gatomontes99 Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 Why would the WH want to ignore fraud at HHS? Because fraud at HHS went to illegal aliens, Washington insiders and crony capitalists. 2 1 Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
robosmith Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: Why would the WH want to ignore fraud at HHS? Because fraud at HHS went to illegal aliens, Washington insiders and crony capitalists. And you believe a bunch of APES on FOS LIES. LMAO Quote
WestCanMan Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 14 minutes ago, robosmith said: And you believe a bunch of APES on FOS LIES. LMAO Newsflash: everyone on earth considers Fox News to be 20,000 times more reliable than you, robobigot. 2 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
gatomontes99 Posted March 26 Author Report Posted March 26 8 hours ago, WestCanMan said: Newsflash: everyone on earth considers Fox News to be 20,000 times more reliable than you, robobigot. You forgot a zero a two Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
gatomontes99 Posted March 26 Author Report Posted March 26 8 hours ago, robosmith said: And you believe a bunch of APES on FOS LIES. LMAO When you can't refute the data, you attack the user, the source or, in this case, a News station that had nothing to do with anything. RFK is the source here. He is a Democrat. He is saying other Democrats intentionally allowed fraud. That should concern everyone. But you are so partisan that you defend the meat sack that used to be President rather than finding fraud so that money can be used appropriately or cut from the budget all together. Either way the government becomes more efficient. 1 Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
John Johnston Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said: When you can't refute the data, you attack the user, the source or, in this case, a News station that had nothing to do with anything. RFK is the source here. He is a Democrat. He is saying other Democrats intentionally allowed fraud. That should concern everyone. But you are so partisan that you defend the meat sack that used to be President rather than finding fraud so that money can be used appropriately or cut from the budget all together. Either way the government becomes more efficient. You really do need an intervention. That was one of the dumbest comments I have read in a while. Maybe lay off the KoolAid for a while. Quote
Nationalist Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 7 minutes ago, John Johnston said: You really do need an intervention. That was one of the dumbest comments I have read in a while. Maybe lay off the KoolAid for a while. Hilarious. Just look at these Demoncrats trying to deflect from the traitorous acts of the Brandon administration. "Ahhh! Fox Baaad!" Or "Ahhh! You're Crazy!" What a bunch of Dweeby traitors. 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
John Johnston Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 9 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Hilarious. Just look at these Demoncrats trying to deflect from the traitorous acts of the Brandon administration. "Ahhh! Fox Baaad!" Or "Ahhh! You're Crazy!" What a bunch of Dweeby traitors. 30-0 The writing is on the wall. All Y'all going to spontaneous combust when the Dems take over the senate and house. Quote
Nationalist Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 9 minutes ago, John Johnston said: 30-0 The writing is on the wall. All Y'all going to spontaneous combust when the Dems take over the senate and house. Perhaps. And that has...what to do with the topic? Nothing. You're just trying to deflect from a thread about the fraud being ignored by Brandon's administration. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
John Stone Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 FOX news re: news is a misnomer - FOX is pure entertainment. On the other hand FOX is not a misnomer regarding the women. Objective news in CNN of course! lol Quote
Nationalist Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 16 minutes ago, John Stone said: FOX news re: news is a misnomer - FOX is pure entertainment. On the other hand FOX is not a misnomer regarding the women. Objective news in CNN of course! lol Fox has what position in viewership? That's right...top. Poor CNN. It lies and sucks...and only you desperate Libbies cling to it like a security blanket. But you can cling to your blankie...Just take your thumb outta your mouth. Its bad for your teeth. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
gatomontes99 Posted March 26 Author Report Posted March 26 52 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Hilarious. Just look at these Demoncrats trying to deflect from the traitorous acts of the Brandon administration. "Ahhh! Fox Baaad!" Or "Ahhh! You're Crazy!" What a bunch of Dweeby traitors. He proved my point. 1 hour ago, John Johnston said: You really do need an intervention. That was one of the dumbest comments I have read in a while. Maybe lay off the KoolAid for a while. Thank you for helping me prove my point. 1 Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
robosmith Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 14 hours ago, WestCanMan said: Newsflash: everyone on earth considers Fox News to be 20,000 times more reliable than you, robobigot. ONLY ^FOOLS believe a source that had to pay $800M penalty FOR LYING. AND their lawyers testified IN COURT that no one should believe their pundits are telling the truth. LMAO Quote In a 2020 defamation lawsuit, lawyers for Fox News argued that viewers should not expect facts from Tucker Carlson’s show, describing his program as "rhetorical hyperbole" and opinion rather than news. The argument was that reasonable viewers would not take his on-air claims as factual reporting, similar to defenses used in other media defamation cases. NPR +4 2020 Case Defense: In defending Tucker Carlson, Fox lawyers successfully argued that the show’s content is not intended to be taken as literal fact. Quote
robosmith Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 3 hours ago, Nationalist said: Fox has what position in viewership? That's right...top. Poor CNN. It lies and sucks...and only you desperate Libbies cling to it like a security blanket. But you can cling to your blankie...Just take your thumb outta your mouth. Its bad for your teeth. You right wing desperately cling to FOS LIES because they're the ones who tell YOU WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR. Not because they tell the truth. LMAO Quote
Nationalist Posted March 26 Report Posted March 26 13 minutes ago, robosmith said: You right wing desperately cling to FOS LIES because they're the ones who tell YOU WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR. Not because they tell the truth. LMAO Lol...you never cease to amuse. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
gatomontes99 Posted March 26 Author Report Posted March 26 1 hour ago, robosmith said: ONLY ^FOOLS believe a source that had to pay $800M penalty FOR LYING. AND their lawyers testified IN COURT that no one should believe their pundits are telling the truth. LMAO Do you not understand that the source of the information is a Democratic candidate for President in 2024? Quote Don't you think that if I were wrong that I would know it?
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.