You misuse that word a lot. Especially around election time. Trump lied about getting the GOP to change the party platform. You have no justification for that.
It is incredible hypocrisy that you hold Trump to account when he has made no clear position, while you simultaneously ignore YEARS of "treasonous" behavior by Obama on the same issue. But then the true facts are not a concern for you, only whatever lying talking points you can front.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
NOW you understand why there's been such projection about "IT WAS THE RUSSIANS." The elephant in the room is Clinton funneling foreign money right into her pocket.
A major technology transfer component of the Russian reset overseen by Hillary Clinton substantially enhanced the Russian military’s technological capabilities, according to both the FBI and the U.S. Army.
Russian government officials and American corporations participated in the technology transfer project overseen by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that funnelled tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation.
A Putin-connected Russian government fund transferred $35 million to a small company with Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta on its executive board, which included senior Russian officials.
John Podesta failed to reveal, as required by law on his federal financial disclosures, his membership on the board of this offshore company.
Podesta also headed up a think tank which wrote favorably about the Russian reset while apparently receiving millions from Kremlin-linked Russian oligarchs via an offshore LLC.
You're clutching desperately to an anecdotal connection between Trump and Putin because that's the only talking point provided to you by the MSM that's within reach. But in doing so, you're blatantly ignoring the confirmed connections between Russia and Hilldawg.
What's worse here though is you're usual attempt at false equivalency (see also: "A republican did it too!"). Trump didn't really lie about anything with regards to Russia. Shillary did, on the other hand.
No need to clutch, Trump lied about changing the party platform. You guys are apparently okay with that. It's just funny seeing the double standard you employ, lol.
The New York Times, after falsely representing the women in Trump's life, and the Times was bitterly rebuked and humiliated when Carrie Prejean and other women come forward to say the NY Times misrepresented them in the hit-piece, now they're making another desperate stab at discrediting Trump.
Would that they devoted the slightest interest at the low-hanging fruit hanging right in front of them regarding Hillary Clinton.
The Times story got the facts correct but they left out that Prejean liked being treated that way. That doesn't change what Trump did though. And it's silly to pretend that reporting on his debt should somehow be off limits. He's running for our highest office WB.
no, the issue isn't having money or not but if Trump is lying to voters about how much he has. A big part of his campaign is that he's successful and isn't beholden to interest groups. If he's got so much debt that he owes to unknown groups and governments, voters should get to know. The media is doing it's job in vetting him. It's not their job to be propaganda for your party.
So... straining to find a context where Trump can be portrayed as a liar is the ultimate priority.
But situations where Hillary Clinton unquestionably lied, compromised national security with her private e-mail server and even stripped classified markers to e-mail top secret information, where Hillary Clinton lied to the surviving families of those killed in Benghazi, alleging their family members died because of an anti-muslim YouTube video, rather than because of her own negligence, and where she sells out America to foreign governments through millions in donations to the Clinton Foundation, that's not news to you!
But the fact that Donald Trump runs a business that has occasional cash flow problens and gets a business loan like most other businesses, THAT to you and the other liberal partisans at the New York Times, is somehow far worse than Hillary's blatant corruption and treason.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
no, the issue isn't having money or not but if Trump is lying to voters about how much he has. A big part of his campaign is that he's successful and isn't beholden to interest groups. If he's got so much debt that he owes to unknown groups and governments, voters should get to know. The media is doing it's job in vetting him. It's not their job to be propaganda for your party.
Trump can just claim he short circuited, then it's all good,right?
no, the issue isn't having money or not but if Trump is lying to voters about how much he has. A big part of his campaign is that he's successful and isn't beholden to interest groups. If he's got so much debt that he owes to unknown groups and governments, voters should get to know. The media is doing it's job in vetting him. It's not their job to be propaganda for your party.
Trump can just claim he short circuited, then it's all good,right?
But that would be at least every other day, lol. No, I think you should just keep ignoring how awful and unfit Trump is and concentrate on bitching about the press for having the audacity to actually do their job.
No. There is blatant media bias, and if equal scrutiny were given by the media to both candidates, this election would at the very least be much closer.
http://www.mrc.org gives quantifiable numbers and examples of this, on pretty much a daily basis.
Things that are major stories with Trump, Oh! Awful! Disgraceful! Renders him unworthy of office! Are not even MENTIONED when Hillary is in the exact same situation, or far worse.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
On the inherent one-sided liberal bias of the media, that is quantifiable in the number of stories reported, and 5 decades of polls of reporters on how they vote, and how they see a spectrum of issues.
As Marco Rubio said during one of the primary debates, answering a question about super-PAC influence, Rubio answered "Well of course, the greatest super-PAC of all is the liberal media..."
There is absolutely no question there is liberal bias in the media, and absolutely no question it negatively impacts Republicans. In 2012, in two separate debates Martha Raddatz and Candy Crowley BOTH intervened on behalf of the Obama/Biden ticket, and sided against the Republican ticket, in Crowley's case in a way that likely cost Romney votes, making Romney look foolish citing false facts in favor of Obama, and not correcting the error until a day later after the debate, when far fewer were watching and probably even knew of the CNN correction. Obama won with 51% of the vote, and the media did its part to bring him the very narrowest of victories.
Newt Gingrich giving opinion on Frau Hitlery's nomination acceptance speech on July 28th, overview of their dysfunctional convention, and of her inherent flaws as a candidate.
Since the DNC convention, where Hillary Clinton got a 9 or 10 point bounce, Trump has in barely 3 weeks continued to close the gap into a virtual tie in most states, and continues to rise in the polls.
