I did'nt bring this up, the burden is NOT on me.
The burden of proof lies with the accuser not the accused so since you are doing the accusing...
And in that it says, NO SOLICITATION DOCUMENT EXISTS. From what I gather from reading it is that they have NOT solicited any at this time.
Breitbart is not a reliable source for ANYTHING
Your quote, the burden of disproof is on you. You can have an opinion but statements such as those require a fact to prove. Just because you do not like the article, or the source does not give right to shoot it down. If I am going to say I don't agree I will show facts as to why.
Since you seem grossly misinformed, I will tutor you a bit :
Read, Weep :
News organizations found, for example, that the ACORN videos–which purported to show a young Mr. Breitbart ally named James O'Keefe posing as a pimp seeking advice from the organization about how to establish a brothel and evade taxes–actually presented a heavily edited account of what had happened.
An investigation by the California attorney general's office concluded that O'Keefe had added footage of himself and an ally dressed in flamboyant costumes that they had not worn to ACORN's offices. By then, it was too late for ACORN: Outraged conservatives in Congress stripped the organization of federal funding.
The most interesting admission in the piece comes from Rich Lowry of theNational Review:
Lowry said Mr. Breitbart "wasn't a journalist in the traditional sense of dotting every i and crossing every t." As such, his journalistic lapses "didn't damage him on the right. He wasn't playing by the traditional media rules."
That's a fairly damning assessment of the right, from the right. 🙂
With that assesment all so called news agencies could be debunked. The problem I have is not you calling Brietbart or anybody else a fraud, it is not using sources to prove that what you disagree with is wrong. You play on emotions only that I can see yelling at any conservative on this forum that they are wrong, yet never brining up any source to show where they are wrong. Opinions are like a******* everyone has one.
Oh I have " sourced " many times here. Wether you see that, or know that, I dont even care. I just hate when someone slops up a link and doesnt bother to give a run down.
But you carry on now, I found some comedy gold via right wing palooza MILLIONS march on washington takin back ' Murica.
I've seem more people at a church picnic.
The actual request for those who don't like research.
The question is why do they need night sights and close uarter fire arms. The forestry service is under their jurisdiction, do they have alot of pot plots? I think that when the money runs out on welfare they are arming up to protect their offices from riots. My 2 cents.
- « Previous
- Next »