That's how we ended up with 2 terrible choices in the election.
I couldn't vote for either of them.
Since you watch neither you should have nothing to say.
I'm making an assumption that Maddow would have taken that possibility into account. I could be wrong, but if so then she got played rather well. I have no reason to believe Maddow is complicit with Trump.
Oh, in your world only people who watch madcow and/or Hannity should have something to say? Interesting, tell me more about these fascinating ideas of yours
This started as a story of madcow getting to what some lefty idiots on twitter were calling "the holy grail" last night, getting leaked Trump tax returns. Then it turned out it was a complete nothing burger, madcow and her fellow idiots got completely played because the "leaked" information is beneficial to Trump in many ways and completely undermines their "he doesn't pay taxes!" story. I don't need to watch either madcow or Hannity to follow this story
LOL, just the moron that the conservatives need to complete their brain trust.
LOL, not even fucking close.Circle jerk, much? The birther crap is just as bad as your Russian bs.
Oh, in your world only people who watch madcow and/or Hannity should have something to say? Interesting, tell me more about these fascinating ideas of yours
This started as a story of madcow getting to what some lefty idiots on twitter were calling "the holy grail" last night, getting leaked Trump tax returns. Then it turned out it was a complete nothing burger, madcow and her fellow idiots got completely played because the "leaked" information is beneficial to Trump in many ways and completely undermines their "he doesn't pay taxes!" story. I don't need to watch either madcow or Hannity to follow this story
Hey folks, we're getting punked. You think that particular year return with no supporting schedules tells us anything. If anything this particular return makes it look like Trump was basically telling the truth about his income and tax liabilities. The Trump white house has said that it is a real return. Looks like we're getting the dance of the seven vales. We're only going to see what Trump wants us to see. This means nothing without all of the returns in the time frame up to the election year especially without the supporting schedules.
These aren't the drones you are looking for.
I think oreilly is a pinhead but to claim 10+ years of dominance and a one week of victory is making him wet his panties just shows how much of a partisan dip you are.
He's not going to be #1 in his seventies. Everyone loses steam and retires eventually.
If nothing else... the viewer base dies off.
Dear the readers, this is JUST one of many examples from this moron. Look how he blew up smoke out of his lying mouth and how I used facts to shame and humiliate him in public, over and over again.
From another thread - http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/high-chance-of-china-taiwan-war.2499383/#post-38743019
Who is the moron now?
Hey folks, we're getting punked. You think that particular year return with no supporting schedules tells us anything. If anything this particular return makes it look like Trump was basically telling the truth about his income and tax liabilities. The Trump white house has said that it is a real return. Looks like we're getting the dance of the seven vales. We're only going to see what Trump wants us to see. This means nothing without all of the returns in the time frame up to the election year especially without the supporting schedules.
These aren't the drones you are looking for.
She acknowledged that the provenance is suspect.
Since when is it a positive attribute for a President to play the media, anyway?
Always, according to the mindlessness of the Trumpsters when it's their hero at work.
IMO if she suspected she might be given an untrue statement she shouldn't have bitten, but that's me. Why give Trump potentially beneficial coverage?
Well it doesn't really change anything I suppose.
Your beef isn't with us its with the 17 intel agencies who have agreed there is something.Circle jerk, much? The birther crap is just as bad as your Russian bs.
I knew it looked wrong but I thought I spelled it the right way and it was highlighted so I went with the change.veils, not vales
Its more of a comment of which of your two faces you decide to show. But its your 1st amendment right so have at it.Oh, in your world only people who watch madcow and/or Hannity should have something to say? Interesting, tell me more about these fascinating ideas of yours
This started as a story of madcow getting to what some lefty idiots on twitter were calling "the holy grail" last night, getting leaked Trump tax returns. Then it turned out it was a complete nothing burger, madcow and her fellow idiots got completely played because the "leaked" information is beneficial to Trump in many ways and completely undermines their "he doesn't pay taxes!" story. I don't need to watch either madcow or Hannity to follow this story
Its more of a comment of which of your two faces you decide to show. But its your 1st amendment right so have at it.
Which two faces? I'm puzzled. I said I watch neither of those two. What faces are you referring to?
She obviously thought she had a very damning piece of evidence, but apparently she never bothered to check it out before airing it. They had a damned countdown clock running, FFS.Why publish it if doesn't fit your agenda or preconceived notions about Trump? Why publish it if you are going to publicly acknowledge that the provenance is suspect? All that is doing is purposely discrediting yourself and your ability to report accurate information.
She cannot be that dumb. Please someone explain to me what I'm missing?
Why publish it if doesn't fit your agenda or preconceived notions about Trump? Why publish it if you are going to publicly acknowledge that the provenance is suspect? All that is doing is purposely discrediting yourself and your ability to report accurate information.
She cannot be that dumb. Please someone explain to me what I'm missing?
This. If you actually watched the show, the reporter who's specialty is taxes and tax law subjects, said that he's been reporting on Trump for over 30 years and he suspects that he has received things anonymously from Trump when it served his interests in the past.Huh? There is no dispute I am aware of that the documents she put forth are genuine, so if anything this makes her MORE credible and should make you even MORE convinced of her ability to report accurate information. What has been said is that perhaps Trump's team leaked the document themselves in order to make him look good but that in no way discredits her. I'm seriously baffled how you think her reporting factually true things makes her less credible.
It doesn't fit her political agenda, that much is sure, but if anything that would once again bolster her credibility if she was willing to publish it. Let's be frank though, it was just a ratings grab. She may have a political ideology but the ideology of ratings comes first.