A political Forum that does not talk about Politics

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Here ass breath.
1. The statement was from Oct.

Editor's note: We've attached an update to this fact-check below in response to reader queries after subsequent testimony by James Clapper. The original fact-check and rating remain unchanged

On Oct. 7, however — the same day WikiLeaks released the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta — the Homeland Security Department and Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a joint statement that said, "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations."

The statement added that the recent hacks "are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process."

The statement also said the intelligence community believes these attacks are directed from top levels of the Russian government, as Clinton said.

"We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities," the statement said.

The U.S. Intelligence Community is made up of 17 agencies, forming the basis of Clinton’s claim.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ikileaks-rele/

So at the time, the statement was made, it was true. If you would read the whole thing you would have seen the reasoning.

Using what you call "reasoning" you would claim every scientist and textbook prior to the downgrade of Pluto's status was lying because they said there were 9 planets of equal status.
Plus your op-ed was focused on this spring so STFU.

2. And now you want to argue what half true means. Politifact pointed out the issues. Did you catch that douche-bag? Just because you don't agree with their term you say they're lying.

Once again this is just your opinion. No factual proof of any kind that Politifact lied. They describe all circumstances involved in their decisions precisely because of pricks like you. Smarter pricks than you.

You're 0-2 fuck face. And since this will be the caliber of your responses (totally off topic by the way), consider yourself tossed onto the failed gender-swap pile.

Make that 0-3 unless you have proof or a thread name that was pulled. Unlike you, I can post your posts where you have lied to prove a point.

How about I'll leave the forum if I can't and you leave if I can? Of course, if you're afraid.......
If you don't publically agree we'll just accept you for the lying cocksucker you are.
PS Since you're on ignore, have one of your bitches quote you so I'll know you agreed.

What focus you have. You can ignore 215 trump half true or less statements. To paraphrase Lou Reed, You plucked your eyebrows and then he (you) was a she (you) and the immortal, In the backroom, you are everybody's darling, you kept your head while you were giving head.
[/FONT]

are you drunk again??


bahahaaaaaa

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Here ass breath.
1. The statement was from Oct.

Editor's note: We've attached an update to this fact-check below in response to reader queries after subsequent testimony by James Clapper. The original fact-check and rating remain unchanged

On Oct. 7, however — the same day WikiLeaks released the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta — the Homeland Security Department and Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a joint statement that said, "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations."

The statement added that the recent hacks "are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process."

The statement also said the intelligence community believes these attacks are directed from top levels of the Russian government, as Clinton said.

"We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities," the statement said.

The U.S. Intelligence Community is made up of 17 agencies, forming the basis of Clinton’s claim.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ikileaks-rele/

So at the time, the statement was made, it was true. If you would read the whole thing you would have seen the reasoning.

Using what you call "reasoning" you would claim every scientist and textbook prior to the downgrade of Pluto's status was lying because they said there were 9 planets of equal status.
Plus your op-ed was focused on this spring so STFU.

2. And now you want to argue what half true means. Politifact pointed out the issues. Did you catch that douche-bag? Just because you don't agree with their term you say they're lying.

Once again this is just your opinion. No factual proof of any kind that Politifact lied. They describe all circumstances involved in their decisions precisely because of pricks like you. Smarter pricks than you.

You're 0-2 fuck face. And since this will be the caliber of your responses (totally off topic by the way), consider yourself tossed onto the failed gender-swap pile.

Make that 0-3 unless you have proof or a thread name that was pulled. Unlike you, I can post your posts where you have lied to prove a point.

How about I'll leave the forum if I can't and you leave if I can? Of course, if you're afraid.......
If you don't publically agree we'll just accept you for the lying cocksucker you are.
PS Since you're on ignore, have one of your bitches quote you so I'll know you agreed.

What focus you have. You can ignore 215 trump half true or less statements. To paraphrase Lou Reed, You plucked your eyebrows and then he (you) was a she (you) and the immortal, In the backroom, you are everybody's darling, you kept your head while you were giving head.
[/FONT]

It never was "true", masterdickmuncher, and hildebeest was in a position to know that. Yet, here your retarded ass is citing Politifact as your source to prove that Politifact is telling the truth, you miscreant ignoramus. How stupid can you get, masterdickmuncher? Here's a third Politifact "lie by ommission" for you to sit your wide-ass on and rotate, masterdickmuncher: where's Politifact's ruling on hildebeest blaming the Benghazi attack on a video on the night of the attack, masterdickmuncher?

The Telegraph said hildebeest lied, masterdickmuncher.

Hillary Clinton's big Benghazi lie

(Telegraph)

The Daily Mail said hildebeest lied, masterdickmuncher.

'Let's move on': Hillary's blithe response after devastating Congress report reveals she lied and lied again about what caused US Ambassador to die in Bengazi

(The Daily Mail)

Politifact didn't make a ruling because they knew they'd have to admit hildebeest lied, masterdickmuncher, and so they made a biased decision and elected not to make the ruling that hildebeest lied.

[Yssup Rider]

So the Daily Mail and the Telegraph are credible?

No wonder they put them in the racks right next to the mini bic lighters, AAA batteries and breath mints.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!! !

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by WTF

I'll find every fag in this forum even if I have to suck everyone's dick to prove it!

The chief beta of the Austin Reacharound Defense Force has spoken.

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

are you drunk again??


bahahaaaaaa

Was Munch ever sober?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

So the Daily Mail and the Telegraph are credible?

No wonder they put them in the racks right next to the mini bic lighters, AAA batteries and breath mints.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!! !

There's no doubt you know where stores keep the breath mints given your profession at your glory holes, you Mussulman-luvin, Hitler worshipping, lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM, but YOU buying a Brit paper at a newsstand is only another one of your fantastical lies.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

How do you discuss something with someone who labels many things fake news when they don't show any proof to back up their claim? Just that they "know" it's fake...

Again, how do you have a discussion with someone who claims you're wrong and offers no proof to show you are wrong?

Anybody who has a set of talking points they think covers all... situations is intellectually lazy...

You're the intellectually lazy one, dickmuncher. It's obvious you don't even know the most elementary rules of debate. If you spit out a proposition - let's say, "the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian Government" - then it is incumbent upon YOU to produce factual proof of your statement. It is not my responsibility to DISPROVE it. The burden of proof is on you. You have to prove the affirmative. I don't have to prove the negative.

This is such a rudimentary, well-established debate rule that I am forced to correlate your ignorance of it with the FACT that your asshole is thoroughly stretched out and hideously ruptured after making so many logically challenged posts in this forum.

If I tell the world you suck a dozen giant cocks every day with relish, would it be a FACT unless/until you proved it isn't? Or should it be treated as FAKE NEWS unless/until I furnish proof?

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by lustylad

If I tell the world you suck a dozen giant cocks every day with relish, would it be a fact until you proved it isn't?

good points

perhaps with mustard and onions as well

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

good points

perhaps with mustard and onions as well

You prefer dicks with mustard and onions?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by WTF

Gay Rey was and will always be the least informed poster that ever graced this forum.... although Cherie runs a close second.

You're just jealous of Rey because he is much more clever and witty with the homo insults than you'll ever be. Or is it because you're "better informed" when it comes to the queer stuff? Rey uses his imagination, but you know what it REALLY feels like to wear a rainbow thong and work in a gloryhole, dontcha?

And Cherie can eat your ass for breakfast, fagboy.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by TryWeakly

Did WackTheFuckstick really out SissyChaps as a faggot?

Lol... WackTheFuckstick... never heard that one before... maybe it will catch on!

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Once again this is just your opinion. No factual proof of any kind that Politifact lied. They describe all circumstances involved in their decisions precisely because of pricks like you. Smarter pricks than you.

Fuck Politifact. I already smacked you down months ago for treating it as the Bible of Truth, you obtuse moron! Is "half-true" a fact? Is "mostly false" a lie? Why do you keep going down this rabbit hole, you dicksucking fool?

Originally Posted by lustylad

Politifact is hardly an unbiased arbiter of “fact”. Its ratings are highly subjective. And it doesn't measure truth or falsity on a binary basis. It uses a so-called Truth-o-Meter with 5 (highly subjective) categories - True, Mostly True, Half True, Mostly False, Pants on Fire. Based on this (highly subjective) methodology, the most anyone can claim is that according to Politifact some politicians move the needle more in one direction or the other .

And even that is grossly misleading, since it is based on whichever statements Politifact arbitrarily and selectively decides merit rating. Only a dickmunching fool like you would rely on Politifact as “proof” that someone “lies at a 70% rate”. Only a cockworshipping moron like you would claim anything published by Politifact is tantamount to a “set of facts”.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You prefer dicks with mustard and onions?

You obviously prefer the fat ones.


PIGLER