And every l*****t (or anyone else) here on OPP that believed and defended them should be giving us an apology and a retraction.

But is that going to happen?

So who are the consummate liars?

Yeah, me too. I asked them to provide a link to a story dated during Trump’s presidency. (https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-270011-3.html#4413526 point #3)

Crickets.

I guess they are waiting for one of their biased “fact-chuckers” to tell them what to think and say.

I guess that works for them kinda like how one of Biden’s prepared speeches works for him…[pause]

Uh huh!

Oh yeah, and there's that. Good point. And the l*****ts on OPP are perfectly fine with such treason. In my mind, the minions who allow this stuff are the real problem. They enable the c*******t sympathizing politicians. But that's just my opinion.

Some more general observations about the alleged balloons on Trump’s watch and l*****t admissions. This just shows how dishonest and corrupt they are.

The fact is coming out that Trump (and his team) was not made aware of Chinese spying balloons, and l*****ts are okay with that.

https://patriotalerts.com/2023/02/biden-official-chinese-spy-balloons-flown-during-trump-admin-were-discovered-after-he-left-office/

I wonder if pants-on-fire Pegw will apologize for her complicity in spreading f**e news…

https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-270045-1.html#4412654

“…had stories” means past tense.

Oops. That was a lie. If the news sources had the story, why didn’t the president of the USA know?

Oh, that, well, here’s their position…

https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-270011-1.html#4412737

This would be insubordination if not treason for the military to not inform the commander in chief of existential threats to our country. And you’re okay with the man elected by the people being disregarded by his subordinates? That is also called “denying a fair and legal e******n”. Turn the tables and tell us how you would feel if a conservative military decided to withhold critical information from a Democrat president like Obama or Biden (both of whom conservatives consider incompetent). Biden is a whole lot less competent and trustworthy than Trump was, that’s for sure, just by going from the actual record, not the spins. I doubt you can be honest enough to admit you would be outraged and thus expose your hypocrisy if your presidents were dishonored like Trump was by your own admission..

Same kind of response from Rinaldi…



So, Trump wasn’t told by his subordinates that Chinese spy balloons were in American airspace because he was deemed by some of them as “incompetent” so a Chinese spy balloon was left to traverse our airspace. On the other hand, Biden was told about a Chinese spy balloon and didn’t remove it (like Trump should have and would have if he’d been informed of it) but Biden didn’t shoot it down until after it had a chance to gather any information it wanted to and t***smit it to China.

And then you l*****ts wonder why patriots don’t consider you patriotic to America. Hmmm.

You people (l*****ts) don’t know when you’re caught in a checkmate.

This was the best response on this thread yet in my opinion.

The fact that the military did end up shooting it down proves they believed it was bad enough to warrant military intervention. So the i***tic claim that it was “harmless” is demonstrably false. If not, then the US military is to blame for shooting down a harmless weather balloon for theatrics. That would be like blowing up a fishing vessel because it got into US waters. Who does that? Is any Biden supporter so sure of his conviction that it was harmless that he or she is now criticizing Biden for shooting it down? No? Didn’t think so.

Secondly, the claim “well, Trump did it too” isn’t as much an indictment on Trump as it is on Biden. in doing so they’re saying if Trump, who they claim got everything wrong, did it too, then that makes it okay for Biden. In other words that’s an admission that Biden doesn’t have the leadership sk**ls to know when (i.e. immediately) to shut down an enemy spy craft over America. Which, (recalling point one above), they eventually did shoot down proving they knew it was a threat and thus not harmless. So they are simply making excuses for Biden’s blatant ineptitude. Oh, but they needed to protect American lives! Really? So we’re okay sacrificing the security of the whole nation rather than risking the few? And there’s no way the US could possible evacuate anyone in an emergency like they do in times of hurricanes? Come on, man. Biden is on China’s payroll, that’s the real issue. (Here’s an analogy. What kind of “hero” waits until after the class bully (coincidentally his best friend, btw) totally beats up the class weakling before stepping in, and only then when he’s got the whole rest of the class supporting and prodding him to do so well after all the damage has been done? It is that obvious that the military response was just for appearance’s sake, not “heroics”. Biden wasn’t about to disappoint his Chinese cash cow.) and now he’s supposedly “victorious” for shooting down an unarmed object? Come on, man!

Thirdly, I have yet to see anyone cite or link to a dated article from the past, during Trump’s administration, where a Chinese balloon was then reported over US airways at that time. So it appears to be all hearsay. (I could be wrong on this and just haven’t read it or missed it, so if I’m wrong here’s an opportunity to show me. If so I’ll retract it. Unlike l*****ts who very rarely if ever retract anything they say that is debunked. Which is yet a fourth reason these brainwashed l*****t people should not be believed).

Peg,

Now whose ratings are “pants-on-fire” Peg? Oh, that would be you.

How does it feel knowing that the people you claim as “fact-checkers” are actually bought and paid for by one of the most dangerous men in America?
Did you see this post?

https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-269978-1.html#4411977

Or is your confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance getting in the way of you being able to process such information that totally blows your claims away?

I’m telling you this for your own good, Peg. You are talking to people who know how to think for themselves and acting like you’re all superior, when in fact you are the one who is being bamboozled and deceived because you fall for their [MSM, & politician’s) lies. You’re only making yourself look bad.

Wake up, dear!

Peg,

I’ve told you before you need to do your own research.

Look what I found just by doing a little digging…

First, from the past…
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Social media stocks tumble following Trump ban

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/social-media-stocks-tumble-following-151356269.html

January 11, 2021

On Monday, social media stocks were under pressure after banning President Donald Trump’s accounts following last week’s siege on Capitol Hill. Twitter said the platform was permanently banning the outgoing President, while Facebook said it was indefinitely banning Trump. Yahoo Finance’s Alexis Keenan breaks down the latest.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now from the present…..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/02/meta-stock-rockets-20percent-on-solid-earnings-analyst-reactions.html

Meta shares rocket 23%, one of the best days in over a decade
PUBLISHED THU, FEB 2 2023
“shares jumped over 23% on Thursday, one of the stocks best day in nearly a decade, with a slew of analyst upgrades coming off the back of a fourth-quarter revenue beat and optimistic prognostications from CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
“Meta shares sit at their highest point since September 2022, which was weeks before a disastrous third-quarter earnings report that prompted analysts across Wall Street to openly question Zuckerberg’s leadership. There was a markedly changed tone in analyst notes Wednesday night and Thursday morning, however, with the company beating topline estimates with $32.17 billion in revenue.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not only that, but I looked up META on NASDAQ, and, did it confirm what you said that it didn’t change much?
Well, I guess that depends on what you think “remaining steady for some time” looks like. For most of us that means a fairly flat line. But apparently for you that means something akin to a crosscut view of a tidal wave…

https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/meta

Well, that’s according to research being published by investigative journalist Matt Palumbo.

Read about it here…

https://patriotnewsnetwork.com/breaking-soros-officially-declared-most-dangerous-person-in-the-world/

And here…

https://nypost.com/2023/01/25/how-george-soros-funds-fact-checkers-to-silence-dissent/

“George Soros is the most dangerous man in America. The investor is intent on remaking the country to his liberal image, from our foreign-policy priorities to undermining our criminal-justice system. This week, The Post takes a look at the reach of Soros’ billions. In this fourth essay, Matt Palumbo, author of “The Man Behind the Curtain: Inside the Secret Network of George Soros,” talks about how “fact checking” can shape the narrative.
It’s not enough for George Soros to fund the media and encourage stories that back up his point of view — he has to make sure no one disagrees with it…

As the Hungarian publication Remix revealed, of the 11 Facebook-approved fact checking organizations for Central and Eastern Europe, eight were funded by Soros. As is the case for the US, these fact checking groups are largely critical of the political right.
Major fact-checking organizations such as PolitiFact, Snopes, and others have long faced allegations of left-wing political bias — allegations a series of studies over the years have confirmed. One of the more recent studies of bias on PolitiFact found sources six times more likely to defend Biden in their “fact-checks” than check his facts.
Major funding for PolitiFact’s parent company, The Poynter Institute, includes the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, Ford Foundation, Soros-backed Tides Foundation and Tides Center, the Carnegie Corp. of New York among many others…

Of the dozens of fact-checks mentioning Soros’ name on PolitiFact’s website, every single one without exception serves to deny what Soros’ multibillion-dollar empire is funding or debunk what amounts to chain email-tier rumors about him.

Every single claim fact-checked (always as “False” or “Pants on Fire”) is someone making a negative claim about Soros that PolitiFact responds to as if they’re his p.r. agent. When it comes to objectively true allegations that have been made about Soros network; such as his funding of rogue prosecutors nationwide, his connections to various media figures, his connections to the Biden White House, and much more, the fact-checkers simply ignore them.
Which is, essentially, the upshot of why Soros and other left-wing groups have weaponized “fact checking” — it allows them to pressure social media to censoring any news they don’t like.”
End of article.

And to think people on OPP believe these “fact checkers” are unbiased sources of unassailable t***h. That is dangerous!

Well, throwing the "Russian Collusion" h**x up against the wall to see if it sticks didn't work, so on to the next loser strategy. Why not with the DOJ in their pocket?

I have fact checked this statement and it is 100% factual with +/- 0.000000002% possibility of being inaccurate.

Do you have the stats on legal gun ownership to go along with this data?

If you had to pick only one, would you choose safe or free?

I was referring to liberals being propagandized. I was agreeing with you. Sorry for the confusion.

just how propagandized do you have to be not to see what's going on??? I wouldn't have believed it if I didn't see it with my own eyes.