liberal bias. A good rule of thumb there is almost always two sides to a story. Listen to both and weigh them out and see what side you come down on.
You seem to take as gospel truth the so called fact checkers. I would maintain news sources that claim to be unbiased and only reporting the unvarnished truth are slim pickings these days. Some of the sources you have claimed for example such as Snopes or the Southern Poverty Law Center are NOT unbiased sources.
OBF sees the bias but still reads and watches the MSM and also reads and watches sources that do lean right and usually I can get to the truth that way. The right wing sources are not lying they are telling the rest of the story the MSM likes to leave out because of their own liberal bias. A good rule of thumb there is almost always two sides to a story. Listen to both and weigh them out and see what side you come down on.
Old you read far right bias "news" sources. Everything I read/watch in closer to center, because I'm don't care for propaganda. You love right wing propaganda, because it re-enforces your opinions. You making excuses that your extreme right wing bias "news" sources are comparable to reliable/reputable news is laughable. One try to be unbiased, while the other's existing is base on being bias. Thanks you to people like you the extreme ring wing nuts jobs sites are doing great.
I try to stay in the green, but I will read so stuff from the yellow. You think the red news source are just as good as the green, they just cover the stories "different". No they used loaded words, sketch the truth or break it, pass opinion off as facts. So to you the Enquirer is just as good as New York Times.These ratings aren't opinions they are base of methodology. Again if you really care about the facts over opinions you would do your own research. But you just keep repeating your Fox News talking points like the sheep you are.
-
You seem to take as gospel truth the so called fact checkers. I would maintain news sources that claim to be unbiased and only reporting the unvarnished truth are slim pickings these days. Some of the sources you have claimed for example such as Snopes or the Southern Poverty Law Center are NOT unbiased sources.
OBF sees the bias but still reads and watches the MSM and also reads and watches sources that do lean right and usually I can get to the truth that way. The right wing sources are not lying they are telling the rest of the story the MSM likes to leave out because of their own liberal bias. A good rule of thumb there is almost always two sides to a story. Listen to both and weigh them out and see what side you come down on.
Old you read far right bias "news" sources. Everything I read/watch in closer to center, because I'm don't care for propaganda. You love right wing propaganda, because it re-enforces your opinions. You making excuses that your extreme right wing bias "news" sources are comparable to reliable/reputable news is laughable. One try to be unbiased, while the other's existing is base on being bias. Thanks you to people like you the extreme ring wing nuts jobs sites are doing great.
I try to stay in the green, but I will read so stuff from the yellow. You think the red news source are just as good as the green, they just cover the stories "different". No they used loaded words, sketch the truth or break it, pass opinion off as facts. So to you the Enquirer is just as good as New York Times.These ratings aren't opinions they are base of methodology. Again if you really care about the facts over opinions you would do your own research. But you just keep repeating your Fox News talking points like the sheep you are.
Old you read far right bias "news" sources. Everything I read/watch in closer to center, because I'm don't care for propaganda. You love right wing propaganda, because it re-enforces your opinions. You making excuses that your extreme right wing bias "news" sources are comparable to reliable/reputable news is laughable. One try to be unbiased, while the other's existing is base on being bias. Thanks you to people like you the extreme ring wing nuts jobs sites are doing great.
I try to stay in the green, but I will read so stuff from the yellow. You think the red news source are just as good as the green, they just cover the stories "different". No they used loaded words, sketch the truth or break it, pass opinion off as facts. So to you the Enquirer is just as good as New York Times.These ratings aren't opinions they are base of methodology. Again if you really care about the facts over opinions you would do your own research. But you just keep repeating your Fox News talking points like the sheep you are.
Excellent a blast from the past.
With CNN and time being relatively centered here I have to call bullshit on the whole thing.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
You seem to take as gospel truth the so called fact checkers. I would maintain news sources that claim to be unbiased and only reporting the unvarnished truth are slim pickings these days. Some of the sources you have claimed for example such as Snopes or the Southern Poverty Law Center are NOT unbiased sources.
OBF sees the bias but still reads and watches the MSM and also reads and watches sources that do lean right and usually I can get to the truth that way. The right wing sources are not lying they are telling the rest of the story the MSM likes to leave out because of their own liberal bias. A good rule of thumb there is almost always two sides to a story. Listen to both and weigh them out and see what side you come down on.
Old you read far right bias "news" sources. Everything I read/watch in closer to center, because I'm don't care for propaganda. You love right wing propaganda, because it re-enforces your opinions. You making excuses that your extreme right wing bias "news" sources are comparable to reliable/reputable news is laughable. One try to be unbiased, while the other's existing is base on being bias. Thanks you to people like you the extreme ring wing nuts jobs sites are doing great.
I try to stay in the green, but I will read so stuff from the yellow. You think the red news source are just as good as the green, they just cover the stories "different". No they used loaded words, sketch the truth or break it, pass opinion off as facts. So to you the Enquirer is just as good as New York Times.These ratings aren't opinions they are base of methodology. Again if you really care about the facts over opinions you would do your own research. But you just keep repeating your Fox News talking points like the sheep you are.
Old you read far right bias "news" sources. Everything I read/watch in closer to center, because I'm don't care for propaganda. You love right wing propaganda, because it re-enforces your opinions. You making excuses that your extreme right wing bias "news" sources are comparable to reliable/reputable news is laughable. One try to be unbiased, while the other's existing is base on being bias. Thanks you to people like you the extreme ring wing nuts jobs sites are doing great.
I try to stay in the green, but I will read so stuff from the yellow. You think the red news source are just as good as the green, they just cover the stories "different". No they used loaded words, sketch the truth or break it, pass opinion off as facts. So to you the Enquirer is just as good as New York Times.These ratings aren't opinions they are base of methodology. Again if you really care about the facts over opinions you would do your own research. But you just keep repeating your Fox News talking points like the sheep you are.
???
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login