Four Pinocchios for the Senator
Next Post

Press {{ keys }} + D to make this page bookmarked.


Four Pinocchios for the Senator


WASHINGTON, DC – September 12, 2018

We have thoroughly covered the liberal hysteria around Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, why the nomination is so crucial to them  and what they are ready to do to prevent the nomination, and we won't repeat ourselves. Trump's opponents use all possible dirty tricks from the purely bureaucratic (like throwing in several thousand pages of documents 1 day before the hearing), to strong-arm tactics (paid protests with arrests of activists). They are even willing to risk their supporters in the Senate, demonstratively breaking their own rules and disclosing confidential information. But apparently the liberals are doing very badly if their leaders are ready to descend to banal fakery.

So, Sen. Kamala Harris(D-Calif.) had selectively edited a video of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s comments about “abortion-inducing drugs” to argue he is against birth control. As a result, Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler awarded her four Pinocchios in a Tuesday column.  A four-Pinocchio rating is the most egregious one can receive from a Post fact-checker.

According to Kessler, Harris did not make it clear that Kavanaugh was actually reiterating the plaintiff’s position in a 2013 court case. Instead, he wrote, she made it seem that Kavanaugh was offering his own opinion.

“The issue at hand is Kavanaugh’s reference to ‘abortion-inducing drugs,’” Kessler wrote. “A plain reading of his sentence, with its reference to 'they said,' suggests that he is merely reflecting the plaintiffs’ argument.”

He said Harris had omitted the words “they said” in a widely circulated tweet that said Kavanaugh’s comments were a “dog whistle for going after birth control.”

“Harris’s decision to snip those crucial words from her first post on the video is certainly troubling,” the Washington Post fact-checker wrote.

This trick is as old as old as they come. By selectively editing without context, you can turn the meaning of what was said to its exact opposite.  It is easy enough to take phrases of the bible out of context and prove that the authors should be judged for blasphemy. Sen. Kamala Harris did the same, only in a very primitive way. She is either arrogant and believes the idiots unwilling to test her words, or stupid enough to not understand the consequences of her lies... likely it doesn’t matter for her at all, and she is confident that people will vote for someone they are told to. I remind you that Harris, a former California attorney general, is considered a top-tier presidential contender from the Democratic side to challenge President Trump in 2020.

Anyway her tweet has been “liked” more than 30,000 times and retweeted more than 15,000 times. Now, all these people know that the Senator lied to them, but will that change anything?

Author: USA Really