Typically of the liberal press, Fred is at it again with an editorial called, "Get to the Truth about Russian hacking in U.S. election"
Fred is whining about the election, of course. He says Dems are angry that Obama didn't get onto the Russians quickly enough for the hacking. From an evidence point of view, as opposed to speculation with an agenda, that is a hard thing to prove. If you can't prove something but you use it as part of your argument, what have you done to your position? You have weakened your position, perhaps substantially. So, Did Putin contribute? Who knows. Fred, it was not a good idea to use that.
He said that Hillary's position was weakened by the fact that she did not satisfy voters' desire for a change candidate. He did not have to dig very deeply for that nuggett.
Fred says that in some cases, Trump is "summoning" conservative politicians who resorted to questioning him way, way beyond his credentials. Mitt Romney, for example. I was personally offended by Romney's treatment of Trump. I wouldn't have blamed Trump if he had kicked Romney's ass right back out of the building...but let me say this. If Hillary had won, I would say that her past ungraciousness could be expected to continue, super bitch that she is. To assume that she would be gracious is a mistake. So why make the point about Trump? Because it is one of only a few points that are available. This is what the Democrats' weapons cache consists of. barbs and unsubstantiated/false news like Russian Hacking. You will all end up with egg on your face if it turns out that the leak was from the DNC. Ya know something, Fred. I sincerely hope that you and your "world history creators" can get back to a better way of framing the world as we see it to something that better resembles the truth.
I was going to blog this, but I will just send it to you. It actually makes me queazy to read it. Jim Self jimself1954@gmail.com
Fred is whining about the election, of course. He says Dems are angry that Obama didn't get onto the Russians quickly enough for the hacking. From an evidence point of view, as opposed to speculation with an agenda, that is a hard thing to prove. If you can't prove something but you use it as part of your argument, what have you done to your position? You have weakened your position, perhaps substantially. So, Did Putin contribute? Who knows. Fred, it was not a good idea to use that.
He said that Hillary's position was weakened by the fact that she did not satisfy voters' desire for a change candidate. He did not have to dig very deeply for that nuggett.
Fred says that in some cases, Trump is "summoning" conservative politicians who resorted to questioning him way, way beyond his credentials. Mitt Romney, for example. I was personally offended by Romney's treatment of Trump. I wouldn't have blamed Trump if he had kicked Romney's ass right back out of the building...but let me say this. If Hillary had won, I would say that her past ungraciousness could be expected to continue, super bitch that she is. To assume that she would be gracious is a mistake. So why make the point about Trump? Because it is one of only a few points that are available. This is what the Democrats' weapons cache consists of. barbs and unsubstantiated/false news like Russian Hacking. You will all end up with egg on your face if it turns out that the leak was from the DNC. Ya know something, Fred. I sincerely hope that you and your "world history creators" can get back to a better way of framing the world as we see it to something that better resembles the truth.
I was going to blog this, but I will just send it to you. It actually makes me queazy to read it. Jim Self jimself1954@gmail.com
