Army

Lot you got more patience that I got talking some these don't have the spirit of T***h .

American Vet

Of course CNN always airs the t***h and carefully research it's stories <sarcasm intended>

Scaramucci Slip
CNN retracted a story in June of 2017 claiming that former Trump adviser Anthony Scaramucci was under investigation by Congress for his alleged ties to Russia. (RELATED: CNN Retracts Story About Trump Adviser Being Under Investigation)
The story relied on one anonymous congressional source and CNN apologized to Scaramucci for the error. Three CNN reporters ended up resigning from the company over the botched report.

Trump Jr. Collusion
CNN reported in December of 2017 that Donald Trump Jr. received special access to documents stolen by WikiLeaks on Sept. 4, 2016. However, Donald Trump Jr. actually was emailed about the documents on Sept. 14, 2016 — a day after they were already available to the general public. (RELATED: CNN Botches Major ‘Bombshell’ Alleging Contacts Between Don Jr. And WikiLeaks)
CNN updated the report but still has not explained how two sources managed to give them the wrong date on the email.

17 Intel Agencies Lie
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said during a congressional hearing in May that three intelligence agencies — the CIA, NSA and the FBI — concluded that Russia interfered with the 2016 e******n.
Nonetheless, CNN has repeatedly claimed that all 17 intelligence agencies came to the same conclusion about Russian meddling. CNN’s claim is pure nonsense, as the Department of Energy, Department of the Treasury, and Drug Enforcement Agency, among others, would have no authority to make any assertions about Russian meddling in e******ns.

Comey Testimony Crumbles
On June 6, 2017, CNN reported that former FBI director James Comey would contradict President Donald Trump’s claim that he was not under investigation.
When the time came for Comey to release his opening statement for his congressional testimony, he actually ended up confirming Trump’s account. (RELATED: Comey Confirms: Trump Wasn’t Under FBI Investigation)
“This article was published before Comey released his prepared opening statement. The article and headline have been corrected to reflect that Comey does not directly dispute that Trump was told multiple times he was not under investigation in his prepared testimony released after this story was published,” CNN corrected.

A Clean Bill Of Health
In May of 2017 when Republicans were authoring a new health care bill, CNN claimed that GOP changes to Obamacare could make rape and sexual assault pre-existing conditions.
PolitiFact rated that claim “mostly false,” explaining that “the bill does not change what is or is not a pre-existing condition; the health insurance companies write those definitions for themselves.”

8. Just Tap It In
CNN originally denounced Trump’s claim in March of 2017 that former President Barack Obama was wiretapping phones in Trump Tower as a “flat-out lie.”
Then, in September of 2017, CNN reported that the FBI had a wiretap on former campaign chairman Paul Manafort — who has a residence in Trump Tower.
While it is unclear if the FBI tapped Manafort’s phones in Trump Tower or picked up his conversations with the president, it’s plausible enough that CNN should not be dismissing Trump’s claims out of hand

Zeleny’s Folly
CNN reporter Jeff Zeleny tweeted on July 31, 2018, that President Trump had not taken questions from reporters in at least a week.
Just one day prior to Zeleny’s tweet, Trump answered questions during a joint news conference with the Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte.

Cuda2020

No, just hysterical ones, usually from the right.

Cuda2020

We don't have enough pages here to post FOX's.

American Vet

LOL

Avoidance noted.....as usual.

Tuck tail and run again.

Cuda2020

I know how much you h**e the facts and comic talk shows, like FOX.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

You have your t***hs and I have mine and most likely between the two we may find of slither of it...” May” the operative word here...

American Vet

So let's see:

I post actual, verifiable instances/facts.

And you post a comment that I don't like facts.

Rose42

Most people - including ssdd/“common sense matters” - look for ‘facts’ from sources that confirm their opinion. When was the last time anyone’s mind changed? Anyone who disagrees now uses only fringe sites and ‘alternative facts’. People can’t even recognize that propaganda works on them. It works on everyone to some extent.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

So true, Rose...If it doesn’t fit their narrative it isn’t fact..

I find it interesting they attack the site more than the article, which regardless of the sight used it is also on any number of other sites and “ the facts” or article is correct regardless..Before I stopped lining up other sites to show including their “own quoted” they will still deny.. I know longer bother anymore.. If they want to “ prove” rather opinionate the site is false, let them do it!!

TexaCan Loc: Homeward Bound!

I think she just illustrated one of those attributes of hysterical women that are, supposedly, RW.........personally attacking someone because of her inadequacy to prove her stated accusation about Fox!

I guess she forgot about those Liberal ladies that had the need to have a planned time to “scream at the sky” in order to release their frustrations! Nothing hysterical bout that! 🥴😤🤭🧑🏻‍🎤👨🏻‍🎤😂

TexaCan Loc: Homeward Bound!

I suppose you can back this statement up with actual occurrences.......a “fair and balanced” comparison between Liberal ladies and Conservative ladies? Or perhaps that’s just estrogen talking! 🤷🏻‍♀️👍

SSDD

Yeah... Sorry... I don't buy into all that "there is more than one t***h" B.S., there is really only one reality and as such, only one version of the t***h. Anything that does not conform with reality, that is not the t***h, what DOES conform with reality, that IS the t***h, anything else is a fallacy. If something does not line up with known facts, it is a fallacy or to put it another way, mis/disinformation, B.S., or according to a site discovered on an internet search, a "fabrication falsehood fib unt***h deception falsity fiction falsification prevarication invention mendacity misinformation dishonesty disinformation exaggeration myth perjury sham deceit inaccuracy porky pretenseUS pretenceUK story white lie dissimulation distortion gossip guile misrepresentation misstatement pretext propaganda subterfuge tale bulldust fable falseness forgery fraudulence hyperbole line whopper yarn backbiting detraction evasion taradiddle tarradiddle half-t***h departure from the t***h fairy tale flight of fancy made-up story piece of fiction tall story tall tale terminological inexactitude trumped-up story barefaced lie f**e news figment of the imagination little white lie red herring alternative fact cock and bull story fairy story pork pie porky pie canard ruse trickery cock-and-bull story rumourUK concoction figment wile rumorUS coloringUS stratagem colouringUK fantasy unt***hfulness sophistry fallacy delusion song and dance spuriousness fish story phantasy duplicity speciousness equivocation kidology crock deceptiveness lies hypocrisy untruism hogwash deceitfulness fraud f**e fancy jazz slant lying cover inveracity fallaciousness illusion fudging cover-up excuse jive casuistry stonewall stall run-around adulteration farfetched story shaggy-dog story mendaciousness chicanery stretch twist insincerity perversion hollowness double-dealing perfidy spin smoke fictitiousness m********n twisting clothesline evasiveness bunk disingenuousness unveracity unreality hallucination fibbing amphibology sophism urban myth amphiboly shuffling creation imagination waffle manipulation improvisation false light urban legend t***hlessness economy with the t***h con doctoring alteration tampering not a true picture trick double meaning cop out double entendre double talk quibbling routine angler's tale unlikely story guise pishogue whisper unbelievable tale fanciful tale false statement spinach half t***h big lie remarkable story nancy story rigmarole spiel fibbery feigning f**ery scandal chestnut defamation claptrap opus artifactUS work artefactUK persuasion false report disguise mask semblance front conspiracy theory dissembling two-timing one for the birds false excuse prepared speech doublespeak codology figment of one's imagination unreliability indirectness circumlocution misconception false colors misbelief waffling flannel paltering", taken from https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/lie.html, there are more but I think I have made my point quite well enough. Pardon the lack of punctuation in that list, I left it "true to form"ho have trouble with the ACTUAL t***h as a direct c/p, unaltered.

Only those who have trouble with the ACTUAL t***h make up such fallacies as "there is more than one t***h". That should tell you a little something about yourself and those you try so hard to support and defend when you have to rely on "cock and bullery" to justify such support and/or defense of the indefensible. The ACTUAL t***h is not subject to gradation, or perception, the t***h IS the t***h, all else is anything BUT the t***h. The ACTUAL t***h is NOT flexible, it is NOT subject to one's point of view. It is reliant on facts and reality and NOTHING more. Why do you people make up such crap as "alternate t***h"? Wanna know another word for "alternate t***h"? LIES!

So yeah... Go ahead and live in your world of make believe and lies, I will stay right here in the real world. I will tell you one thing, I most certainly will not accept your lies as t***h.

SSDD

Wrong again. You people are so delusional... No, people like me look for ACTUAL facts, ones based in reality, not your delusional alternate reality that you people favor so much. But... C'est la vie, one can not persuade a Trumplican to give up their world of make believe and lies regardless of how hard one may try. It really isn't worth the effort, or more succinctly, Trumplicans aren't really worth the effort... What would be the point of wasting one's time trying to convince another who is so delusional, so adverse to reality, so gullible, so ignorant, so factually challenged, so intellectually challenged and so damned stubborn? Is one fitting such a description even worth knowing? Are they of ANY value? What value can they hold? Even the Trumplicans that have already learned the hard way that they screwed up, are they even worth it? If they were so easily deceived, are they not subject to being deceived again in the future by the next charlatan that comes along? Perhaps that might make a decent topic of discussion... Are Trumplicans redeemable?

Rose42

No you don’t. You’re no different than most other people. Your yip yap can’t change that. In fact, you may as well be a ‘Trumplican’ for all your blather.