Big Blitz Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 There are 51 Senators that do not support that disaster of a bill. Not 1 holding it up.....51. Shows exactly what the media thinks of half the country. It doesn't exist to them. 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaCrispy Posted December 18, 2021 Share Posted December 18, 2021 (edited) 20 hours ago, Big Blitz said: There are 51 Senators that do not support that disaster of a bill. Not 1 holding it up.....51. Shows exactly what the media thinks of half the country. It doesn't exist to them. If he just switched over to the Republican Party, then the media wouldn’t be able to say there was one senator holding up the bill anymore...funny how that works...shows how stupid their premise is (that all people of a particular party MUST vote a certain way)...😉 Edited December 18, 2021 by JaCrispy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted December 18, 2021 Share Posted December 18, 2021 8 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: If he just switched over to the Republican Party, then the media wouldn’t be able to say there was one senator holding up the bill anymore...funny how that works...shows how stupid there premise is (that all people of a particular party MUST vote a certain way)...😉 Well, remember McCain was heroic and courageous for his famous “ thumbs down” vote on ACA, but Manchin is being obstructionist 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 18, 2021 Share Posted December 18, 2021 (edited) $$$$$ Edited December 18, 2021 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 On 9/26/2021 at 7:48 AM, Doc said: LOL. You’d think they would have planned on staying longer… totes unplanned... And this gem: Idiots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 22 hours ago, B-Man said: $$$$$ It’s telling that a news organization that will go to incredible lengths to tell a story, including exposing a 16 year old boy to the collective hate and rage of the masses, yet requires complete confidentiality as a part of a settlement for their misdeeds. Additionally, no other major news organization seems interested in the details of the story and settlement—an issue that would be a matter of massive public interest. Being part of the “free press” must be complicated. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
716er Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 19 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: an issue that would be a matter of massive public interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 20 minutes ago, 716er said: You understand that you’re aligning with a character best described as a simpleton, yes? Never mind, I withdraw the question. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Tim Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 4 hours ago, 716er said: You aren't interested in how much it cost a news organization to lie about a child? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 (edited) 7 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: It’s telling that a news organization that will go to incredible lengths to tell a story, including exposing a 16 year old boy to the collective hate and rage of the masses, yet requires complete confidentiality as a part of a settlement for their misdeeds. Additionally, no other major news organization seems interested in the details of the story and settlement—an issue that would be a matter of massive public interest. Being part of the “free press” must be complicated. That's because they are a mechanism for disseminating propaganda, have no ethical standards, and lying is a requirement of their function as State media outlet. Bagdad Bob, Tokyo Rise, MSNBC Rachel Madcow. If the Kings and Clerics of the Middle Ages had today's media they'd be insisting the Earth was flat and the center of the Universe while those disagreeing are spreading misinformation. And then burning them at the stake. Unfortunately for CNN and MSNBC burning heretics at the stake is illegal. At least for now. Edited December 19, 2021 by All_Pro_Bills 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 20, 2021 Share Posted December 20, 2021 "Appears"? You mean to you? I balk at this headline in The Guardian: "Why Trump appears deeply unnerved as Capitol attack investigation closes in." They have to use the word "appears," because they obviously don't know how Trump feels — deeply or shallowly — inside. Then the word throws off the whole idea, so it seems to be only what it is: How it looks to the Guardian writer (Hugo Lowell). I haven't read the piece, not yet anyway, but the easy answer to "Why Trump appears deeply unnerved" is that the author is seeing what he wants to see — which is Trump deeply unnerved. The brief headline also contains a second element of wishful perception: the Capitol attack investigation is closing in on Trump. Is it? We're expect to believe that it is, but that's not what I think. And I don't think Trump is deeply unnerved. I'm not convinced he's deeply anything. Posted by Ann Althouse https://althouse.blogspot.com/2021/12/appears-you-mean-to-you.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted December 20, 2021 Share Posted December 20, 2021 1 minute ago, B-Man said: "Appears"? You mean to you? I balk at this headline in The Guardian: "Why Trump appears deeply unnerved as Capitol attack investigation closes in." They have to use the word "appears," because they obviously don't know how Trump feels — deeply or shallowly — inside. Then the word throws off the whole idea, so it seems to be only what it is: How it looks to the Guardian writer (Hugo Lowell). I haven't read the piece, not yet anyway, but the easy answer to "Why Trump appears deeply unnerved" is that the author is seeing what he wants to see — which is Trump deeply unnerved. The brief headline also contains a second element of wishful perception: the Capitol attack investigation is closing in on Trump. Is it? We're expect to believe that it is, but that's not what I think. And I don't think Trump is deeply unnerved. I'm not convinced he's deeply anything. Posted by Ann Althouse https://althouse.blogspot.com/2021/12/appears-you-mean-to-you.html It's a propaganda piece worthy of the best Pravda had to offer. Provide no facts or evidence of anything but draw unsupported conclusions for their faithful readers. Most of these "News" outlets have devolved into official propaganda extensions of government. They are not independent, they are not objective, they work under no requirement to tell the truth. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted December 20, 2021 Share Posted December 20, 2021 27 minutes ago, B-Man said: "Appears"? You mean to you? I balk at this headline in The Guardian: "Why Trump appears deeply unnerved as Capitol attack investigation closes in." They have to use the word "appears," because they obviously don't know how Trump feels — deeply or shallowly — inside. Then the word throws off the whole idea, so it seems to be only what it is: How it looks to the Guardian writer (Hugo Lowell). I haven't read the piece, not yet anyway, but the easy answer to "Why Trump appears deeply unnerved" is that the author is seeing what he wants to see — which is Trump deeply unnerved. The brief headline also contains a second element of wishful perception: the Capitol attack investigation is closing in on Trump. Is it? We're expect to believe that it is, but that's not what I think. And I don't think Trump is deeply unnerved. I'm not convinced he's deeply anything. Posted by Ann Althouse https://althouse.blogspot.com/2021/12/appears-you-mean-to-you.html 20 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: It's a propaganda piece worthy of the best Pravda had to offer. Provide no facts or evidence of anything but draw unsupported conclusions for their faithful readers. Most of these "News" outlets have devolved into official propaganda extensions of government. They are not independent, they are not objective, they work under no requirement to tell the truth. It's a tactic employed by a certain poster here. It's all about their feelz. Meanwhile we wait for the facts to emerge to validate these feelz and...they never do. As I've been saying, if there were something tying Trump to the idiots entering the Capitol, we would have heard well before now. Just holding a rally isn't even close to enough. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted December 20, 2021 Share Posted December 20, 2021 31 minutes ago, Doc said: It's a tactic employed by a certain poster here. It's all about their feelz. Meanwhile we wait for the facts to emerge to validate these feelz and...they never do. As I've been saying, if there were something tying Trump to the idiots entering the Capitol, we would have heard well before now. Just holding a rally isn't even close to enough. Months ago, the FBI has issued statements and reached the conclusion there is no evidence of any organized planning or collusion within the administration or between the administration and protesters on 1/6. But somehow a politically motivated committee run by a dictatorial House Speaker with all the rules and procedures designed (and the rules ignored too when necessary) to avoid any contention to their pre-conceived conclusions of guilt is going to uncover evidence full-time and experienced Federal law enforcement has somehow missed. Yet how preposterous this is, the faithful still cling to hope. Rather than being angry at the result they might be better served targeting their anger at the messengers of the false narratives they believe. But after several failures there is no evidence of a learning curve here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 21, 2021 Share Posted December 21, 2021 The American Media Should Not Be Trusted Reason #5,297 The Press Draws Lines on Voting - Democrats Ethically Redistrict States While GOP Is Hatefully Gerrymandering https://redstate.com/bradslager/2021/12/21/the-press-draws-lines-on-voting-democrats-ethically-redistrict-states-while-gop-is-hatefully-gerrymandering-n494927 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 3, 2022 Share Posted January 3, 2022 Will the Times apologize for lying about Officer Sicknick’s death? An unruly crowd entered the US Capitol on Jan. 6, while then-President Donald Trump addressed a rally several blocks away. One member of that crowd, Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed woman and a veteran, was shot by the Capitol Police. The next day, Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died in the hospital. On Jan. 8, The New York Times reported that Officer Sicknick had died after being struck in the head with a fire extinguisher by violent Trump supporters. This story was quickly repeated by numerous other media outlets. Millions believed it. The story was false. Sicknick died of two strokes, which occurred many hours after the invasion of the Capitol. The blue-check-media fallback was that bear spray used by the Capitol invaders had caused the officer’s strokes. That also turned out to be false. After a curiously long delay, the DC medical examiner’s office released its report this week, and it concludes that Sicknick suffered no injuries, internal or external. He didn’t have a reaction to bear spray, the chief medical examiner reported. So the single most important “fact” about the events of Jan. 6 was false. That leaves some questions. First, who were the Gray Lady’s sources? The Times story quoted two anonymous “law-enforcement officials,” but anyone associated with the Capitol Police, or any investigation, should have known that Sicknick wasn’t struck in the head with a fire extinguisher. Having been misled by its sources, will the Times tell us who they were? Will the Times apologize for its error? It could have independently confirmed its claims by checking with Sicknick’s family or with the hospital. Or the paper could simply have waited until it had definitive confirmation of the facts and refrained from reporting a falsehood in the meanwhile. As leftist journalist Glenn Greenwald notes, the Times didn’t check the facts because the paper needed the story to be true. And it still hasn’t apologized. They actively encourage and excuse violence from the left, while manufacturing lies about violence from the right — remember when the NYT blamed Sarah Palin for Gabby Giffords’ shooting? They’re despicable, awful people and have no standing to talk about decency or democracy. https://nypost.com/2021/04/22/will-the-times-apologize-for-lying-about-officer-sicknicks-death/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 3, 2022 Share Posted January 3, 2022 This thread sounds like something the Chinese government is saying about the free press Quote How Beijing Has Muted Hong Kong’s Independent Media Citizen News, a small but aggressive online publication, is the latest outlet to fold amid relentless pressure from the authorities. HONG KONG — Citizen News, a small online news site in Hong Kong known for its in-depth coverage of courts and local politics, said it would stop publishing on Monday night, deepening concerns about the collapse of the city’s once-robust media. Just days earlier, another independent online media outlet, Stand News, closed after hundreds of police raided its offices and arrested seven people. Two former senior editors at Stand News and the publication itself were charged with conspiracy to publish seditious materials. Quote https://www.nytimes.com/article/hong-kong-media-muzzled.html Chinese communists sound A LOT like Trumpers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Tim Posted January 3, 2022 Share Posted January 3, 2022 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: This thread sounds like something the Chinese government is saying about the free press Chinese communists sound A LOT like Trumpers I would argue with you but you obviously feel truth is less important than narrative which is why you can't see the difference between not trusting a liar and the government stopping the truth. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 3, 2022 Share Posted January 3, 2022 37 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said: I would argue with you but you obviously feel truth is less important than narrative which is why you can't see the difference between not trusting a liar and the government stopping the truth. You think a non-free press would be more honest? Wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Tim Posted January 3, 2022 Share Posted January 3, 2022 4 hours ago, Tiberius said: You think a non-free press would be more honest? Wow As I said you don't care about honesty, your response is unrelated to what I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted January 4, 2022 Share Posted January 4, 2022 5 hours ago, Tiberius said: You think a non-free press would be more honest? Wow You think the press should be politically motivated? Wow 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 4, 2022 Share Posted January 4, 2022 Oh, the hypocrisy! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaCrispy Posted January 4, 2022 Share Posted January 4, 2022 9 hours ago, Tiberius said: This thread sounds like something the Chinese government is saying about the free press Chinese communists sound A LOT like Trumpers How so? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted January 4, 2022 Share Posted January 4, 2022 (edited) 19 hours ago, Tiberius said: You think a non-free press would be more honest? Wow I don't think the fundamental issue with the media is honesty. That's just a circumstance of the situation where people's ethics have been compromised. It doesn't matter what your views, liberal, conservative, independent, socialist, communist, capitalist, religious or agnostics. Or what you believe or don't believe. The enemy of press freedom and truth, and of personal freedom and democracy is authoritarian concentration of power in the hands of one person or just a few people. In our press example maybe 7 or 8 people control 90% of the media in the country. If there were 500 people controlling media outlets it would be difficult for one voice or view to prevail and suppress and control all the others. With 7 or 8 people, a couple conference calls or zoom sessions and its done. I can't think of one brutal or ruthless dictatorship or oppressive regime or government anywhere in the world pushing its citizens around at their whim that wasn't the result of concentration of power in a central government. How much power would the CCP have if other political parties were legal and there were 15 or so competing for votes and offices? If Kim didn't control the military and the security state in North Korea you think he'd last more than 15 seconds before somebody took him out? Your want freedom and democracy, then break up the central government. Cut the budget 75%. Return power to the States and local jurisdictions. You want free and honest and truth in the press? Break up all the media monopolies and disburse control across 1,000's of individuals and organizations. You want an environment where all political views are valued and open and honest debate of the merits of all are heard? Then de-fund Washington DC. Limit the money a handful of billionaires throw at politicians. Eliminate political monopolies. Break up big corporations. De-centralize authority. You know who hates that idea? Big media, big corporations, big money, and big government. They are the enemy of honesty, truth, freedom, and democracy not what you think are fringe conservative or liberal expressing their views. Edited January 4, 2022 by All_Pro_Bills 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 4, 2022 Share Posted January 4, 2022 2 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I don't think the fundamental issue with the media is honesty. That's just a circumstance of the situation where people's ethics have been compromised. It doesn't matter what your views, liberal, conservative, independent, socialist, communist, capitalist, religious or agnostics. Or what you believe or don't believe. The enemy of press freedom and truth, and of personal freedom and democracy is authoritarian concentration of power in the hands of one person or just a few people. In our press example maybe 7 or 8 people control 90% of the media in the country. If there were 500 people controlling media outlets it would be difficult for one voice or view to prevail and suppress and control all the others. With 7 or 8 people, a couple conference calls or zoom sessions and its done. I can't think of one brutal or ruthless dictatorship or oppressive regime or government anywhere in the world pushing its citizens around at their whim that wasn't the result of concentration of power in a central government. How much power would the CCP have if other political parties were legal and there were 15 or so competing for votes and offices? If Kim didn't control the military and the security state in North Korea you think he'd last more than 15 seconds before somebody took him out? Your want freedom and democracy, then break up the central government. Cut the budget 75%. Return power to the States and local jurisdictions. You want free and honest and truth in the press? Break up all the media monopolies and disburse control across 1,000's of individuals and organizations. You want an environment where all political views are valued and open and honest debate of the merits of all are heard? Then de-fund Washington DC. Limit the money a handful of billionaires throw at politicians. Eliminate political monopolies. Break up big corporations. De-centralize authority. You know who hates that idea? Big media, big corporations, big money, and big government. They are the enemy of honesty, truth, freedom, and democracy not what you think are fringe conservative or liberal expressing their views. Nah, we have way more freedom and dispersal of press than ever. You think the 50's with just a few major networks was better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted January 4, 2022 Share Posted January 4, 2022 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Nah, we have way more freedom and dispersal of press than ever. You think the 50's with just a few major networks was better? We definitely agree on this one Tibs. It was only recently that people have noticed the media bias. The bias was there all along, but when independent media sprang up the Main Stream Outlets went even further Left, and now we've completely jumped the shark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted January 4, 2022 Share Posted January 4, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Nah, we have way more freedom and dispersal of press than ever. You think the 50's with just a few major networks was better? 49 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: We definitely agree on this one Tibs. It was only recently that people have noticed the media bias. The bias was there all along, but when independent media sprang up the Main Stream Outlets went even further Left, and now we've completely jumped the shark. I disagree with you both that things are better than before. A handful of news monopolies control the majority of the business. Like I said maybe 7 or 8 people own most of the world's media. And while the web has provided the ability for peer-to-peer and peer-to many communication of news, ideas, and views that ability is slowing and surely being censored and blocked by government interests and big corporations. Starting in earnest in the US after the 2016 election. Most Americans don't get their news from boutique and independent news sites. And as a whole I think Americans are less informed and generally more clueless about what's going on in the country and the world at-large than ever before. Post an expert sourced story or video about vaccine safety in the US or criticize President Xi in China and see what happens to media freedom. Edited January 4, 2022 by All_Pro_Bills 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted January 4, 2022 Share Posted January 4, 2022 (edited) No posts about the fourth estates complicity in Elizabeth Holmes's crimes? For shame, PPP. Her appeal essentially boiled down to the fact that she was a woman in a Steve Jobs turtleneck. In reality she is a moderately intelligent sociopath who took advantage of (among others) blundering Obama-era media empires to make herself rich. Aside from John Carreyrou nobody questioned any of it until the government started looking hard at their tech. Even after Carreyrou published, companies like NBC gave her a platform to spew lies. Edited January 4, 2022 by LeviF 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted January 5, 2022 Share Posted January 5, 2022 (edited) 17 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I disagree with you both that things are better than before. A handful of news monopolies control the majority of the business. Like I said maybe 7 or 8 people own most of the world's media. And while the web has provided the ability for peer-to-peer and peer-to many communication of news, ideas, and views that ability is slowing and surely being censored and blocked by government interests and big corporations. Starting in earnest in the US after the 2016 election. Most Americans don't get their news from boutique and independent news sites. And as a whole I think Americans are less informed and generally more clueless about what's going on in the country and the world at-large than ever before. Post an expert sourced story or video about vaccine safety in the US or criticize President Xi in China and see what happens to media freedom. It seemed like there was a golden era when new forms of data and information dissemination was availed but not every idiot could act as a content distributor. There was still some integrity in reporting and some standard in sourcing investigate reporting. Maybe it was the 90s? Then the pendulum swung. The evolution of social media mega corporations and the chronology of googles parallel evolution to completely control what internet searches hit and omit has effectively re- consolidated the internet into an easily manipulated headline distributor. The platforms where individuals acted to distribute their own ideas began to become mss managed. Conflated with the low effort truth seeking from the average American, you have the perfect recipe for masses of narrative programmed sheep who fall hook line and sinker for the contemporary ministry of information. ultimately what all politicians know is one sheep vote counts just the same as that of one who thinks independently, digs deeper and questions manufactured narratives. It takes much less effort and money per vote to herd a critical mass of sheep. Edited January 5, 2022 by Over 29 years of fanhood 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 5, 2022 Share Posted January 5, 2022 On 1/3/2022 at 8:10 PM, JaCrispy said: How so? Free press is against the people? They closed their free press down, just like Trumpers want to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 5, 2022 Share Posted January 5, 2022 The media does not report any more, they lecture. 1 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 5, 2022 Share Posted January 5, 2022 . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 6, 2022 Share Posted January 6, 2022 Media’s January 6th Insurrection Against Truth By Tom Tradup Yes, the January 6th“insurrection” is real. Oh, not the riotous behavior at the U.S. Capitol a year ago. I mean the one today… January 6, 2022. When MSNBC, CNN, The Washington Post and other alleged “news” organizations as they roll out hour after hour of hysterical, hand-wringing coverage of events last January. Not since the canonization of George Floyd and the alibis the media made for the violent riots and looting that followed (as if smashing store windows and grabbing 10 bags of Doritos somehow amounted to “social justice”) has more ridiculous, over-hyped coverage been ramped up for today’s “first anniversary of the worst assault on American democracy that ever occurred.” But like mosquitoes drawn to an high-voltage electric bug-zapper, liberal media doofuses simply cannot help pulling back the curtain on their real agenda..which is—to quote our current ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel—to never let a good crisis go to waste. {snip} Speaking of Trump, the “nonpartisan” January 6thSelect Committee is now doling out subpoenas like candy corn at Morticia Addams house, including one for the cell phone records of former White House national security strategist Dr. Sebastian Gorka. But as he declared at Charlie Kirk’s AMERICA Fest gathering recently, “Nancy Pelosi has chosen the wrong enemy” and Gorka has since filed a lawsuit to block access to his private records. All kidding aside, the absurdly over-the-top “news” coverage of today’s January 6thanniversary…coupled with Fifth Columnists in the world of “journalism” like George Stephanopoulos or Chuck Todd and weasels like Associated Press “White House correspondent” Jonathan Lemire, last seen on MSNBC shaking his head in disgust over “GOP opposition to voting rights”…is the dictionary definition of an insurrection. Against the truth. And against the public’s right to unbiased, fair coverage of the news. But of course that ship sailed years ago. So TV viewers—and the literally dozens of Americans left who still read newspapers—can be fully confident that all day today…what they read and watch will be nothing more than anti-Trump brainwashing, perpetrated by dishonest and unethical organizations who bear no actual connection with the word “news.” Pathetic, but true. On the “plus” side: only 306 days left until Midterms on November 8th. https://townhall.com/columnists/tomtradup/2022/01/06/medias-january-6th-insurrection-against-truth-n2601459 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted January 6, 2022 Share Posted January 6, 2022 https://nationalpost.com/opinion/tara-henley-why-i-quit-the-cbc https://torontosun.com/opinion/goldstein-former-cbc-staffer-tara-henley-said-what-many-canadians-think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 6, 2022 Share Posted January 6, 2022 Science can't be trusted Media can't be trusted Republicans not part of Trump cult can't be trusted Your mother can't be trusted Only Trump and people like ***** Bill O'Reilly speak the truth 👍 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albwan Posted January 6, 2022 Share Posted January 6, 2022 (edited) BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... lying propagandist racist bites the dust. Buh bye! Edited January 6, 2022 by Albwan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 6, 2022 Share Posted January 6, 2022 Good riddance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Not a surprise, despite the Left/Media campaign to convince the weak-minded otherwise. CBS Buries Poll Results Showing Most Americans Of Both Parties Think Jan 6 Was ‘A Protest That Went Too Far.’ https://www.dailywire.com/news/cbs-buries-poll-results-showing-most-americans-of-both-parties-think-jan-6-was-a-protest-that-went-too-far 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts