Circling circling circling. Wagons keep on circling.
(we've reached the inevitable stage where, in response to overwhelming criticism, all the other beltway journalists tweet about how great & indispensable journalist X is- those dumb dumb readers just don't understand).
What Rachael offered up was a completely subjective opinion- as if it was just an objective fact- devoid of context and stated definitively. She (& other political hacks journos) created a narrative based on nothing but her own opinion and very rightfully got pushback on it.
#Actually, you're just not intelligent enough to understand my extremely savvy point. Unlike you all, I have a very high IQ
Also, this part was 100% just Rachael Bade being super salty that everyon ratio'ed her shitty tweet yesterday. Because #actually that just proves how right and unbiased they are.
Sorry your sources aren't going to get to serve on the committee, Rachael. I'm sure you can find some other crazies to leak to you, like you did during the BENGHAZI fervor that you were the main MSM conduit for.
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.
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)....
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!)