The Democrats are now pro war.

You asked for a source and I pointed you to a video from an award winning reporter on the topic. If you weren't a lazy fuck and kept digging maybe you would have found something. Don't worry papa Trump and papa Vlad tuck me in at night.
I'm working. This sites already up on my phone. I don't have time to travel down a rabbit hole that leads to nothing. Post or source or just admit you lost
 
I'll show you 100% evidence when I'm in complete control of the world. LOL

I guessed right. You are a Putin and Assad suck. Sarin isn't something you can just dump from a truck shit head. The rest of your false flag conspiracy theory (and what gives you the right to demand anything? Show me 100% substantial evidence that you are right, fuck head) came directly from Assad and Putin. Your entire fake conspiracy theory rests on questioning the facts brought home by investigatory bodies from a war zone. Assad has a looooong history of war crimes AND has a proven record of using gas attacks as a weapon of terror against his opponents. The proponderance of evidence and facts gathered from past war crimes on his own people are enough to make me laugh at you over this.

The source I cited that talked about Gabbard was the was the Washington Post. Before you try to slam the reference, know that the opinion piece cited very clear and irrefutable facts about Gabbard. She visited Syria twice. Once with other congressmen to see the war from the rebel's side which other congressmen came back to report the war crimes Assad was comitting yet Gabbard only talks about her proctored second visit where Assad's men showed her only what Assad wanted her to see. She only ever talks about the second visit. The facts are against you on this.

Gabbard represents the authoritarian left, along with Sanders. Your kind are more like the right in this regard. Why your kind take up the cases of war criminals like Putin and Assad is beyond me but not my problem. I see your kind as a freedom hating fringe that I oppose as deeply as I do Trump and his kind. Maybe not as deeply because no matter what, I'd vote for Bernie if he won the nomination. But still, I have to say back to you, stop sucking up to brutal dictators.

TLDR
 
If I don't wear a time foil hat you and poker would just ignore me. I'm just trying to feel what it's like to be you dude
Aww man I apologize, I didn't know you just wanted to feel normal. It must suck not knowing strangers in power don't actually give a fuck about you or your Fam.
 
So where's one to go? I'm seriously asking this question.
if you are simply looking for confirmation of your biases, u-tube is great. The video format on u-tube makes it difficult for the casual consumer of news to fact check. Also, going back and forth to track the narrator's statements is difficult. Most times when I make the mistake of visiting a u-tube vid that your kind cites, it is not informative. The format is most often used to influence rather than inform.

Media bias fact check has a long list of sites that have high ratings for factual low bias news outlets:


From time to time, when searching for information, I'll pull up this list and deliberately randomly select one of the sites listed to read up on a topic.

For myself, I pay for a subscription with Financial Times, a London based newspaper that has high ratings with MBFC. Sites that I go to a lot are Washington Post and less often, NY Times. Huffington Post is pretty biased but factual so I do go there a lot. NPR, especially Morning Edition are good.

Places like realclearpolitics and any u-tube site are just crap to me. Of course, Breitbart and Fox are places I only visit by accident and laugh at a lot.

Regarding the "award winning author" you cited. I didn't watch the video. What I know about Blumenthal is this: he's not a shill but his style is not to report but to tell his audience what he wants them to think. How he can interview somebody like Daniel Ortega and report only glowing truthy bits while completely ignoring the brutality of that man's regime turns me off. He makes no attempt to tell both sides of a story. Also, Blumenthal is definitely an outlier on many of his positions. When one dives into his reports -- assuming the person is objective -- one sees him glossing over or ignoring facts that get in the way of the narrative he wants his audience to hear. So, I call bullshit. If I can't find facts based reports from multiple sites that give both sides of the argument, then I don't give the report much if any credence.

Give me the facts and let me make up my own mind. I want to hear the story from both sides. You don't. All I need to know about you is that you cited a fucking u-tube video from a biased source. I don't think you are a shill or a troll. But I don't think you are a very good source for factual information. If I want to know what the authoritarian left are saying, I think you are a good source.
 
Back
Top