Here we go again
You can't make this shit up
https://cnn.com/2019/03/06/politics/donald-trump-2020-election-illegitimate/index.html
Comments
-
The fuck does 'de-legitimize' mean?
You either win or you don't.
Does Hillary Rodham Clinton want some fucking participation ribbon?
De-legitimize? Christ.
-
Seems problematicPurpleThrobber said:The fuck does 'de-legitimize' mean?
You either win or you don't.
Does Hillary Rodham Clinton want some fucking participation ribbon?
De-legitimize? Christ. -
https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
-
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Are you proud of being stupid or is there another reason for your post?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.” -
Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
Fact? -
Hondo holds Hannity to a higher standard than Hillary. Why did the WaPo give Hillary’s “facts” 4 Pinocchio’s Hondo?2001400ex said:
Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.SFGbob said:
Hey Hondo would you say that your party's Presidential Candidate's conspiracy theories about black voter suppression are worse than or equal to an anonymous message board poster's comments about Pizzagate or Seth Rich?2001400ex said:
I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?RaceBannon said:https://foxnews.com/politics/washington-post-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-voter-suppression-claims
The Washington Post's fact-checker sharply critiqued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her claims on Sunday concerning voter suppression in Wisconsin and Georgia in the 2016 presidential election.
“Clinton made several factual errors, offered questionable claims about a couple of studies, and ended up giving a misleading assessment of her loss,” Salvador Rizzo wrote in his column. The Post gave Clinton “Four Pinocchios.”
“I was the first person who ran for president without the protection of the Voting Rights Act, and I will tell you, it makes a really big difference,” Clinton said Sunday in Selma, Ala., commemorating “Bloody Sunday.” “And it doesn’t just make a difference in Alabama and Georgia; it made a difference in Wisconsin, where the best studies that have been done said somewhere between 40 [thousand] and 80,000 people were turned away from the polls because of the color of their skin, because of their age, because of whatever excuse could be made up to stop a fellow American citizen from voting.”
“Just think about it: Between 2012, the prior presidential election where we still had the Voting Rights Act, and 2016, when my name was on the ballot, there were fewer voters registered in Georgia than there had been those prior four years,” Clinton told the audience.
The Post responded that “Clinton’s claim that total voter registration declined in that state from 2012 to 2016 is false; it increased.”
