Dan Crenshaw crushes Bill Maher

[AzogtheDefiler]

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

 

[colfax_m]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

 

[colfax_m]

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

A

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

He is in Congress, which is why he shouldn't be lying like this.

He's referring to the No Ban Act. This was an act introduced April 2019 by Judy Chu. You can read it here.

H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

Summary of H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

www.congress.gov

It would have repealed a handful of executive orders that are completely unrelated to the Chinese Travel restrictions. Pelosi didn't introduce it. She certainly didn't propose it "the same day". The No Ban Act would not have prevented Trump from restricting travel to China. The act says a few things but the extent of the limitations is that it requires Trump to tell Congress his rationale for any ban (a requirement which he has shown he has little interest in fulfilling in plenty of other circumstances).

I would ordinarily say that these are mistakes, but given these false statements are all used to craft a specific narrative, I consider them to be lies. There's no way for a person to make numerous mistakes that all contribute to an overall narrative. The narrative is that the restrictions were widely condemned. If that were the case, Crenshaw wouldn't have to be lying to support that allegation.

If the restrictions were widely condemned, he'd be able to point out actual instances of doing so.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

A

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

He is in Congress, which is why he shouldn't be lying like this.

He's referring to the No Ban Act. This was an act introduced April 2019 by Judy Chu. You can read it here.

H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

Summary of H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

www.congress.gov

It would have repealed a handful of executive orders that are completely unrelated to the Chinese Travel restrictions. Pelosi didn't introduce it. She certainly didn't propose it "the same day". The No Ban Act would not have prevented Trump from restricting travel to China. The act says a few things but the extent of the limitations is that it requires Trump to tell Congress his rationale for any ban (a requirement which he has shown he has little interest in fulfilling in plenty of other circumstances).

I would ordinarily say that these are mistakes, but given these false statements are all used to craft a specific narrative, I consider them to be lies. There's no way for a person to make numerous mistakes that all contribute to an overall narrative. The narrative is that the restrictions were widely condemned. If that were the case, Crenshaw wouldn't have to be lying to support that allegation.

If the restrictions were widely condemned, he'd be able to point out actual instances of doing so.

So he is right. People on the left didn't like the travel ban. How about you just say "Thank you for your service"?

Too much?

 

[ColonelAngus]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

 

[colfax_m]

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

A

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

He is in Congress, which is why he shouldn't be lying like this.

He's referring to the No Ban Act. This was an act introduced April 2019 by Judy Chu. You can read it here.

H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

Summary of H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

www.congress.gov

It would have repealed a handful of executive orders that are completely unrelated to the Chinese Travel restrictions. Pelosi didn't introduce it. She certainly didn't propose it "the same day". The No Ban Act would not have prevented Trump from restricting travel to China. The act says a few things but the extent of the limitations is that it requires Trump to tell Congress his rationale for any ban (a requirement which he has shown he has little interest in fulfilling in plenty of other circumstances).

I would ordinarily say that these are mistakes, but given these false statements are all used to craft a specific narrative, I consider them to be lies. There's no way for a person to make numerous mistakes that all contribute to an overall narrative. The narrative is that the restrictions were widely condemned. If that were the case, Crenshaw wouldn't have to be lying to support that allegation.

If the restrictions were widely condemned, he'd be able to point out actual instances of doing so.

So he is right. People on the left didn't like the travel ban. How about you just say "Thank you for your service"?

Too much?

You're such a troll. A sad, sad, sad, troll.

Don't ask questions when you're going to ignore the answer, troll.

 

[colfax_m]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

A

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

He is in Congress, which is why he shouldn't be lying like this.

He's referring to the No Ban Act. This was an act introduced April 2019 by Judy Chu. You can read it here.

H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

Summary of H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

www.congress.gov

It would have repealed a handful of executive orders that are completely unrelated to the Chinese Travel restrictions. Pelosi didn't introduce it. She certainly didn't propose it "the same day". The No Ban Act would not have prevented Trump from restricting travel to China. The act says a few things but the extent of the limitations is that it requires Trump to tell Congress his rationale for any ban (a requirement which he has shown he has little interest in fulfilling in plenty of other circumstances).

I would ordinarily say that these are mistakes, but given these false statements are all used to craft a specific narrative, I consider them to be lies. There's no way for a person to make numerous mistakes that all contribute to an overall narrative. The narrative is that the restrictions were widely condemned. If that were the case, Crenshaw wouldn't have to be lying to support that allegation.

If the restrictions were widely condemned, he'd be able to point out actual instances of doing so.

So he is right. People on the left didn't like the travel ban. How about you just say "Thank you for your service"?

Too much?

You're such a troll. A sad, sad, sad, troll.

Don't ask questions when you're going to ignore the answer, troll.

Relax. I gave an opinion. You're the one coming out with insults.

 

[ColonelAngus]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

Print media?

Who specifically? Can I go to my local Walgreens and ask for print media?

From where should I get accurate news?

 

[colfax_m]

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

A

Maher hasn’t been terribly relevant for a long time. Crenshaw lies repeatedly in this interview and I’ve only watched a few minutes.

What did he lie about?

.

For starters he claims that there was widespread condemnation of Trump’s travel ban. There wasn’t. He even claims Biden had stated he wouldn’t have done it. Also false. He also claimed Pelosi introduced legislation the day that Trump enacted travel restrictions that would have prevented Trump from doing so. That’s a three sided lie. Pelosi didn’t introduce it. It was introduced a year ago. And it wouldn’t have stopped Trump from enacting restrictions.

All those are true. He is actually in Congress. Prove his statements are lies. And there was widespread condemnation.

He is in Congress, which is why he shouldn't be lying like this.

He's referring to the No Ban Act. This was an act introduced April 2019 by Judy Chu. You can read it here.

H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

Summary of H.R.2214 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): NO BAN Act

www.congress.gov

It would have repealed a handful of executive orders that are completely unrelated to the Chinese Travel restrictions. Pelosi didn't introduce it. She certainly didn't propose it "the same day". The No Ban Act would not have prevented Trump from restricting travel to China. The act says a few things but the extent of the limitations is that it requires Trump to tell Congress his rationale for any ban (a requirement which he has shown he has little interest in fulfilling in plenty of other circumstances).

I would ordinarily say that these are mistakes, but given these false statements are all used to craft a specific narrative, I consider them to be lies. There's no way for a person to make numerous mistakes that all contribute to an overall narrative. The narrative is that the restrictions were widely condemned. If that were the case, Crenshaw wouldn't have to be lying to support that allegation.

If the restrictions were widely condemned, he'd be able to point out actual instances of doing so.

So he is right. People on the left didn't like the travel ban. How about you just say "Thank you for your service"?

Too much?

You're such a troll. A sad, sad, sad, troll.

Don't ask questions when you're going to ignore the answer, troll.

Relax. I gave an opinion. You're the one coming out with insults.

If you don't want to be called a troll, stop trolling.

 

[colfax_m]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

Print media?

Who specifically? Can I go to my local Walgreens and ask for print media?

From where should I get accurate news?

I subscribe to the NY Times and WaPo. They're pretty reliable. Reuters, ProPublica and a handful of others are good too. I like reading New Yorker from time to time. WSJ is okay but too technical. The Economist is a good one for outside perspective since they're European based. Foreign Policy is good, but low volume.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

Print media?

Who specifically? Can I go to my local Walgreens and ask for print media?

From where should I get accurate news?

I subscribe to the NY Times and WaPo. They're pretty reliable. Reuters, ProPublica and a handful of others are good too. I like reading New Yorker from time to time. WSJ is okay but too technical. The Economist is a good one for outside perspective since they're European based. Foreign Policy is good, but low volume.

I recommend this. Excellent. Unbiased. In your email every morning.

Morning Brew

Morning Brew delivers quick and insightful updates about the business world every day of the week from Wall St. to Silicon Valley.

www.morningbrew.com

 

[ColonelAngus]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

Print media?

Who specifically? Can I go to my local Walgreens and ask for print media?

From where should I get accurate news?

I subscribe to the NY Times and WaPo. They're pretty reliable. Reuters, ProPublica and a handful of others are good too. I like reading New Yorker from time to time. WSJ is okay but too technical. The Economist is a good one for outside perspective since they're European based. Foreign Policy is good, but low volume.

The NYT reported that Trump is a Russian spy for 3 years. Was that accurate?

 

[LoneLaugher]

I can bash Crenshaw. He’s a soldier who sucks Trump’s dick. He could be a real American hero. But he wants to keep his job more than he wants to keep his integrity.

You guys think he makes you better men. In fact, you make him a worse man. Congrats.

You think he was hired by trump? Lol poor guy.. why do you attack some who has different views then you? So angry! What’s wrong with diversity?

No, dumbass. He has to suck Trump mushroom dick to get re-elected. Sad. Believe me.

Why do you find it hard that people have opposite views of you and why do you attack them? Traditional American values is what built this country not yours.. you’re gonna have to except it..We’re not going anywhere

Are. Values ( plural ) are. Not is. Moron.
Accept. Idiot. The word you want is accept.

It is not the “views” that I object to. It is the lying and the hypocrisy.

Trump is a man of low character. A draft dodger and a cheat.

Crenshaw is supposed to be a man of high character. He is not. He has lowered himself to kiss Trump’s ass in order to stay in office.

**** him and **** you.

See, this is the problem.

Anyone FORCED to defend Trump because of the outlandish insanity or who doesn't join in the calls for his removal from office is "kissing his ass." You motherfuckers FORCE me to defend Trump all the time with your unhinged bullshit. If you fools would actually criticize his real faults as a president, rather than the nonsense about RussiaRussiaRussia and the "quid pro quo" with Ukraine, you would get more support from people like me.

.

You need to read the Mueller report and you need to be honest with yourself about Ukraine. The man is corrupt. That is one of his REAL faults.

The dishonesty and the narcissism are real faults.

This man has no redeeming qualities. None.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I can bash Crenshaw. He’s a soldier who sucks Trump’s dick. He could be a real American hero. But he wants to keep his job more than he wants to keep his integrity.

You guys think he makes you better men. In fact, you make him a worse man. Congrats.

How about you just say "Thank you for your service" and then shut your fat mouth, Lone Leftist.

Nah. He's lost that. **** him.

 

[colfax_m]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

Print media?

Who specifically? Can I go to my local Walgreens and ask for print media?

From where should I get accurate news?

I subscribe to the NY Times and WaPo. They're pretty reliable. Reuters, ProPublica and a handful of others are good too. I like reading New Yorker from time to time. WSJ is okay but too technical. The Economist is a good one for outside perspective since they're European based. Foreign Policy is good, but low volume.

I recommend this. Excellent. Unbiased. In your email every morning.

Morning Brew

Morning Brew delivers quick and insightful updates about the business world every day of the week from Wall St. to Silicon Valley.

www.morningbrew.com

It looks mostly like a news aggregator. Such a service would be impossible without the print media doing the actual work. I don't need my news filtered through someone else.

 

[colfax_m]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

Print media?

Who specifically? Can I go to my local Walgreens and ask for print media?

From where should I get accurate news?

I subscribe to the NY Times and WaPo. They're pretty reliable. Reuters, ProPublica and a handful of others are good too. I like reading New Yorker from time to time. WSJ is okay but too technical. The Economist is a good one for outside perspective since they're European based. Foreign Policy is good, but low volume.

The NYT reported that Trump is a Russian spy for 3 years. Was that accurate?

Show me the report you're referencing please.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I can bash Crenshaw. He’s a soldier who sucks Trump’s dick. He could be a real American hero. But he wants to keep his job more than he wants to keep his integrity.

You guys think he makes you better men. In fact, you make him a worse man. Congrats.

How about you just say "Thank you for your service" and then shut your fat mouth, Lone Leftist.

Nah. He's lost that. **** him.

Fantastic. Go burn that Red White and Blue, you patriot!

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

Print media?

Who specifically? Can I go to my local Walgreens and ask for print media?

From where should I get accurate news?

I subscribe to the NY Times and WaPo. They're pretty reliable. Reuters, ProPublica and a handful of others are good too. I like reading New Yorker from time to time. WSJ is okay but too technical. The Economist is a good one for outside perspective since they're European based. Foreign Policy is good, but low volume.

I recommend this. Excellent. Unbiased. In your email every morning.

Morning Brew

Morning Brew delivers quick and insightful updates about the business world every day of the week from Wall St. to Silicon Valley.

www.morningbrew.com

It looks mostly like a news aggregator. Such a service would be impossible without the print media doing the actual work. I don't need my news filtered through someone else.

Yes, but I am busy with work but the @$$!!! So it is very concise and helpful.

 

[LoneLaugher]

What were Crenshaw’s lies? Specifically.

Listed above. Read the thread.

Lied about Pelosi introducing a bill. Lied about when the bill was introduces. Lied about who introduced it. Lied about what it did.

The No Ban Act was introduced a year ago, not days after the travel restrictions were announced. It was not going to stop Trump from doing anything. Crenshaw lies about to make the viewer believe the act was a direct response to Trump’s travel restrictions which is used to support the false narrative that Trump’s restrictions were universally opposed. It’s a lie. Didn’t happen. He’s gaslighting you.

Wow. Crenshaw is a lying POS.

Who tells the truth? From where should I get my news?

Print media is typically the most reliable. They spend the most time, gather the most facts, and aren't bound by the sensationalist TV and internet news cycles which are too short for any in depth reporting.

Crenshaw is a liar.

Print media?

Who specifically? Can I go to my local Walgreens and ask for print media?

From where should I get accurate news?

I subscribe to the NY Times and WaPo. They're pretty reliable. Reuters, ProPublica and a handful of others are good too. I like reading New Yorker from time to time. WSJ is okay but too technical. The Economist is a good one for outside perspective since they're European based. Foreign Policy is good, but low volume.

The NYT reported that Trump is a Russian spy for 3 years. Was that accurate?

No. It didn't.