Blackvegetable » 20 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
Huey » 30 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
Take you time with that argument that refutes what I posted about the DB ****. I have the the time I the world. I very recently retired after another 17 years with the DOD.
@Huey
@ROG62
I already did.
You have not posted anything DB got wrong....again.
Your motto seems to be lie to you die.
Huey » Yesterday, 3:56 pm » wrote: ↑
Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 3:37 pm » wrote: ↑
See, I told you that you could figure that out on your own.
When you ran...of course..
Even if it is from that less than credible source, the daily beast
Except that you've never laid a glove in it and they're quoting the guy, verbatim.
Zero, huh? You shoulda used the link I gave you, Princess.
you're a **** idiot.
For the record, they **** you again. This is from yesterday:
when did the WSJ break the story?
When you ran...of course..
I didn't run. I gave you the tools necessary to get your answer. Not my fault you are too lazy to your own work, Princess. I don't do YOUR bidding.
FOX news online, that your source lied to you about and said had 0 reporting online, actually ran the story I posted about YESTERDAY. The daily beast story was published TODAY!
https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-veter ... -guilfoyle
Fox Veteran Shames Network for ‘Malpractice’ Over Guilfoyle
“Fox has 0 reporting online about this,” he wrote on X, saying the network’s last article mentioning Guilfoyle dated Dec. 10, 2024, when Trump announced her nomination.
They **** you again.
And, Spoiled Princess, if you click on the link I gave from the WSJ, you will get the date the story ran. Again, I gave you the tools.
Note the portions in bold. The FOX story I posted was from SUNDAY. The DB article was written on MONDAY. The DB failed to fact check the tweet. And you have posted NOTHING to refute that.
I'll wait. I am retired now collecting a couple of fat pensions.