Tea Ess Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 312 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 140 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/10/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1998 Author Share Posted February 19, 2017 Just now, Jewels7 said: Doesn't change the fact that Hillary has media on payroll as reported by the parody site. Maybe address that fact. Okay. It's wrong. Hillary did not have reporters on her payroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezra Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 134 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 8,142 Content Per Day: 2.35 Reputation: 6,612 Days Won: 20 Joined: 11/02/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted February 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Tea Ess said: It's from a parody website, though. It would be like linking The Onion. And as far as I can tell, the leaked emails didn't show that Hillary had reporters on her payroll. Why are you trying to protect Hillary and dismiss Wikileaks? Do you really want to see those Wikileaks documents? There is no parody here. Those documents absolutely showed the reporters who were on Hillary's payroll, and trying to claim that they were forged or fudged won't cut it. And the whole world knows how the media were rigging the debates in Hillary's favor, feeding her with unauthorized information, etc. Wasserman-Schulz and Donna Brazile were exposed, and had to step down from their respective positions. So kindly do some serious research about this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewels7 Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 713 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 351 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/10/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted February 19, 2017 8 minutes ago, Tea Ess said: Okay. It's wrong. Hillary did not have reporters on her payroll. Saying that isn't proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tea Ess Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 312 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 140 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/10/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1998 Author Share Posted February 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Ezra said: Why are you trying to protect Hillary and dismiss Wikileaks? Do you really want to see those Wikileaks documents? There is no parody here. Those documents absolutely showed the reporters who were on Hillary's payroll, and trying to claim that they were forged or fudged won't cut it. And the whole world knows how the media were rigging the debates in Hillary's favor, feeding her with unauthorized information, etc. Wasserman-Schulz and Donna Brazile were exposed, and had to step down from their respective positions. So kindly do some serious research about this matter. Can you link a reliable and non-parody source that shows that Hillary Clinton had reporters on payroll? The Washington Post reported on the leaked emails that showed she had friendly reporters that her campaign gave stories to, but not that they were on payroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tea Ess Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 312 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 140 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/10/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1998 Author Share Posted February 19, 2017 Just now, Jewels7 said: Saying that isn't proof. You can't prove a negative (eg Hillary did not have reporters on payroll). The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewels7 Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 713 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 351 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/10/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted February 19, 2017 3 minutes ago, Tea Ess said: You can't prove a negative (eg Hillary did not have reporters on payroll). The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Of course you can prove a negative. Evidence of Hillary having off the record contacts with 30 reporters before her campaign is out there. And Super PAC's are not to be discounted as doing a candidates bidding either. http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/sites/default/files/10-06-16 Correct the Record%2BClinton final.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewels7 Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 713 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 351 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/10/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted February 19, 2017 3 minutes ago, Davida said: The Onion has truer News then CNN!! And is vastly more entertaining too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tea Ess Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 312 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 140 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/10/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1998 Author Share Posted February 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Jewels7 said: Of course you can prove a negative. Evidence of Hillary having off the record contacts with 30 reporters before her campaign is out there. And Super PAC's are not to be discounted as doing a candidates bidding either. http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/sites/default/files/10-06-16 Correct the Record%2BClinton final.pdf If I said that pink rabbits lived on Pluto, the burden of proof would be on me to prove it, not you to disprove it. I already conceded that Hillary and her campaign had friendly reporters, so I'm not surprised she had off the records contacts with them, but there's still no evidence that she had them on payroll. That's what I'm disputing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tea Ess Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 312 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 140 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/10/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1998 Author Share Posted February 19, 2017 Just now, Davida said: There's unsubstantiated pink rabbits on Pluto?!?!?!!!! Alright!! Possibly, but I haven't provided proof for that claim, so I don't expect anyone to believe it. It's the same thing with Hillary having reporters on payroll. I am not aware of any evidence supporting that claim, so no one should be expected to believe it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewels7 Posted February 19, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 713 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 351 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/10/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted February 19, 2017 15 minutes ago, Davida said: and it lowers my BP rather then raising it!! Always a big plus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts