Da! We must nationalize the means of production to ensure pravda for the people!Hey guys. Private businesses are doing free market stuff and doing what they want. How dare they!!
Da! We must nationalize the means of production to ensure pravda for the people!Hey guys. Private businesses are doing free market stuff and doing what they want. How dare they!!
Ok dumdum![]()
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019...on-how-do-we-prevent-it-from-happening-again/
Treason is ok when we do it says big brother.
Remember these are the types who loudly claimed manipulation was attack on the integrity of elections.
And before anyone brings up "free speech", just understand your standard is the same as Putins.
Who the hell could be so stupid as to post something from O'Keefe...oh nevermind.
Even worse if Trump loses to a woman.If Trump loses in 2020, I think we'll have to get out the popcorn... 0roo's going to melt down as his dreams of eternal right-wing dictatorship fade away.
So what? O'Keefe is a proven grifter. It's his reason for living.
It isn't fallacious. Sure he could possibly be saying something true, but I'll wait until someone credible claims what he is saying is true, and until that happens, I'll assume he is lying.Which, even if true, is irrelevant. If O'Keefe says that 1 + 1 = 2, the act of O'Keefe saying so does not make it false. That's the essence of the genetic fallacy.
O'Keefe is a political animal with an agenda. It's fair to be skeptical. It's fair to point to certain portions and say "This looks suspiciously edited" if that's the case. But it's fallacious to say that, just because any particular leak was facilitated through O'Keefe, that it's defacto not even worth looking at.
If Trump loses in 2020, I think we'll have to get out the popcorn... 0roo's going to melt down as his dreams of eternal right-wing dictatorship fade away.
Which, even if true, is irrelevant. If O'Keefe says that 1 + 1 = 2, the act of O'Keefe saying so does not make it false. That's the essence of the genetic fallacy.
O'Keefe is a political animal with an agenda. It's fair to be skeptical. It's fair to point to certain portions and say "This looks suspiciously edited" if that's the case. But it's fallacious to say that, just because any particular leak was facilitated through O'Keefe, that it's defacto not even worth looking at.
I've yet to see anything from O'Keefe that wasn't fabricated, until then anything he claims is not worth looking at.Which, even if true, is irrelevant. If O'Keefe says that 1 + 1 = 2, the act of O'Keefe saying so does not make it false. That's the essence of the genetic fallacy.
O'Keefe is a political animal with an agenda. It's fair to be skeptical. It's fair to point to certain portions and say "This looks suspiciously edited" if that's the case. But it's fallacious to say that, just because any particular leak was facilitated through O'Keefe, that it's defacto not even worth looking at.
Which, even if true, is irrelevant. If O'Keefe says that 1 + 1 = 2, the act of O'Keefe saying so does not make it false. That's the essence of the genetic fallacy.
O'Keefe is a political animal with an agenda. It's fair to be skeptical. It's fair to point to certain portions and say "This looks suspiciously edited" if that's the case. But it's fallacious to say that, just because any particular leak was facilitated through O'Keefe, that it's defacto not even worth looking at.
OP posts link to Project Veritas.
OP is a fucking loon.
Which, even if true, is irrelevant. If O'Keefe says that 1 + 1 = 2, the act of O'Keefe saying so does not make it false. That's the essence of the genetic fallacy.
O'Keefe is a political animal with an agenda. It's fair to be skeptical. It's fair to point to certain portions and say "This looks suspiciously edited" if that's the case. But it's fallacious to say that, just because any particular leak was facilitated through O'Keefe, that it's defacto not even worth looking at.
Which, even if true, is irrelevant. If O'Keefe says that 1 + 1 = 2, the act of O'Keefe saying so does not make it false. That's the essence of the genetic fallacy.
O'Keefe is a political animal with an agenda. It's fair to be skeptical. It's fair to point to certain portions and say "This looks suspiciously edited" if that's the case. But it's fallacious to say that, just because any particular leak was facilitated through O'Keefe, that it's defacto not even worth looking at.
Which, even if true, is irrelevant. If O'Keefe says that 1 + 1 = 2, the act of O'Keefe saying so does not make it false. That's the essence of the genetic fallacy.
O'Keefe is a political animal with an agenda. It's fair to be skeptical. It's fair to point to certain portions and say "This looks suspiciously edited" if that's the case. But it's fallacious to say that, just because any particular leak was facilitated through O'Keefe, that it's defacto not even worth looking at.
From what I've seen so far, sadly, the Dems don't have a candidate who can beat Trump...so no worries about Oroo melting down over that.
From what I've seen so far, sadly, the Dems don't have a candidate who can beat Trump...so no worries about Oroo melting down over that.
Who the hell could be so stupid as to post something from O'Keefe...oh nevermind.
Otoh, if it looks like a fuck and lies like a fuck . . .But it's fallacious to say that, just because any particular leak was facilitated through O'Keefe, that it's defacto not even worth looking at.
