Fake News Libturd Style

[jknowgood]

The CIA and NSA say it was the Russians and they did it to help Trump. And there is no evidence Hillary's was hacked. Ay caramba. Read something, GOP chumps.

They won't. They are happy because it affected their opponent and that is more important to them than evidence that a foreign state directly attempted to influence. There is no way of knowing whether or not it a tually made a difference in the election, but tbat isnt the point. Americans should be outraged. The fact that some are going so far as to justify and applaud it is beyond disconcerting. It's disgusting.

Again, influence how?

I'm not sure we will know the degree to which it affected the election, but I'm sure it had some influence. Either way, that is water under the bridge now.

Are you OK with this happening? Or, do you think we should take it seriously? Do you see it as undermining the integrity of our elections?

I do.

No, no you don't get off with that response, influence the election is a huge word. How did they influence voters? That has to be the question to answer since it is the accusation. Come on how?

Yes. I can. Who are you to make demands when you won't even answer questions?

There is no objective way right now to measure the damage done by the hacks, releasing to wikileaks, Russian propagated fake news, etc.

I think it would be naive to assume there was no effect. You can look at the proliferation of fake news and conspiracy theories spawned by all this, as one example and the willingness of people to believe it. You think it hasn't influenced opinions? There has been little attempt to critically analyze the material in its appropriate context. It's been released in data dumps.

Did it influence the election? Yes. Look at how the polls dropped after each release. Of course the polls were notoriously off this time but I think that has much to do with the many wildcards thrown into the election.

Yeah what did come out of the emails is that Hillary had to cheat against Sanders. You still supported her. Hillary even received the question of the debates in advance. Talk about rigging the election.

 

[Coyote]

The CIA and NSA say it was the Russians and they did it to help Trump. And there is no evidence Hillary's was hacked. Ay caramba. Read something, GOP chumps.

They won't. They are happy because it affected their opponent and that is more important to them than evidence that a foreign state directly attempted to influence. There is no way of knowing whether or not it a tually made a difference in the election, but tbat isnt the point. Americans should be outraged. The fact that some are going so far as to justify and applaud it is beyond disconcerting. It's disgusting.

How did it affect the election? Come on girl you keep posting more fake crap!

What exactly did Putin do?

Exactly! All morning it's been someone connected to Russia what's that actually mean? Oh yeah, no one knows and it's faked

I know Hillary gives classified information to our enemies. She is president material. Putin says he will work with Trump, and all a sudden put in rigged our election. Liberals are crazy.View attachment 101599

You "know".

 

[jc456]

I see no one of the libturd side can defend their fake news thank you

 

[jknowgood]

They won't. They are happy because it affected their opponent and that is more important to them than evidence that a foreign state directly attempted to influence. There is no way of knowing whether or not it a tually made a difference in the election, but tbat isnt the point. Americans should be outraged. The fact that some are going so far as to justify and applaud it is beyond disconcerting. It's disgusting.

How did it affect the election? Come on girl you keep posting more fake crap!

What exactly did Putin do?

Exactly! All morning it's been someone connected to Russia what's that actually mean? Oh yeah, no one knows and it's faked

I know Hillary gives classified information to our enemies. She is president material. Putin says he will work with Trump, and all a sudden put in rigged our election. Liberals are crazy.View attachment 101599

You "know".

I also know Hillary cheated against Sanders and was given questions in advance to the debates. Is that not rigging the election?

 

[dannyboys]

Not going to hold the ***** responsible for putting her emails on unsecured emails?

No, you are not. Makes you a ******* idiot.

I love too how you feign outrage over that and not about ALL of the other countries hacking our emails just about every day.

Very well documented too. Now, all of a sudden you just care sooooo much. Of course ignoring the ***** and the unsecured servers.

Plus how you ignore all of the disgraceful information and lies and bribes and what the Clinton Foundation was up to.

So, please. Go yell in your little echo chambers about how unjust things are for little ******* hillary.

Just don't do it with me.

Wah Wah Wah

Just admit it. You support Russia intervening in our elections as long as your candidate benefits.

Say after me: PRESIDENT PUTIN

You have proof of this intervention or are you just posting fake news? Hillary warned you that fake news like this could get someone killed.

Prove it's fake news.

That is the phonies BS response I have had in a long long time. Prove to me that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

So the CIA confirms that the Russians attempted to mess with our elections and you promptly label it fake news with no supporting evidence? Talk about BS.

NO you ****-witt!
Wrong as always!
The Washington Post claimed an 'anonymous unnamed source' at the CIA claimed the Russians affected the election outcome.
Yet the OFFICIAL CIA announcement said the CIA had NO information proving the Russians did **** all!
What the **** is wrong with you?

 

[jc456]

They won't. They are happy because it affected their opponent and that is more important to them than evidence that a foreign state directly attempted to influence. There is no way of knowing whether or not it a tually made a difference in the election, but tbat isnt the point. Americans should be outraged. The fact that some are going so far as to justify and applaud it is beyond disconcerting. It's disgusting.

How did it affect the election? Come on girl you keep posting more fake crap!

What exactly did Putin do?

Exactly! All morning it's been someone connected to Russia what's that actually mean? Oh yeah, no one knows and it's faked

I know Hillary gives classified information to our enemies. She is president material. Putin says he will work with Trump, and all a sudden put in rigged our election. Liberals are crazy.View attachment 101599

You "know".

Yeah

 

[Coyote]

They won't. They are happy because it affected their opponent and that is more important to them than evidence that a foreign state directly attempted to influence. There is no way of knowing whether or not it a tually made a difference in the election, but tbat isnt the point. Americans should be outraged. The fact that some are going so far as to justify and applaud it is beyond disconcerting. It's disgusting.

Again, influence how?

I'm not sure we will know the degree to which it affected the election, but I'm sure it had some influence. Either way, that is water under the bridge now.

Are you OK with this happening? Or, do you think we should take it seriously? Do you see it as undermining the integrity of our elections?

I do.

No, no you don't get off with that response, influence the election is a huge word. How did they influence voters? That has to be the question to answer since it is the accusation. Come on how?

Yes. I can. Who are you to make demands when you won't even answer questions?

There is no objective way right now to measure the damage done by the hacks, releasing to wikileaks, Russian propagated fake news, etc.

I think it would be naive to assume there was no effect. You can look at the proliferation of fake news and conspiracy theories spawned by all this, as one example and the willingness of people to believe it. You think it hasn't influenced opinions? There has been little attempt to critically analyze the material in its appropriate context. It's been released in data dumps.

Did it influence the election? Yes. Look at how the polls dropped after each release. Of course the polls were notoriously off this time but I think that has much to do with the many wildcards thrown into the election.

Yeah what did come out of the emails is that Hillary had to cheat against Sanders. You still supported her. Hillary even received the question of the debates in advance. Talk about rigging the election.

I supported Sanders.

But your statement indicates a complete ignorance of how the party primary system works.

There was nothing in those emails about Clinton cheating. It was back and forth from dnc staffers on who the party should support, and that they were going to back Clinton. This is how the parties operate in primaries. They can even decide to circumvent the popular vote and select a candidate. In fact, there was discussion of that within the GOP over Trump. It's been done. Oh, and no outrage and claims of cheating and corruption from you guys

Primaries are about PARTIES not popular votes.

 

[jc456]

How did it affect the election? Come on girl you keep posting more fake crap!

What exactly did Putin do?

Exactly! All morning it's been someone connected to Russia what's that actually mean? Oh yeah, no one knows and it's faked

I know Hillary gives classified information to our enemies. She is president material. Putin says he will work with Trump, and all a sudden put in rigged our election. Liberals are crazy.View attachment 101599

You "know".

I also know Hillary cheated against Sanders and was given questions in advance to the debates. Is that not rigging the election?

They continue to show they're hypocrites

 

[dannyboys]

Actually..no, that is what YOU are saying. Please don't attribute your delusional thinking to the rest of us.

Whether Hillary would have won or lost without Russia's meddling is an unknown and ultimately irrelevant. What matters is that a foreign power did this. If that is too much for your little bird brain to grasp, then this might be the time for a strategic retreat to your Safe Space and a fresh pair of Depends.

A foreign power had to expose the shitbag DNC because the media won't, of course even if they did you'd ignore them too.

No evidence the DNC actually did anything, just staffers BSing on e-mails, dupe.

So THAT'S why The Ramen Noodle Head Debbie had a resign in disgrace and THATS why Donna Brazile had to resign in disgrace??????????
******* DUMMY!

 

[jc456]

Again, influence how?

I'm not sure we will know the degree to which it affected the election, but I'm sure it had some influence. Either way, that is water under the bridge now.

Are you OK with this happening? Or, do you think we should take it seriously? Do you see it as undermining the integrity of our elections?

I do.

No, no you don't get off with that response, influence the election is a huge word. How did they influence voters? That has to be the question to answer since it is the accusation. Come on how?

Yes. I can. Who are you to make demands when you won't even answer questions?

There is no objective way right now to measure the damage done by the hacks, releasing to wikileaks, Russian propagated fake news, etc.

I think it would be naive to assume there was no effect. You can look at the proliferation of fake news and conspiracy theories spawned by all this, as one example and the willingness of people to believe it. You think it hasn't influenced opinions? There has been little attempt to critically analyze the material in its appropriate context. It's been released in data dumps.

Did it influence the election? Yes. Look at how the polls dropped after each release. Of course the polls were notoriously off this time but I think that has much to do with the many wildcards thrown into the election.

Yeah what did come out of the emails is that Hillary had to cheat against Sanders. You still supported her. Hillary even received the question of the debates in advance. Talk about rigging the election.

I supported Sanders.

But your statement indicates a complete ignorance of how the party primary system works.

There was nothing in those emails about Clinton cheating. It was back and forth from dnc staffers on who the party should support, and that they were going to back Clinton. This is how the parties operate in primaries. They can even decide to circumvent the popular vote and select a candidate. In fact, there was discussion of that within the GOP over Trump. It's been done. Oh, and no outrage and claims of cheating and corruption from you guys

Primaries are about PARTIES not popular votes.

Yeah, what's a super pac mean?

So rigging is ok in primaries?

It's amazing to me what libturds find acceptable! Wow, such hypocrites.

 

[Coyote]

Wah Wah Wah

Just admit it. You support Russia intervening in our elections as long as your candidate benefits.

Say after me: PRESIDENT PUTIN

You have proof of this intervention or are you just posting fake news? Hillary warned you that fake news like this could get someone killed.

Prove it's fake news.

That is the phonies BS response I have had in a long long time. Prove to me that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

So the CIA confirms that the Russians attempted to mess with our elections and you promptly label it fake news with no supporting evidence? Talk about BS.

NO you ****-witt!
Wrong as always!
The Washington Post claimed an 'anonymous unnamed source' at the CIA claimed the Russians affected the election outcome.
Yet the OFFICIAL CIA announcement said the CIA had NO information proving the Russians did **** all!
What the **** is wrong with you?

Google "Russia influence election" and look at recent articles. They have a "a high degree of confidence" which is typically as close as you can get in that biz. They also have "high degree of confidence" that the the GOP was hacked, but they open not to release that info to wikileaks. That is interesting.

 

[jc456]

You have proof of this intervention or are you just posting fake news? Hillary warned you that fake news like this could get someone killed.

Prove it's fake news.

That is the phonies BS response I have had in a long long time. Prove to me that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

So the CIA confirms that the Russians attempted to mess with our elections and you promptly label it fake news with no supporting evidence? Talk about BS.

NO you ****-witt!
Wrong as always!
The Washington Post claimed an 'anonymous unnamed source' at the CIA claimed the Russians affected the election outcome.
Yet the OFFICIAL CIA announcement said the CIA had NO information proving the Russians did **** all!
What the **** is wrong with you?

Google "Russia influence election" and look at recent articles. They have a "a high degree of confidence" which is typically as close as you can get in that biz. They also have "high degree of confidence" that the the GOP was hacked, but they open not to release that info to wikileaks. That is interesting.

I don't want to read a high level of confidence, I want to see they have evidence. Faked is all it is!

Post evidence Or it's fake

 

[dannyboys]

Again, influence how?

I'm not sure we will know the degree to which it affected the election, but I'm sure it had some influence. Either way, that is water under the bridge now.

Are you OK with this happening? Or, do you think we should take it seriously? Do you see it as undermining the integrity of our elections?

I do.

No, no you don't get off with that response, influence the election is a huge word. How did they influence voters? That has to be the question to answer since it is the accusation. Come on how?

Yes. I can. Who are you to make demands when you won't even answer questions?

There is no objective way right now to measure the damage done by the hacks, releasing to wikileaks, Russian propagated fake news, etc.

I think it would be naive to assume there was no effect. You can look at the proliferation of fake news and conspiracy theories spawned by all this, as one example and the willingness of people to believe it. You think it hasn't influenced opinions? There has been little attempt to critically analyze the material in its appropriate context. It's been released in data dumps.

Did it influence the election? Yes. Look at how the polls dropped after each release. Of course the polls were notoriously off this time but I think that has much to do with the many wildcards thrown into the election.

Yeah what did come out of the emails is that Hillary had to cheat against Sanders. You still supported her. Hillary even received the question of the debates in advance. Talk about rigging the election.

I supported Sanders.

But your statement indicates a complete ignorance of how the party primary system works.

There was nothing in those emails about Clinton cheating. It was back and forth from dnc staffers on who the party should support, and that they were going to back Clinton. This is how the parties operate in primaries. They can even decide to circumvent the popular vote and select a candidate. In fact, there was discussion of that within the GOP over Trump. It's been done. Oh, and no outrage and claims of cheating and corruption from you guys

Primaries are about PARTIES not popular votes.

And "elections have consequences" dummy!!!!!!
Man up! Your Queen has lost to a ******* nobody solely because he had dark skin. The second time the ***** lost to "an orange clown".
What the **** does THAT say about the quality of your candidate????
I KNOW!!!! It wasn't the RUSSIANS after all. It was those ******* Negroes who sat on the porch! OH NO! It was the ******* Latinos who didn't vote for the Queen! OH NO! It was those "STUPID"!!!!!! White educated women who turned out not to be so ******* smart as you thought they were who voted for Trump! OH NO! It was those "stupid" blue collar workers in the rust belt who were so ******* stupid they were "stupid" enough to vote for the orange clown!
When will it EVER end with you fidiots???
Charlie Manson could have beat Hillary with half the 1.2 billion the Queen spent to get elected.
******* wise up!
I've sent your Queen a Christmas gift: An I love Wisconsin' T-shirt and an atlas to show her where the State is.
HAAAA HAAAAA!

 

[Coyote]

I'm not sure we will know the degree to which it affected the election, but I'm sure it had some influence. Either way, that is water under the bridge now.

Are you OK with this happening? Or, do you think we should take it seriously? Do you see it as undermining the integrity of our elections?

I do.

No, no you don't get off with that response, influence the election is a huge word. How did they influence voters? That has to be the question to answer since it is the accusation. Come on how?

Yes. I can. Who are you to make demands when you won't even answer questions?

There is no objective way right now to measure the damage done by the hacks, releasing to wikileaks, Russian propagated fake news, etc.

I think it would be naive to assume there was no effect. You can look at the proliferation of fake news and conspiracy theories spawned by all this, as one example and the willingness of people to believe it. You think it hasn't influenced opinions? There has been little attempt to critically analyze the material in its appropriate context. It's been released in data dumps.

Did it influence the election? Yes. Look at how the polls dropped after each release. Of course the polls were notoriously off this time but I think that has much to do with the many wildcards thrown into the election.

Yeah what did come out of the emails is that Hillary had to cheat against Sanders. You still supported her. Hillary even received the question of the debates in advance. Talk about rigging the election.

I supported Sanders.

But your statement indicates a complete ignorance of how the party primary system works.

There was nothing in those emails about Clinton cheating. It was back and forth from dnc staffers on who the party should support, and that they were going to back Clinton. This is how the parties operate in primaries. They can even decide to circumvent the popular vote and select a candidate. In fact, there was discussion of that within the GOP over Trump. It's been done. Oh, and no outrage and claims of cheating and corruption from you guys

Primaries are about PARTIES not popular votes.

Yeah, what's a super pac mean?

So rigging is ok in primaries?

It's amazing to me what libturds find acceptable! Wow, such hypocrites.

It has nothing to do with acceptable or not acceptable. It's the way the parties run THEIR primaries. I'm not a member of either. Primaries are about the PARTIES not individual candidates. You don't like, then work within your party to change it. Conserverards would have more credibility if their outrage extended to their own

 

[Coyote]

Prove it's fake news.

That is the phonies BS response I have had in a long long time. Prove to me that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

So the CIA confirms that the Russians attempted to mess with our elections and you promptly label it fake news with no supporting evidence? Talk about BS.

NO you ****-witt!
Wrong as always!
The Washington Post claimed an 'anonymous unnamed source' at the CIA claimed the Russians affected the election outcome.
Yet the OFFICIAL CIA announcement said the CIA had NO information proving the Russians did **** all!
What the **** is wrong with you?

Google "Russia influence election" and look at recent articles. They have a "a high degree of confidence" which is typically as close as you can get in that biz. They also have "high degree of confidence" that the the GOP was hacked, but they open not to release that info to wikileaks. That is interesting.

I don't want to read a high level of confidence, I want to see they have evidence. Faked is all it is!

Post evidence Or it's fake

Sure, like they ever release intelligence. You don't demand evidence for your claims, innuendo is enough. Double standards much?

 

[dannyboys]

You have proof of this intervention or are you just posting fake news? Hillary warned you that fake news like this could get someone killed.

Prove it's fake news.

That is the phonies BS response I have had in a long long time. Prove to me that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

So the CIA confirms that the Russians attempted to mess with our elections and you promptly label it fake news with no supporting evidence? Talk about BS.

NO you ****-witt!
Wrong as always!
The Washington Post claimed an 'anonymous unnamed source' at the CIA claimed the Russians affected the election outcome.
Yet the OFFICIAL CIA announcement said the CIA had NO information proving the Russians did **** all!
What the **** is wrong with you?

Google "Russia influence election" and look at recent articles. They have a "a high degree of confidence" which is typically as close as you can get in that biz. They also have "high degree of confidence" that the the GOP was hacked, but they open not to release that info to wikileaks. That is interesting.

The recent articles are all written by the WP/MSNBC/CNN. Not ONE of those sites anyone other than 'anonymous sources".
You wait asshole. These Fake News stories put up by radical LIBs are going to be end up as truthful as the Hand's Up Don't Shoot" lies.

 

[Coyote]

Prove it's fake news.

That is the phonies BS response I have had in a long long time. Prove to me that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

So the CIA confirms that the Russians attempted to mess with our elections and you promptly label it fake news with no supporting evidence? Talk about BS.

NO you ****-witt!
Wrong as always!
The Washington Post claimed an 'anonymous unnamed source' at the CIA claimed the Russians affected the election outcome.
Yet the OFFICIAL CIA announcement said the CIA had NO information proving the Russians did **** all!
What the **** is wrong with you?

Google "Russia influence election" and look at recent articles. They have a "a high degree of confidence" which is typically as close as you can get in that biz. They also have "high degree of confidence" that the the GOP was hacked, but they open not to release that info to wikileaks. That is interesting.

The recent articles are all written by the WP/MSNBC/CNN. Not ONE of those sites anyone other than 'anonymous sources".
You wait asshole. These Fake News stories put up by radical LIBs are going to be end up as truthful as the Hand's Up Don't Shoot" lies.

Or your pizza gate fake news story?

 

[jc456]

That is the phonies BS response I have had in a long long time. Prove to me that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

So the CIA confirms that the Russians attempted to mess with our elections and you promptly label it fake news with no supporting evidence? Talk about BS.

NO you ****-witt!
Wrong as always!
The Washington Post claimed an 'anonymous unnamed source' at the CIA claimed the Russians affected the election outcome.
Yet the OFFICIAL CIA announcement said the CIA had NO information proving the Russians did **** all!
What the **** is wrong with you?

Google "Russia influence election" and look at recent articles. They have a "a high degree of confidence" which is typically as close as you can get in that biz. They also have "high degree of confidence" that the the GOP was hacked, but they open not to release that info to wikileaks. That is interesting.

The recent articles are all written by the WP/MSNBC/CNN. Not ONE of those sites anyone other than 'anonymous sources".
You wait asshole. These Fake News stories put up by radical LIBs are going to be end up as truthful as the Hand's Up Don't Shoot" lies.

Or your pizza gate fake news story?

Was " hands up" fake or not?

 

[jc456]

That is the phonies BS response I have had in a long long time. Prove to me that the tooth fairy doesn't exist.

So the CIA confirms that the Russians attempted to mess with our elections and you promptly label it fake news with no supporting evidence? Talk about BS.

NO you ****-witt!
Wrong as always!
The Washington Post claimed an 'anonymous unnamed source' at the CIA claimed the Russians affected the election outcome.
Yet the OFFICIAL CIA announcement said the CIA had NO information proving the Russians did **** all!
What the **** is wrong with you?

Google "Russia influence election" and look at recent articles. They have a "a high degree of confidence" which is typically as close as you can get in that biz. They also have "high degree of confidence" that the the GOP was hacked, but they open not to release that info to wikileaks. That is interesting.

I don't want to read a high level of confidence, I want to see they have evidence. Faked is all it is!

Post evidence Or it's fake

Sure, like they ever release intelligence. You don't demand evidence for your claims, innuendo is enough. Double standards much?

No, the MSM is reporting it! Based on what? Give a name and what the accused said! Where'd they get the story?
Why should I believe them? What credibility do they have after "hands up don't shoot " fk them!

 

[jc456]

I believe nothing from MSM! They are biased nut jobs with one objective! To hurt me and my side! Fk them and you for believing them with no evidence!