Here we go again

SFGbob

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

So I guess Hondo isn't going to tell us why he called Hillary's lie a "fact." Funny how Hondo has tried to hold me responsible for people who talk about Seth Rich, when I've never said a word about it, but when Hillary tells blatant lies about blacks being turned away at the polls Hondo calls it a "fact" and takes no responsibility for it.

If you can't see the difference between someone bitching and lying about voter rolls. And someone outright making up lies calling someone a murderer and kingpin of a child sex ring. I can't help you. Fuck you are stupid.

Can you see the difference between you lying and claiming what Hillary said was a "fact" and me never once saying anything Seth Rich?

If she was lying Hondo, why did you call it a "fact?"

2001400ex

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

So I guess Hondo isn't going to tell us why he called Hillary's lie a "fact." Funny how Hondo has tried to hold me responsible for people who talk about Seth Rich, when I've never said a word about it, but when Hillary tells blatant lies about blacks being turned away at the polls Hondo calls it a "fact" and takes no responsibility for it.

If you can't see the difference between someone bitching and lying about voter rolls. And someone outright making up lies calling someone a murderer and kingpin of a child sex ring. I can't help you. Fuck you are stupid.

Can you see the difference between you lying and claiming what Hillary said was a "fact" and me never once saying anything Seth Rich?

If she was lying Hondo, why did you call it a "fact?"

Why don't you pull up what I said. I didn't say it was fact. Idiot.

Seriously. Read for comprehension.

SFGbob

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

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.”

I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?

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?

Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.

What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?

2001400ex

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

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.”

I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?

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?

Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.

What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?

Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".

RaceBannon

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

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.”

I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?

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?

Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.

What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?

Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".

What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?

JFC you really are pathological

2001400ex

RaceBannon said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

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.”

I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?

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?

Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.

What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?

Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".

What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?

JFC you really are pathological

Read the WaPo article

PurpleThrobber

HHusky said:

PurpleThrobber 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.

You don't understand "legitimacy"? Did you go to college?

The fuck does it matter whether Donald Trump or Hillary or Bozo the Clown makes a statement that the election is "de-legitimate". There are election commissions in every county and parish in this country. Somehow they all of a sudden got bamboozled after 250 years of elections in this country?

That's ridiculous. And to now predict that is what Trump is going to say years before the event happens...that's even more ridiculous.

Have you ever once had a thought that goes against your party line?

RaceBannon

2001400ex said:

RaceBannon said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

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.”

I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?

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?

Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.

What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?

Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".

What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?

JFC you really are pathological

Read the WaPo article

Fuck off

2001400ex

RaceBannon said:

2001400ex said:

RaceBannon said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

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.”

I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?

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?

Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.

What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?

Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".

What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?

JFC you really are pathological

Read the WaPo article

Fuck off

I do have to chuckle at how you read the fox news article quoting the WaPo article. But you won't actually go to WaPo itself and read it. Keep your head buried in the sand. Using statistics to lie is much worse than calling someone a murderer and a child sex ring Mastermind.

SFGbob

2001400ex said:

RaceBannon said:

2001400ex said:

RaceBannon said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

SFGbob said:

2001400ex said:

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.”

I thought the Washington Post is liberal. Are you saying they are eating their own?

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?

Well one is based in fact and the other is bullshit repeated on the number 1 news talk show.

What's it like being a pathological liar Hondo?

Do you know the difference between "comment based on fact" and "a factual comment" is? Remember the whole discussion on lying with statistics? Of course you are too simple minded to understand this. So you go with "pathological liar".

What fact was her comment base on since it is a false statement?

JFC you really are pathological

Read the WaPo article

Fuck off

I do have to chuckle at how you read the fox news article quoting the WaPo article. But you won't actually go to WaPo itself and read it. Keep your head buried in the sand. Using statistics to lie is much worse than calling someone a murderer and a child sex ring Mastermind.

I read it. You're a fucking liar. Her statement wasn't based on fact it was a fucking lie and instead of admitting that you actually had the gall to defend it.