Hey ****....
What did DB get wrong?Beekeeper » 32 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Hey @Blackvegetable , looks like the DAILY BEASTIALITY just got SHOVE UP YOUR *** AGAIN!!
How convenient, huh??
Liars exposed AGAIN!! They only exist to keep yuo **** MORONS all angry and ****. When they LIES GET EXPOSED, you get mad.
Chase me more!!
"Another"?Huey » 49 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
And another of your threads, based on something from the Daily Beast, bites dust.
pivoting and double dribbling again.
Zero represents never happened, not found yet shows you weren't looking for the actual answer but accepting what others believed took place without seeing or admitting it happened. That is flaming reasonable doubt on purpose between all possibilities it cannot be what actually existed in that specific event..
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. @HueyBlackvegetable » 13 minutes ago » wrote: ↑"Another"?Huey » 59 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
And another of your threads, based on something from the Daily Beast, bites dust.
There have been zero...
I already did.Huey » 15 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
Your motto seems to be lie to you die.Blackvegetable » 20 minutes ago » wrote: ↑I already did.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
You have not posted anything DB got wrong....again.
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.Huey » Yesterday, 3:56 pm » wrote: ↑Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 3:37 pm » wrote: ↑Huey » Yesterday, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑ See, I told you that you could figure that out on your own. Even if it is from that less than credible source, the daily beast. Zero, huh? You shoulda used the link I gave you, Princess.
For the record, they **** you again. This is from yesterday: (SUNDAY)
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump- ... ions-mount
You need to find better sources.When you ran...of course..See, I told you that you could figure that out on your own.
Except that you've never laid a glove in it and they're quoting the guy, verbatim.Even if it is from that less than credible source, the daily beastyou're a **** idiot.Zero, huh? You shoulda used the link I gave you, Princess.when did the WSJ break the story?For the record, they **** you again. This is from yesterday:
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.When you ran...of course..
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.
What is the article about?Huey » 17 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Your motto seems to be lie to you die.
Note the portions in bold. The FOX story I posted was from SUNDAY.

Make your own case. The DB reported a lie. You wanna divert, go for it.Blackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑What is the article about?Huey » 22 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Your motto seems to be lie to you die.
Note the portions in bold. The FOX story I posted was from SUNDAY.
I am waiting for you to post this "lie"...Huey » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Make your own case. The DB reported a lie. You wanna divert, go for it.
Due to retirement I have all the time In the world. I'll wait for your case, Princess.
Blackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ I am waiting for you to post this "lie"...
I can't refute what you refuse to post.
Only the lie, not a bunch of effluvium.
Are you saying he didn't post that on X?Huey » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ I have, multiple times.
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.
Then one might think you wouldn't fail so miserably.Huey » 20 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ The Daily Beast:
![]()
Bias Rating: LEFT (-6.6)
- Overall, we rate the Daily Beast Left-Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that favor the left. We also rate them Mixed for reporting due to failed fact checks.
Factual Reporting: MIXED (4.6)
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY
@Blackvegetable Do not EVAH presume to mock anyone for the source selections.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-beast/