Once and for all... why you shouldn't believe the MSM and I want you BIASED MSM defenders --- defend!

[HappyJoy]

p

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

Plopped kids in OBAMA'S CAGES. The rest of that BS is out of context as well like everything else that the MSM spewed for the last four years. They also told us he recommended shooting up bleach--NEVER HAPPENED.

The fact that you guys still continue to tell lies (but you probably don't know it) about what the original purpose of those cages were for demonstrates that your news sources are doing you a disservice.

Why does the original purpose of the cages matter?

The cages weren't intended to be used to strip children from their families and house for months on end only to lose the connection of these kids to their families on the order of thousands and still hundreds appear to be lost forever.

The cages were constructed during a period under the Obama administration when a larger than usual number of unaccompanied children were crossing the border and were used to house these kids for up to 72 hours before being transferred over to HHS.

Ok and again I’ll ask how that is relevant to how Trump has used them and handled the situation. You know that even if Obama built and used them to torture babies it wouldn’t make any inappropriate actions by Trump magically OK, right? Bringing up Obama is a wahtaboutism, a distraction from what we are discussing

Ah, I see what you are saying. It is a whataboutism for sure. Additionally it's a lie told to normalize Trump.

The term "whataboutism" is the way leftwingers announce that they are proud to be hypocrites.

What about when conservatives use the same term?

 

[candycorn]

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

That's 100% lies, of course. That's all you NAZIs ever do is lie, lie, lie.

You're woefully misinformed.

 

[bripat9643]

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

That's 100% lies, of course. That's all you NAZIs ever do is lie, lie, lie.

You're woefully misinformed.

Obviously not.

 

[bripat9643]

p

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

Plopped kids in OBAMA'S CAGES. The rest of that BS is out of context as well like everything else that the MSM spewed for the last four years. They also told us he recommended shooting up bleach--NEVER HAPPENED.

The fact that you guys still continue to tell lies (but you probably don't know it) about what the original purpose of those cages were for demonstrates that your news sources are doing you a disservice.

Why does the original purpose of the cages matter?

The cages weren't intended to be used to strip children from their families and house for months on end only to lose the connection of these kids to their families on the order of thousands and still hundreds appear to be lost forever.

The cages were constructed during a period under the Obama administration when a larger than usual number of unaccompanied children were crossing the border and were used to house these kids for up to 72 hours before being transferred over to HHS.

Ok and again I’ll ask how that is relevant to how Trump has used them and handled the situation. You know that even if Obama built and used them to torture babies it wouldn’t make any inappropriate actions by Trump magically OK, right? Bringing up Obama is a wahtaboutism, a distraction from what we are discussing

Ah, I see what you are saying. It is a whataboutism for sure. Additionally it's a lie told to normalize Trump.

The term "whataboutism" is the way leftwingers announce that they are proud to be hypocrites.

What about when conservatives use the same term?

They only use it to show what hypocrites NAZIs like you are.

 

[candycorn]

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

That's 100% lies, of course. That's all you NAZIs ever do is lie, lie, lie.

You're woefully misinformed.

Obviously not.

You don't think he fired anyone by tweet?

 

[bripat9643]

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

That's 100% lies, of course. That's all you NAZIs ever do is lie, lie, lie.

You're woefully misinformed.

Obviously not.

You don't think he fired anyone by tweet?

I think you're referring to Jim Comey. It couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.

 

[bripat9643]

p

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

Plopped kids in OBAMA'S CAGES. The rest of that BS is out of context as well like everything else that the MSM spewed for the last four years. They also told us he recommended shooting up bleach--NEVER HAPPENED.

The fact that you guys still continue to tell lies (but you probably don't know it) about what the original purpose of those cages were for demonstrates that your news sources are doing you a disservice.

What does it matter what the original purpose was? There's no doubt about the fact the the Obama admin built them, and they would have reviled Trump if he had done it.

Of course the purpose something was built for and how it was used matters. It's not like you care that the Trump administration separated families anyway.

Obama used it to detain children separately from their parents. Obviously you don't care that the Obama administration separated families.

 

[candycorn]

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

That's 100% lies, of course. That's all you NAZIs ever do is lie, lie, lie.

You're woefully misinformed.

Obviously not.

You don't think he fired anyone by tweet?

I think you're referring to Jim Comey. It couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.

It also happened to Prince Feebus or whatever his name was. Firing people by tweet is an asshole move...
Good to see you are now contradticting yourself about what I poste being "100% lies".
Thanks for the early morning batting practice fuck face.

 

[bripat9643]

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

That's 100% lies, of course. That's all you NAZIs ever do is lie, lie, lie.

You're woefully misinformed.

Obviously not.

You don't think he fired anyone by tweet?

I think you're referring to Jim Comey. It couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.

It also happened to Prince Feebus or whatever his name was. Firing people by tweet is an asshole move...
Good to see you are now contradticting yourself about what I poste being "100% lies".
Thanks for the early morning batting practice fuck face.

You mean Rience Preibus. That didn't happen:

​

Reince Priebus - Wikipedia​

​

Priebus stated on CNN that he had resigned on July 27, 2017. The following day Donald Trump announced on Twitter that he had named John F. Kelly as new White House Chief of Staff.​

 

[bripat9643]

Fact 1: The press largely leans left.

Fact 2: Dismissing everything they say as fake news is comically simplistic and ignorant.

Well, yeah....look at your average trump cultist.

A pretty brilliant move by talk radio, you have to admit: "Don't listen to the enemy, just listen to me. I speak da troof".

Trump focused on that ignorant, paranoid audience and got elected.

ROFL! Isn't that exactly what Twitter and Facebook are saying right now? Not only are they saying it, they are preventing us from listening to other sources of news.

You poor things just can't take responsibility for anything you do. Whataboutism is your only thought.

You have been conned. Tough shit.

What am I now taking responsibility for, NAZI?

 

[Mac1958]

Fact 1: The press largely leans left.

Fact 2: Dismissing everything they say as fake news is comically simplistic and ignorant.

Well, yeah....look at your average trump cultist.

A pretty brilliant move by talk radio, you have to admit: "Don't listen to the enemy, just listen to me. I speak da troof".

Trump focused on that ignorant, paranoid audience and got elected.

ROFL! Isn't that exactly what Twitter and Facebook are saying right now? Not only are they saying it, they are preventing us from listening to other sources of news.

You poor things just can't take responsibility for anything you do. Whataboutism is your only thought.

You have been conned. Tough shit.

What am I now taking responsibility for, NAZI?

Nothing, jihadi. That's the problem.

 

[bripat9643]

Fact 1: The press largely leans left.

Fact 2: Dismissing everything they say as fake news is comically simplistic and ignorant.

Well, yeah....look at your average trump cultist.

A pretty brilliant move by talk radio, you have to admit: "Don't listen to the enemy, just listen to me. I speak da troof".

Trump focused on that ignorant, paranoid audience and got elected.

ROFL! Isn't that exactly what Twitter and Facebook are saying right now? Not only are they saying it, they are preventing us from listening to other sources of news.

You poor things just can't take responsibility for anything you do. Whataboutism is your only thought.

You have been conned. Tough shit.

You're behaving just like a perfect servile little NAZI. Using the term "whataboutism is the way a leftwinger admits he is proud to be a hypocrite." Now click your heels together and go lie to someone else.

You posted a picture of a leftwinger, moron.

 

[Mac1958]

Fact 1: The press largely leans left.

Fact 2: Dismissing everything they say as fake news is comically simplistic and ignorant.

Well, yeah....look at your average trump cultist.

A pretty brilliant move by talk radio, you have to admit: "Don't listen to the enemy, just listen to me. I speak da troof".

Trump focused on that ignorant, paranoid audience and got elected.

ROFL! Isn't that exactly what Twitter and Facebook are saying right now? Not only are they saying it, they are preventing us from listening to other sources of news.

You poor things just can't take responsibility for anything you do. Whataboutism is your only thought.

You have been conned. Tough shit.

You're behaving just like a perfect servile little NAZI. Using the term "whataboutism is the way a leftwinger admits he is proud to be a hypocrite." Now click your heels together and go lie to someone else.

You posted a picture of a leftwinger, moron.

Perhaps you missed something, Einstein.

You are a child.

 

[bripat9643]

I bet ya 100% of all the conservative news media, gave their campaign donations to Trump or republicans..... it works both ways, no?

Conservative news media is about 10% the size of leftwing news media, NAZI.

It's widespread enough, to cause an insurrection with its LIES, and to where 80% on the right wing believes in a fantasy made up out of whole cloth that Trump won the election by a landslide.

It's sad to see your so called media, MAGA Media, do this to you....hurt you, and our nation, the way they have done.....

There was no insurrection and no lies. Those claims are NAZI lies. The riot was a Democrat orchestrated false flag event. The idea that the senile pedophile Biden won doesn't pass the laugh test.

 

[bripat9643]

p

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

Plopped kids in OBAMA'S CAGES. The rest of that BS is out of context as well like everything else that the MSM spewed for the last four years. They also told us he recommended shooting up bleach--NEVER HAPPENED.

The fact that you guys still continue to tell lies (but you probably don't know it) about what the original purpose of those cages were for demonstrates that your news sources are doing you a disservice.

What does it matter what the original purpose was? There's no doubt about the fact the the Obama admin built them, and they would have reviled Trump if he had done it.

Of course the purpose something was built for and how it was used matters. It's not like you care that the Trump administration separated families anyway.

IT was built to separate children from their parents, and it was used for that purpose by the Obama administration.

You douchebags simply cannot admit obvious facts.

 

[bripat9643]

Fact 1: The press largely leans left.

Fact 2: Dismissing everything they say as fake news is comically simplistic and ignorant.

Well, yeah....look at your average trump cultist.

A pretty brilliant move by talk radio, you have to admit: "Don't listen to the enemy, just listen to me. I speak da troof".

Trump focused on that ignorant, paranoid audience and got elected.

ROFL! Isn't that exactly what Twitter and Facebook are saying right now? Not only are they saying it, they are preventing us from listening to other sources of news.

You poor things just can't take responsibility for anything you do. Whataboutism is your only thought.

You have been conned. Tough shit.

You're behaving just like a perfect servile little NAZI. Using the term "whataboutism is the way a leftwinger admits he is proud to be a hypocrite." Now click your heels together and go lie to someone else.

You posted a picture of a leftwinger, moron.

Perhaps you missed something, Einstein.

You are a child.

You mean the way the pic was photoshopped? Is what I posted a fact? You couldn't find a pic of a Trump supporter screaming in agony, so you had to doctor up a photo of a Hillary voter.

 

[Mac1958]

Fact 1: The press largely leans left.

Fact 2: Dismissing everything they say as fake news is comically simplistic and ignorant.

Well, yeah....look at your average trump cultist.

A pretty brilliant move by talk radio, you have to admit: "Don't listen to the enemy, just listen to me. I speak da troof".

Trump focused on that ignorant, paranoid audience and got elected.

ROFL! Isn't that exactly what Twitter and Facebook are saying right now? Not only are they saying it, they are preventing us from listening to other sources of news.

You poor things just can't take responsibility for anything you do. Whataboutism is your only thought.

You have been conned. Tough shit.

You're behaving just like a perfect servile little NAZI. Using the term "whataboutism is the way a leftwinger admits he is proud to be a hypocrite." Now click your heels together and go lie to someone else.

You posted a picture of a leftwinger, moron.

Perhaps you missed something, Einstein.

You are a child.

You mean the way the pic was photoshopped? Is what I posted a fact? You couldn't find a pic of a Trump supporter screaming in agony, so you had to doctor up a photo of a Hillary voter.

We have you.

 

[candycorn]

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

That's 100% lies, of course. That's all you NAZIs ever do is lie, lie, lie.

You're woefully misinformed.

Obviously not.

You don't think he fired anyone by tweet?

I think you're referring to Jim Comey. It couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.

It also happened to Prince Feebus or whatever his name was. Firing people by tweet is an asshole move...
Good to see you are now contradticting yourself about what I poste being "100% lies".
Thanks for the early morning batting practice fuck face.

You mean Rience Preibus. That didn't happen:

​

Reince Priebus - Wikipedia​

​

Priebus stated on CNN that he had resigned on July 27, 2017. The following day Donald Trump announced on Twitter that he had named John F. Kelly as new White House Chief of Staff.​

Nah...didn't happen that way:

Trump pushes out Priebus, names Kelly WH chief of staff

WASHINGTON (AP) — His White House in turmoil, President Donald Trump abruptly announced late Friday he was appointing Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly to be his chief of staff, ending the tumultuous six-month tenure of Reince Priebus.

apnews.com

"Trump’s announcement on Twitter said, “I am pleased to inform you that I have just named General/Secretary John F Kelly as White House Chief of Staff. He is a Great American ... and a Great Leader. John has also done a spectacular job at Homeland Security. He has been a true star of my Administration.” "

Factbox: 'You're fired!': how Trump has dismissed White House staff

Before he became U.S. president, Donald Trump was famous for dismissing contestants on his television show "The Apprentice" with a resounding "You're fired!"

www.reuters.com

 

[HappyJoy]

p

It's a simple question based on these facts and I'd like some of you ignorant, uninformed people explain why its is wrong. Here are the facts with links, substantiation...NOT MY subjective opinion...but simple facts.
A) Trump received 95% negative press.
"Former Democratic president Carter comes to President Trump's defense following onslaught of negative coverage."
Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study
“I’ve been studying the news media and elections for more than 35 years. Trust me — there’s never been anything like it,” said Rich Noyes, research director for the conservative press watchdog.

Broadcast coverage of Trump 95% negative, according to new study

Negative press coverage of President Trump has worsened. Since 2016, previous studies from analysts at the Media Research Center revealed that press coverage of Mr. Trump on major broadcast networks was 91% negative. It has gotten worse. A new study released Monday found that the coverage is now...

www.washingtontimes.com

B) Proof of WHY MSM biased?
90% donations went to Biden by MSM in 2020. In 2016 96% donations to Hillary.
These are facts... that have directly affected the BIASED MSM reporting.
View attachment 443682

95% negative press?

Perhaps he shouldn't have been a 100% asshole...fired people by tweet...called people 3rd grade names....referred to women as dogs....banned people from coming here based on their religion....plopped kids into cages as a "deterrent" (500+ still remain by the way--not one committed a single fucking crime)....argued that the kids he kidnapped aren't entitled to soap and toothpaste...called the neo-nazi's "very fine people...called Mexicans "rapists"...said Russia didn't interfere in our 2016 election....gladhaned a brutal North Korean dictator...lied tens of thousands of times....totally ignored a pandemic as it raged the countryside for weeks at a time.

Plopped kids in OBAMA'S CAGES. The rest of that BS is out of context as well like everything else that the MSM spewed for the last four years. They also told us he recommended shooting up bleach--NEVER HAPPENED.

The fact that you guys still continue to tell lies (but you probably don't know it) about what the original purpose of those cages were for demonstrates that your news sources are doing you a disservice.

Why does the original purpose of the cages matter?

The cages weren't intended to be used to strip children from their families and house for months on end only to lose the connection of these kids to their families on the order of thousands and still hundreds appear to be lost forever.

The cages were constructed during a period under the Obama administration when a larger than usual number of unaccompanied children were crossing the border and were used to house these kids for up to 72 hours before being transferred over to HHS.

Ok and again I’ll ask how that is relevant to how Trump has used them and handled the situation. You know that even if Obama built and used them to torture babies it wouldn’t make any inappropriate actions by Trump magically OK, right? Bringing up Obama is a wahtaboutism, a distraction from what we are discussing

Ah, I see what you are saying. It is a whataboutism for sure. Additionally it's a lie told to normalize Trump.

The term "whataboutism" is the way leftwingers announce that they are proud to be hypocrites.

What about when conservatives use the same term?

They only use it to show what hypocrites NAZIs like you are.

Oh, Ok. So whataboutism's are valid depending on who is using them. It's rare when dishonest people admit to their dishonesty.

 

[G.T.]

Orange Blob was 100% horrific, so the media must lean right.