All credit to this guy for pointing out but lol @ this interaction.
"Yeah that's somewhat in conflict with Bender's reporting for sure, but actually........."
So if you're keeping track, the original tweet says....
-The book excerpt said leading Dems widely supported the Soleimani strike (the excerpt say nothing of the such bc its not true)
-Matt Gaetz, unlike the libs, was against the strike (also not true)....
and then the follow-up claims Trump only did this (contra his non-interventionist mindset) bc the big bully GOP senators made him do it. As always, Trump innocent.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Look I'm too tired to argue rn (and be called a boot-licking scumbag centrist worm or w/e) but you deleted the tweets in question bc your premise was aggressively wrong & then when told so, continued to insist that your point was still right AKA typical Stancil shit.
Lord, grant me the confidence of a mediocre dude who's convinced he knows everything about politics, whilst completely talking out of his ass, over and over again. Couldn't be me.
Every time someone hits him with some data or the actual reality of events that have occurred his response is always, "nuh uh. no way. You're wrong. Ackshually...All you have to do is open your eyes to see that I'm right."
Source: Just trust me, bro.
(and to be clear, I'm not referring to Dave here. Dave actually covers politics and at least knows what he's talking about most of the time, despite his proclivities)
DO(ING) SOMETHING is inventing a thing that you think might/might not happen and then getting pre-emptively mad at it and declaring the Dems have (already) failed, before it even occurs.
(And then when it occurs afterwards, you can just claim that your advocacy was what did it)
Fyi, I watched the interview with Schiff. All he said was, "We don't even have the committee members set yet. The only thing we have solidified is the first hearing with the front line police. But sure, it's definitely possible we'll be hearing from people like Milley".
Like, what are you even talking about/ getting mad over? The committee hasn't even started yet. How do you know that they're 'uninterested in getting answers'...it literally hasn't happened yet. Premature failure (source: my imagination that Dems will fail to DO SOMETHING!)
That's it. That's definitely the big story here. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who is privvy to Trump's private actions & classified info, he has nowhere near the sensible perspective as some limp-dick who claimed an 80-year old congresswoman brutalized him.
"Hey uhh all the people around Trump thought exactly the same stuff as the shitlibs were saying. Hmmm does that mean that we might have been wrong (for 4 years) and they were right? Nope, it just means everyone *but* me is totally hysterical."
This whole thing is extremely funny, to me. I was just eating lunch and I saw that Politico tweet about Rodrigo being bad at parallel parking and forever reason this extremely dumb premise (the WH blowing it by not inviting Ariana Grande) just popped into my head.
I chuckled bc it was so stupid. I thought when I posted it some people would get it and others would find it believable (bc Politico publishes gossipy bullshit like that all the time). I thought it'd eventually get back to them & they'd be like, 'Uhhh no. We didnt' write that.'
But I thought it'd be a while and it'd be a pretty mild reaction. Instead, within an hour of posting, big diaper baby/editor of Politico Sam Stein was calling it 'disinformation' and summoning Twitter Support, which...I didn't really expect. I guess I should have, though.