In its pathological Liberal Media quest to catch Billary Clinton Doing Some Kind of Bad Thing That Is Bad Maybe , theNew York Times published a devastating, campaign-destroying, earth-shattering, game-changing, smoking gun GOTCHA! story late Thursday night, and it was Not Excellent News for Hillary:
Will someone, anyone, please tell me, give me one example, of something the Democrats have done that is in any way comparable to the massive mountain of colossal fuck-ups that the Repugs have committed over the last 40 years? Starting with the October Surprise, continuing through Watergate, Iran-Contra, the 2000 election, the invasion of Iraq on false pretenses, Abu-Graib, black sites, Gitmo, torture, Isis? What d'ya got? A blow job? A buggy website? The successful insuring of millions of Americans? Allowing kids who were brought here through no fault of their own to remain here pending legislation to resolve the "immingration problem?" Oh wait, I forgot. The president is blah. Yeah, I guess it all balances out.
The Times has been after the Clintons since the early 90's. It was the Times that was used as a mouthpiece by right wing operatives to push the completely bogus Whitewater story. The Times allowed its reporter Jeff Gerth to repeatedly print accusations without making sure there were independent sources corroborating the charges (just as the later did with Judith Miller's WMD stories). Worse they downplayed the two taxpayer-financed, Republican-led investigations that looked into it and cleared the Clintons. Jay Stevens investigated for the RTC then Robert Fiske was appointed as special prosecutor to look at the Whitewater charges and both found no wrongdoing by the Clintons. The Times buried the story and kept demanding an "independent" counsel be appointed (by a panel of right wing judges) and we got Ken Starr. The Times has never paid a price for their key role in this debacle so they are continuing their disgusting ways, strengthening the far right and damaging our democracy.I have always believed that the Times could not accept that a guy from nowheresville Arkansas could be a legitimated president.
<whisper> We live near an Air Force base, and we sometimes see black helicopters fly over. </whisper>
And some of them claim to be the "true liberals." Sort of like Every True Scotsman.
If a source lies, no loss.
As the woman has said many times, F you, Grey Lady
I had a job once that included cleanup in the restroom. My answer is "everyone who came in the damn place made an inaccurate leak".
Nuh-uh. The Donald is going to be the yoogist, classyist GOP nominee of all time.
Will someone, anyone, please tell me, give me one example, of something the Democrats have done that is in any way comparable to the massive mountain of colossal fuck-ups that the Repugs have committed over the last 40 years? Starting with the October Surprise, continuing through Watergate, Iran-Contra, the 2000 election, the invasion of Iraq on false pretenses, Abu-Graib, black sites, Gitmo, torture, Isis? What d'ya got? A blow job? A buggy website? The successful insuring of millions of Americans? Allowing kids who were brought here through no fault of their own to remain here pending legislation to resolve the "immingration problem?" Oh wait, I forgot. The president is blah. Yeah, I guess it all balances out.
IOKIYAR
We can only hope...
The Times has been after the Clintons since the early 90's. It was the Times that was used as a mouthpiece by right wing operatives to push the completely bogus Whitewater story. The Times allowed its reporter Jeff Gerth to repeatedly print accusations without making sure there were independent sources corroborating the charges (just as the later did with Judith Miller's WMD stories). Worse they downplayed the two taxpayer-financed, Republican-led investigations that looked into it and cleared the Clintons. Jay Stevens investigated for the RTC then Robert Fiske was appointed as special prosecutor to look at the Whitewater charges and both found no wrongdoing by the Clintons. The Times buried the story and kept demanding an "independent" counsel be appointed (by a panel of right wing judges) and we got Ken Starr. The Times has never paid a price for their key role in this debacle so they are continuing their disgusting ways, strengthening the far right and damaging our democracy.I have always believed that the Times could not accept that a guy from nowheresville Arkansas could be a legitimated president.
I was going to mention Judith Miller and the WMD crap. Follow the $$$$$
But then you get newsprint ink all over your nether regions and that's not a good thing.
And editors!
The big problem is that Hill and Bill are so darn boring. I can stand criminal, but boring is unpardonable.
He will release all the "evidence" once he arrives at the White House.
We need the Pegster's input first as an appetizer.