- Joined
- Jan 19, 2007
- Messages
- 5,826
- Reaction score
- 169
I'm going to reiterate: It's blatantly clear that you're just linking the first site that parrots your claims, or is remotely relevant to them. That is not sourcing your claims, that is just spewing links. Almost all of these cites directly quote to the reddit thread in question, meaning they aren't actually sources of original arguments - they're recycled content. If you can't tell the difference between recycled content and original content, educate yourself before wasting more time.
As for this latest round of sites:
You're quoting from TheBlaze now? As in, the Glennbeck laughingstock "news" site? I'm not going to even pollute my computer with that.
The next two "sources" are fringe right-wing sources that score poorly enough on credibility that the first result for both is "satire:"
The politicalinsider, which reposts chain email-style stories like this:
http://www.snopes.com/dead-grandfather-offends-muslims/
westernjournalism, which not only does the same, but was founded specifically to attack the clintons in the 90s?
The only two credible sources you have are cspan, which is simply a link of the video in question, not an interpretation of it, and TheExaminer, a virginia news outlet that's simply states that there are allegations of voter fraud - in other words, that the other stories exist. These do not support your claim. They are simply reports that people are making the claim you are making.
Also, I watched the video the first time I responded to your garbage. It doesn't show voter fraud. What it shows is a hillary precinct captain giving a vote count, a sanders captain giving another, a recount as marginal votes are redistibuted (under caucus rules, candidates under a threshold have their votes redistributed), a recount occurring where it's not clear that the Hillary captain is doing a direct recount instead of just adding the votes received from redistributed O'Malley supporters. The Sanders voters formally request a recount, it's put to a public vote, and the public overwhelmingly refuses a recount. That's not voter fraud. At worst, it's voter laziness. Something that is mentioned in the reddit thread that all of your fucking links cite to as their source.
So just because it comes from Reddit that Makes it's not credible? That's a pretty pathetic theory. Also I can't control what sites decided to run with the story. Just because some of them are conservative doesn't mean they're hit pieces with no justification. It's not like I'm frequenting conservative garbage websites.
I really don't see how this is hard to grasp. Hillary Clinton was gifted 22 extra votes that weren't actually verified. The Bernie Sanders counters recounted everyone, and the Hillary counter was recorded telling somebody else that she only added newcomers to the count she already taken, and then when asked if she recounted everyone, she fucking lied to the organizer and said yes. Anyone that left the caucus site who was supporting Bernie, were removed by Bernie's counters/recounters, but any Hillary supporter who left the caucus site was treated as though they were still there for the purposes of the recount. That means artificial inflation of her numbers occurred unless everyone who left was a Bernie delegate, on top of the Hillary campaign surrogate lying to an election official to cover up her mistake. Which is what I honestly think it probably was.
There are other videos popping up where it happened in other precincts also
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/the-second-example-of-hillary-clintons-election-fraud-whoa-video/
Apparently Bernie Sanders feel there's more than enough evidence as he is now choosing to not concede Iowa. I don't blame him either. If he lost Iowa fair and square then he lost but why not make sure everything was done aboveboard?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...2/bernie-sanders-not-conceding-iowa/79717232/
Look this is the last time I'm gonna post about this I don't give a fuck if you agree or not and I'm not willing to live and die on this hill.