Who (or what) are R-W'ers main "news" sources?

[Eaglewings]

You can tell where the RWnuts get their "news" from by looking at the links they provide when they put up threads.

Good example:

The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots.

Link?

People are full of wisecracks today.. great way to start the day.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You can tell where the RWnuts get their "news" from by looking at the links they provide when they put up threads.

Good example:

The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots.

Link?

Link to what?

Your reference -

"The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots."

 

[NYcarbineer]

You can tell where the RWnuts get their "news" from by looking at the links they provide when they put up threads.

Good example:

The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots.

Link?

Link to what?

Your reference -

"The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots."

Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You can tell where the RWnuts get their "news" from by looking at the links they provide when they put up threads.

Good example:

The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots.

Link?

Link to what?

Your reference -

"The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots."

Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

That it is so easily believed - due to Democrat history - reflects on you people, and no one else.

 

[Camp]

Breitbart is one of the most unreliable sources used by posters here. Gateway Pundit is worse. Both routinely publish speculative conspiracy theories and represent them as fact.
It is kind of comical that the RW whines about a corrupt media and Trump employees the former head of Breitbart as the top executive of his campaign and the former head of FOX an advisor. That is, of course, an absolute conflict of interest and shows a blatant corruption of news sources.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Drudge, Zero Hedge, Bloomberg

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Breitbart is one of the most unreliable sources used by posters here. Gateway Pundit is worse. Both routinely publish speculative conspiracy theories and represent them as fact.
It is kind of comical that the RW whines about a corrupt media and Trump employees the former head of Breitbart as the top executive of his campaign and the former head of FOX an advisor. That is, of course, an absolute conflict of interest and shows a blatant corruption of news sources.

 

[GLASNOST]

Anyone who doesn't get their news from several views is a dumb ass...

Maybe not dumb .... or even an ass...... but not very smart that's for sure. Reading what "the opposition" has to say usually tells you what they lack - and there is always the possibility that you can see the subject in an entirely different light, with a new perspective. It's a win-win situation.

 

[Muhammed]

C-Span

 

[NYcarbineer]

You can tell where the RWnuts get their "news" from by looking at the links they provide when they put up threads.

Good example:

The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots.

Link?

Link to what?

Your reference -

"The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots."

Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

That it is so easily believed - due to Democrat history - reflects on you people, and no one else.

Really? you have a long list of Democrats working for the post office who've been convicted of selectively destroying mail-in ballots that were voting Republican?

Link?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Link?

Link to what?

Your reference -

"The hilarious punking they got yesterday with that story about the postal guy destroying ballots."

Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

That it is so easily believed - due to Democrat history - reflects on you people, and no one else.

Really? you have a long list of Democrats working for the post office who've been convicted of selectively destroying mail-in ballots that were voting Republican?

Link?

Where did I say that?

Link please.

 

[nat4900]

Maybe I should have been more direct in my question......WHO here believes that Breitbart, WND, The Blaze and Gateway Pundit (and Wikileaks, of course) are the FONTS of truth-telling?

 

[Grizz]

wiki has produced emails that were spun to fit rw agenda, nothing damning has surfaced ... typical rw bullshit floats on water.

Prove it boy.
Just because a "Lefty" says doesn't mean it's true....well not in the real world anyway.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Maybe I should have been more direct in my question......WHO here believes that Breitbart, WND, The Blaze and Gateway Pundit (and Wikileaks, of course) are the FONTS of truth-telling?

Wikileaks has high integrity. The rest? I don' trust anyone, hence my use of multiple sources.

 

[nat4900]

Wikileaks has high integrity. The rest? I don' trust anyone, hence my use of multiple sources.

had Wikileaks ALSO revealed the shenanigans that surely must occur within the RNC, then some measure of credibility should be granted to them.....But their one-sided revelations have shown a pronounced bias that makes the outfit, suspect.

 

[GLASNOST]

... had Wikileaks ....... their one-sided revelations have shown a pronounced bias that makes the outfit, suspect.

Uhhhhhh, Wikileaks is non-biased. They don't make up news for the purpose of 'balance'. If you are a whistle-blower (from any side) send your info to Wikileaks. If you are a credible source they will publish it.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Wikileaks has high integrity. The rest? I don' trust anyone, hence my use of multiple sources.

had Wikileaks ALSO revealed the shenanigans that surely must occur within the RNC, then some measure of credibility should be granted to them.....But their one-sided revelations have shown a pronounced bias that makes the outfit, suspect.

Assange was asked about material concerning that, and Trump. He stated he had nothing on note.

The lack of similar material against your opponents does not diminish the integrity, unless you have proof to the contrary.

 

[320 Years of History]

"Who (or what) are R-W'ers main "news" sources?"

I don't know. I can tell that of the folks who comment on this forum that they seem to get their information from what they find here rather than here.

 

[GLASNOST]

I can tell that of the folks who comment on this forum that they seem to get their information from what they find here rather than here.

Very clever.

 

[nat4900]

Assange was asked about material concerning that, and Trump. He stated he had nothing on note.

The lack of similar material against your opponents does not diminish the integrity, unless you have proof to the contrary.

No, I don't have any proof that Assange is either lying or telling the truth.....But i grew up in a household where the word of a would be child molester on the run from his responsibilities should be suspect.