Rule #5, a reminder

So you can't give me an example? How fucking lame are you, anyways? I asked you to cite one and you can't?

You talk shit, and fail to provide a link which is exactly what this OP is about.

Therefore your opinion is dismissed for lack of evidence.
By you. But then again, you think Gatewaypundit is a credible source.
 
By you. But then again, you think Gatewaypundit is a credible source.


I don't know if they're credible or not, there haven't been any examples of them being unreliable coming from you so far..

Are you scared to try and reinforce your position or something?

Doh! Look what thread this is. I'm gonna end this line of discussion for here and now.
 
I don't know if they're credible or not, there haven't been any examples of them being unreliable coming from you so far..

Are you scared to try and reinforce your position or something?

Doh! Look what thread this is. I'm gonna end this line of discussion for here and now.
Good. You never should have started it.
 
This rule is outdated. These days so much of the early part of pieces is fluff, is "contextualizing", the important and meaningful paragraphs come after. It was the journalists who lead with what is important. I usually grab the most important few paragraphs, where ever they may be.

Tell that to the fucking lawyers.
 

Agreed it's bogus.

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...government-didnt-promote-video-joe-biden-cal/
• Joe Biden quoted the Prophet Muhammed at a Muslim outreach event in July and said he would end “the Muslim ban.”

• Biden did not call on Muslims to “wage jihad.” He praised many Muslim Americans for promoting peace.

• Voice of America contractors were investigated after posting the pro-Biden video on its Urdu language service. The video was deleted.
 
Back
Top