Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
" Charleston South Carolina"
(set 2 days ago)
Location: home...finally, home .
8,814 posts, read 21,273,545 times
Reputation: 20102
Advertisements
.
When I think of how Al Franken was unjustly removed from the Senate pretty much by our own Senator Kirsten Gillibrand , I am amazed that this ridiculous foolish person is allowed to remain in office .
__________________ ******************
People may not recall what you said to them, but they will always remember how you made them feel .
1- The republican party didn't do their due diligence before the election.
2- The NY Times couldn't investigate all the data of all the candidates before the election. They did it and ended up with this particular guy as the fishy one AFTER the election due to lack of time.
3- The Democrats knew about this before the election but decided it would be better to let him win and make the republican party look incompetent.
Apparently the New York Times JUST admitted that Biden’s laptop was Biden’s laptop. They move a bit slowly even when they are being truthful. We’ll see if they find any evidence Hunter was selling access to pops - and not a brilliant oil or equity or artistic being. Something tells me the NYT will find that in 2028 or so.
Two takeaways:
1. How long was the NYT sitting on this story?
2. Wouldn't the public best be served if it was published prior to election day?
If the New York Times were ready to go with the story they would have released it the week before Election Day. You do understand that they an arm of the Democratic Party. Obviously they did not have enough information at that time.
.
When I think of how Al Franken was unjustly removed from the Senate pretty much by our own Senator Kirsten Gillibrand , I am amazed that this ridiculous foolish person is allowed to remain in office .
Only reason he was allowed to resign is because his senate seat was in no danger of being lost. If there was any chance of them losing it to the GOP you can bet he would never have been pushed to leave office.
If the New York Times were ready to go with the story they would have released it the week before Election Day. You do understand that they an arm of the Democratic Party. Obviously they did not have enough information at that time.
Obvious? Not to me. One thing we have all learned in the past ten years is that the NYT no longer makes editorial decisions based on journalistic integrity. How long did they sit on Blasey Ford, possible Chinese origins of Covid, vaccine efficacy, etc ...?
I don't think the Santos story was cobbled together in a month and published so quickly. The NYT may not have had the whole story before election day but probably enough to inform the voters of Santos's lack of veracity.
Obvious? Not to me. One thing we have all learned in the past ten years is that the NYT no longer makes editorial decisions based on journalistic integrity. How long did they sit on Blasey Ford, possible Chinese origins of Covid, vaccine efficacy, etc ...?
I don't think the Santos story was cobbled together in a month and published so quickly. The NYT may not have had the whole story before election day but probably enough to inform the voters of Santos's lack of veracity.
Occam's Razor time: instead of sitting on a finished (or even half-finished) article, the article hadn't been written yet.
Why didn't any of the failin' NYT's competitors - national or local - break this story? After they broke it, Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, NBC, etc. all released articles confirming that the fancy-schmancy banks "Santos" claimed to work at don't have any record of his employment, the schools he claimed to have attended don't have any record of his enrollment, etc.
Either they're all in on some conspiracy against poor "George Santos," or maybe for whatever reason, they all just didn't look into the background of one "George Santos." After all, Suozzi didn't do it either 2 years ago...
Apparently Joe Biden, Senator Blumental, and Senator Elizabeth Warren are shocked, just shocked, a pol would make stuff up. Some of it pretty wild and pretty off base.
The New York Times (a dependable source for all manner of hoax material presented as fact) is shocked too.
It now appears that he now lives in Huntington but previously lived in Jackson Heights where he, his mother and sister were evicted. Never saw someone that claims he is wealthy have this many judgements against him for loans credit cards, rent.
Quote:
Early during that first campaign, Mr. Santos listed his address as an apartment in the Elmhurst section of Queens. That residence, which was outside the district he was running to represent, appeared on an official candidate list compiled by New York City’s Board of Elections in 2020 and on federal campaign finance documents.
Mr. Santos later moved to a rowhouse in the Whitestone neighborhood where he is currently registered to vote but where he no longer lives.
Apparently Joe Biden, Senator Blumental, and Senator Elizabeth Warren are shocked, just shocked, a pol would make stuff up. Some of it pretty wild and pretty off base.
The New York Times (a dependable source for all manner of hoax material presented as fact) is shocked too.
I never saw anything to rival Santos, if half of the lies are true it would be difficult to top. Whataboutism is rampant on this thread. Excellent reporting this week as usual by the NY Times, I guess those crack reporters at the NY Post somehow missed this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
