Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, November 20, 2020

Tucker Carlson: Time for Sidney Powell to show us her evidence.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Tucker Carlson calls out Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, saying he asked her for evidence to support her election fraud claims, but "she never sent us any evidence despite a lot of requests, polite requests, not a page."

"When we kept pressing she got angry and told us to stop contacting her."


Honeymoon finally over?

What happened to Tucker's missing UPS package?

#1 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-20 04:19 AM | Reply | Funny: 3

He'll likely backpeddle tomorrow.

#2 | Posted by a_monson at 2020-11-20 05:00 AM | Reply

Tucker Carlson, after spending years helping cultivate a political subculture that hates evidence, now wants some.

#3 | Posted by Zed at 2020-11-20 08:03 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

I wonder if Never-Tr***ers will conveniently forget *ucker's enabling of Tr***

#4 | Posted by hamburglar at 2020-11-20 08:07 AM | Reply

**** Tucker. He's lying scum.

#5 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2020-11-20 12:10 PM | Reply

He'll likely backpeddle tomorrow.

#2 | POSTED BY A_MONSON

Yeah ~~ He'll get a phone call threatening to twitter-ruin his career.

#6 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-11-20 12:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"I wonder if Never-Tr***ers will conveniently forget *ucker's enabling of Tr***"

People smart enough to be "Never Trumpers" never listened to that twit in the first place.

#7 | Posted by danni at 2020-11-20 01:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Oh, so now Tucker is a 'journalist', eh? Checking for facts and all? I guess he has viewed the writing on the wall, about Rupert Murdoch losing control of Fox to his son, and like Chris Wallace, is trying to become a respected, conservative reporter of news...

#8 | Posted by catdog at 2020-11-20 01:18 PM | Reply

Not even trusting them as much as he did Bobulinski :)

#9 | Posted by Mblue at 2020-11-20 02:34 PM | Reply

I'm not a flaming lefty...and I can tell this is Sucker Carlson being Sucker Carlson. His stripes are no more likely to change than his twin sister Rachel Maddow's are.

His commentary was still mostly focused on the fact that the election had been stolen by nefarious left-wing internationalists.

#10 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 03:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Ridiculous attempt at an equivalence. Carlson's not just biased, he flat out lies and isn't intelligent. He's white and aggrieved like his audience. That's his "qualification"

"Carlson was briefly enrolled at Collge du Lman, a boarding school in Switzerland, but says he was "kicked out".[27] He attained his secondary education at St. George's School, a boarding school in Middletown, Rhode Island. He then went to Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, where he graduated in 1991 with a BA in history.[16] After college, Carlson tried to join the Central Intelligence Agency, but his application was denied, after which he decided to pursue a career in journalism with the encouragement of his father.[28][16]"

Maddow was a Rhodes Scholar (not "Roads"). She's consistent in her views and her bias. She also researches the hell out of what she presents and in her books she publishes.

It's an insane comparison. Truly.

#11 | Posted by YAV at 2020-11-20 03:21 PM | Reply

"It's an insane comparison. Truly."

Do you own a TV?

#12 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 03:42 PM | Reply

I'm just asking because, in my office, we go from being lectured by Tucker to being lectured by Rachel. For those of us in the office, they're equally stupid.

#13 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-20 03:43 PM | Reply

Try posting something substantive next time.

#14 | Posted by YAV at 2020-11-20 03:45 PM | Reply

#13 - that's a better qualification on what you were trying to say.

#15 | Posted by YAV at 2020-11-20 03:45 PM | Reply

10

I understood what you were saying. No further clarification needed for me.

#16 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-20 03:51 PM | Reply

#11

Yes, but Tucker has a bow-tie.

#17 | Posted by Corky at 2020-11-20 04:37 PM | Reply

I turned on Hannity for a few minutes last night to hear the latest from him about the election ...

"Maduro, HUGO CHAVEZ!, Venezuela, George Soros, HUGO CHAVEZ!!!!, socialists!!! SOCIALISTS!!!!" yada yada yada

#18 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-11-20 04:56 PM | Reply

#18 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

The Rudy segment was especially deplorable. He was clearly drunk, slurring his words, eyes half open. And as he was being cut off by Hannity to end the segment, he said the Dem party needs its head cut off as he made a slashing motion across his neck.

Fascinatingly despicable.

#19 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-11-20 05:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#13 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Not even close. Rachel had to argue in court that no reasonable television viewer would consider the information provided by Rachel on MSNBC as being anything other than exaggeration and conjecture.

Oh, wait, no...that was Tucker.

#20 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-11-20 05:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Tucker Carlson cried before a judge that his show isn't actually news.

Rachel Maddow is an actual journalist.

QAnonBomber lies about the two of them being the same. But he's ignorable because he's a proven liar.

Eberly claims he agrees with QAnonBomber. Because Eberly likes to normalize the atrocities committed by conservatives.

They both claim to have voted for Biden. Both spend all day long on the DR defending Trumpism.

These trolls these days.

#21 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-20 05:50 PM | Reply

What's the Vegas line on Kamala Harris and Joe Biden being subjected to one of Sarah Palin's Second Amendment Remedies, before noon on Jan 20, 2021?

What's the odds it's Boaz who does it?

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-20 05:52 PM | Reply

What's the Vegas line on Kamala Harris and Joe Biden being subjected to one of Sarah Palin's Second Amendment Remedies, before noon on Jan 20, 2021?
What's the odds it's Boaz who does it?

You really think Boaz wants a Pelosi presidency?

#23 | Posted by MBlue at 2020-11-20 06:05 PM | Reply

-Yes, but Tucker has a bow-tie.

I didn't like him from the start over that.

#24 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-20 06:28 PM | Reply

Remember when Jon Stewart went on *ucker's show? Classic

#25 | Posted by hamburglar at 2020-11-20 06:34 PM | Reply

"Do you own a tv"

Good grief!

#26 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2020-11-20 06:37 PM | Reply

Yeah, Stewart RUINED tucker pretty good. He left for fox shortly after, which is where careers go to die.

#27 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2020-11-20 06:37 PM | Reply

-Yes, but Tucker has a bow-tie.

I didn't like him from the start over that.

#24 | Posted by eberly

From the beginning, he struck me as a smarmy, Little Lord Fauntleroy spoiled rich kid, which is what he is.

Tucker Carlson was born in May 1969 in San Francisco, California into a wealthy family. His father, Richard Warner Carlson, had forged an eventful career in journalism and later politics, and his mother, Lisa McNear, was an artist.

At the age of 14, Carlson was sent to a prestigious boarding school in Rhode Island, where he was known for his "beach boy looks" and his ability to dominate the room at the after-dinner debating society.

It was in 10th grade of boarding school that Carlson also started sporting his signature look: the bow tie.

www.businessinsider.com

#28 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-11-20 07:16 PM | Reply

"Rachel Maddow is an actual journalist."

Smerconish is an actual journalist.

If Rachel is, she's hiding it. Choosing instead to be a political hack, like her twin brother Tucker.

Paul Krugman is a brilliant economist...but also a political hack. He's also a "journalist" of sorts.

#29 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 05:13 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

She's not hiding it all.
All you've done is show how stupid you are by saying that nonsense.

#30 | Posted by YAV at 2020-11-21 08:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Maddow holds a bachelor's degree in public policy from Stanford University and a doctorate in political science from Oxford University

I think that qualifies her to expound on politics. She's only a "hack" because you disagree with her. I'd love to see you try to debate her, she'd hand you your a**.

I notice that everybody who disagrees with you is a "hack". What are you that makes your opinion superior to theirs?

Tucker Carlson? Now, there's a hack!

#31 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2020-11-21 11:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Here's where he got his "political orientation":

The series was loosely based on the life of Herbert Philbrick, a Boston advertising executive who infiltrated the U.S. Communist Party on behalf of the FBI in the 1940s and wrote a bestselling book on the topic, I Led Three Lives: Citizen, 'Communist', Counterspy (1952). The part of Philbrick was played by Richard Carlson [Tucker's Dad]. The "three lives" in the title are Philbrick's outward life as a white-collar worker, his secret life as a Communist agent, and his even more secret life as an FBI operative helping to foil Communist plots.[1]

I Led 3 Lives lasted 117 episodes. Philbrick served as a technical consultant,[2]:37 with Carlson narrating each episode.[2]:86 The episodes often had very little to do with the actual events of Philbrick's life as related in his book"Philbrick is credited with only 5 of the 117 screenplays. Screenplays gradually became more and more outlandish, featuring, for example, such supposed "Communist plots" as the conversion of household vacuum cleaners (1942-1954 Electrolux) into tactical missile launchers with which the Communists intended to destroy America's Nike anti-aircraft defensive missiles, and the manufacturing of untraceable "ghost guns" (unserialized Colt M1911) with which the Communists intended to assassinate their political enemies. en.wikipedia.org


Yeah, he's exactly as credible as Maddow...

#32 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2020-11-21 11:09 AM | Reply

"She's not hiding it all."

Really?

So you can't tell the difference between her and someone like Michael Smerconish or Jake Tapper?

#33 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 11:27 AM | Reply

I can tell the difference.
I'm not the one who can't tell the difference between her and Tucker Carlson.
You didn't think that through, did you?

#34 | Posted by YAV at 2020-11-21 11:36 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"I think that qualifies her to expound on politics. She's only a "hack" because you disagree with her. I'd love to see you try to debate her, she'd hand you your a**."

Disagreement?

Look at the formatting. Both Tucker and Rachel spend the first 15 minutes of each show lecturing viewers, and then bring in a biased guest to reinforce their position. It's literally the same show.

"Tucker Carlson? Now, there's a hack!"

I'm just baffled how you can think one is a hack and not the other.

#35 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 11:40 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

That's some first-rate extended-release Whataboutism from comrade MadBomber.

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-21 11:47 AM | Reply

#35 | Posted by madbomber

Just in case nobody's told you today:

Yer an effin' moron.

#37 | Posted by Angrydad at 2020-11-21 11:49 AM | Reply

"Just in case nobody's told you today:"

I was actually waiting for you to tell me.

You're such a cranky old fart. It's kinda cute.

I'll try and stay off your lawn.

#38 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 11:54 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"That's some first-rate extended-release Whataboutism from comrade MadBomber."

I just think it's interesting. That you can objectively see a difference between the two.

I mean, I don't care if you watch either one of them, but you're doing so because you agree with their POV.

#39 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 11:56 AM | Reply

I think it's interesting that MadBomber can't tell the difference between what he's saying about Maddow and Carlson, and Whataboutism.

Or maybe he thinks Whataboutism makes a valid point.

Is that it, MadBomber?

#40 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-21 12:01 PM | Reply

-I'll try and stay off your lawn.

LOL.....I imagine most of the hostile angry people who take drive-by shots at you don't have a lawn.

Perhaps that's a little fuel for their hostility.

#41 | Posted by eberly at 2020-11-21 12:08 PM | Reply

Look at the formatting. Both Tucker and Rachel spend the first 15 minutes of each show lecturing viewers, and then bring in a biased guest to reinforce their position. It's literally the same show.

Lecturing? I see why you're upset Rachel does in depth analysis and reports (at length and in my opinion, too long winded) on the "A" block story. She then brings on the people that are directly involved and have direct knowledge of the event she's reporting on. She's not lecturing in a negative sense of the word at all. She is lecturing - as a college professor would. She lays out her premise and then offers supporting information and evidence for it. Lots of it. And she reiterates the point. Too much IMHO.

Tucker Carlson I can't comment on in any detail because I refuse to watch his show, though I am familiar with his pre-Fox "career" and agree with Stewart 100%. From the few shows I've seen of Carlson since joining Fox and the way he presents himself in court and what's reported in the News I don't doubt he's a lying, inaccurate, "entertainer" (as he said under oath) with no fealty to the truth. He made damn sure the Court new that.

But you go ahead there and superficially equate the two.

Eberly, I have a very nice lawn. It'd be even nicer if the kids from school would just stay off it! :)

#42 | Posted by YAV at 2020-11-21 12:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

MadBomber, listen up.

While it's true that Trump can be seen the Obama of the right, it doesn't mean Trump is similar to Obama when not viewed through that populist lens.

Same for Carlson and Maddow.

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-21 01:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"he's a lying, inaccurate, "entertainer" (as he said under oath) with no fealty to the truth."

Kinda reminds me of MadBomber, when you put it that way.

#44 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-21 01:01 PM | Reply

It's funny you guys keep engaging QAnonBomber.

If that guy can spend an entire thread arguing Hitler is a socialist.

He can spend entire threads arguing anything.

Trump is Obama. Tucker is Maddow. Gandhi is Genghis Khan. Water is dry.

The guy is literally QAnon conspiracy barfed all over the DR.

#45 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-21 01:40 PM | Reply

It's not really MadBomber I'm replying for.

It's everyone else out there who might be reading, and being lured into his web of lies.

You'll also notice MadBomber isn't really replying to us.

He doesn't really carry on discussions for more than a post or two, and his Groundhog Day m.o. is to just repeat the same few talking points over and over again.

#46 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-21 01:47 PM | Reply

his Groundhog Day m.o. is to just repeat the same few talking points over and over again.

Absolutely, 100%.

#47 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-21 01:51 PM | Reply

"Lecturing? I see why you're upset Rachel does in depth analysis and reports (at length and in my opinion, too long winded) on the "A" block story. She then brings on the people that are directly involved and have direct knowledge of the event she's reporting on. She's not lecturing in a negative sense of the word at all. She is lecturing - as a college professor would. She lays out her premise and then offers supporting information and evidence for it. Lots of it. And she reiterates the point. Too much IMHO."

My choice of news...Al Jazeera. They're the only outlet I have access to that provides unbiased coverage of world events. That's Al Jazeera English for the international audience. They do have a weirder version for English speaking Arabs, but you'll never hear it in the west. For my money, Michael Smerconish is the gold standard of journalism in the US. If you want objectivity, he's the dude.

#48 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 03:19 PM | Reply

"Tucker Carlson I can't comment on in any detail because I refuse to watch his show"

I can't either. Which is why I find it odd you can watch Rachel and not be equally annoyed.

#49 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 03:20 PM | Reply

"While it's true that Trump can be seen the Obama of the right, it doesn't mean Trump is similar to Obama when not viewed through that populist lens."

Trump is not the Obama of the right. He's the Bernie Sanders of the right.

Stop insulting Obama. It's not a fair comparison.

#50 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 03:21 PM | Reply

"If that guy can spend an entire thread arguing Hitler is a socialist."

OK

Then let's agree that Hitler was an officer in the Bavarian Soviet Republic, and then we can argue whether or not Soviets are or are not socialists.

Work for you?

#51 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 03:23 PM | Reply

"Then let's agree that Hitler was an officer in the Bavarian Soviet Republic, and then we can argue whether or not Soviets are or are not socialists."

Using that logic, you could argue he was a Republican.

Ultimately, once in power Hitler had the Socialists killed or jailed. Not exactly an endorsement of the movement.

#52 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-11-21 03:27 PM | Reply

Dear Danforth.

You've really gotta learn not to feed the trolls.

There is no bottom to that rabbit hole.

#53 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-21 03:29 PM | Reply

Trump was registered as a Democrat for more than eight years in the 2000s, according to New York City voter records made public during his 2016 campaign for president.
www.thoughtco.com

That proves it: Trump is a Democrat!
~MB

#54 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-11-21 03:31 PM | Reply

"Trump is not the Obama of the right. He's the Bernie Sanders of the right."

No way.

Trump and Obama each came out of relatively nowhere and crushed their party's establishment political machine.

Bernie Sanders is still nowhere.

But it's beside the point. Tucker Carlson hosts a show which uses a similar format as Rachel Maddow. That's where the similarity ends. Just like The New York Times and Pravda are both newspapers.

#55 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-21 03:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#51

Silly Mythbomber.

drudge.com

A whole thread of him being beaten senseless by the facts.

#56 | Posted by Corky at 2020-11-21 03:56 PM | Reply

"Hitler was an officer in the Bavarian Soviet Republic"

You really need to let is go.
That is not why Hitler is in the history books.

You might as well be saying "George Washington was a Loyalist, who commanded British forces in America."

#57 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-21 04:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

'm just baffled how you can think one is a hack and not the other.

#35 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-21 11:40 AM

One, a judge let off the hook because no reasonable person could expect factual content. The other, not so much.

#58 | Posted by morris at 2020-11-21 06:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Myth B is of the Dr. (not) Jonah Goldberg School of, "But, but... Hitler met a socialist once!".

drudge.com

Mein Kampf was written 1925:

"Indeed, whole chapters of Mein Kampf are devoted to vicious smears and declarations of war against "the Left," and not merely the Marxism that Goldberg acknowledges was a major focus of Hitler's animus."

#59 | Posted by Corky at 2020-11-21 07:19 PM | Reply

I'm just baffled how you can think one is a hack and not the other.
#35 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Telling.

#60 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-11-21 07:43 PM | Reply

"I'm just baffled how you can think one is a hack and not the other."

One, a judge let off the hook because no reasonable person could expect factual content. The other, not so much.
#58 | POSTED BY MORRIS

I'm just baffled as to why MB refuses to acknowledge this simple aspect.

#61 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-11-21 07:51 PM | Reply

Same reason he insists Hitler's claim to fame is as a Socialist in 1919.

He's a revisionist history. Setting the record according to the wishes of his Capitalist superiors.

#62 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-11-21 08:25 PM | Reply

#63 as a matter of decorum you usually have to post here for more than 10 days before you refer to someone as "dear"

#64 | Posted by bruceaz at 2020-11-21 10:58 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#64 - such a stickler for decorum, Bruce!

#65 | Posted by YAV at 2020-11-21 11:19 PM | Reply

#63 | POSTED BY SOURBEER

Your cult leader is a fat orange loser.

He lost despite everything the GOP did to cheat the election.

The only thing Trump managed to win was you.

You supported a wannabe Hitler. Just to feel good about yourself.

What a sad loser you are.

Time for a new username.

This one is done.

#66 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-22 03:34 AM | Reply

"That proves it: Trump is a Democrat!"

No, it proves Trump was a Democrat.

So, when someone says, "Trump was a Democrat," the response is yes, Trump was a Democrat.

#67 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-22 03:42 AM | Reply

"Mein Kampf was written 1925:"

Hitler was an officer in the Bavarian Soviet Republic in 1919.

I still don't get why you guys want to fall on your swords defending socialism. It is a system of monsters, whether Hitler was or wasn't is somewhat immaterial. I'm not sure why you obsess over the economic policies employed by the National Socialists...that's not what made them bad. The Islamic State employs free market economic policies...it's not the capitalism that makes them bad people.

#68 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-22 03:47 AM | Reply

I'm just baffled as to why MB refuses to acknowledge this simple aspect.

Let's do this.

Do you think that Maddow is objective in any meaningful way?

#69 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-22 03:52 AM | Reply

" it proves Trump was a Democrat."

So either Hitler was a Socialist (past tense), or he aligned with them early on, when he believed it was best for his career. However, what he did once in power...arresting, jailing, and executing Socialists, and NEVER embracing Socialism as a governing strategy...speaks much louder than mere words, or prior affiliations.

Any claim Hitler was a Socialist when it counted is spurious. Much the same way Trump won't be remembered as a Democrat.

#70 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-11-22 04:55 AM | Reply

The Nazis were a fascist organization who killed socialists and Jews. Among many others, such as gypsies.

Trump has inspired xenophobia and racism across America.

#71 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-22 05:32 AM | Reply

"Any claim Hitler was a Socialist when it counted is spurious. Much the same way Trump won't be remembered as a Democrat."

Was Trump a Democrat? Yes or No?

It's a binary answer.

I really don't understand why this is so controversial.

#72 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-22 09:24 AM | Reply

"Was Trump a Democrat? Yes or No?"

Not when he did the damage he'll be remembered for.

" It's a binary answer."

Nonsense. You're not approaching the debate in a binary manner. Your position is once a Socialist, always a Socialist.

Ultimately, it wasn't his true philosophy. And he proved it by never governing in that manner.

#73 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-11-22 09:59 AM | Reply

Was Trump a Democrat? Yes or No?

#72 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER AT

he was always a sociopath.

I've answered your question.

#74 | Posted by Zed at 2020-11-22 10:08 AM | Reply

"It's a binary answer."

I smoked cigarettes for two weeks in high school, when it was cool.

When medical personnel are asking about my health history and get to that question and my answer, they chuckle, and write down "NO" on my chart.

If AH was ever a Socialist, it was under similar circumstances.

#75 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-11-22 10:12 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Your position is once a Socialist, always a Socialist."

No, that's not my position at all.

If someone asks if Trump was a Democrat, the answer is yes. Trump was a Democrat. Just like the answer would be yes if you asked whether Trump was a Republican.

With Hitler, it's not as clear.

Why, you ask?

Because Hitler had been appointed as an intelligence agent in summer of 1919. Realistically, this would have occurred after his time as an officer in the Bavarian Soviet Republic. But he had been a spy, and his first exposure to the National Socialists was in his role as an infiltrator. So it's possible that he had been tasked with infiltrating the BSR as well...although there is no documentation that this was the case.

#76 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-11-22 10:33 AM | Reply

Ya know... I get the feeling behind the scenes the FAUX nuze anchors pass Trumptydumpster around like sailors do a hooker on shore leave... at first... it was all who gets a turn with him... now it's who wants a turn with him... and the list keeps getting shorter.

#77 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2020-11-22 10:57 AM | Reply

"With Hitler, it's not as clear."

That's stupid. It's very clear: any perceived loyalty to Socialism disintegrated the minute he got into power. It was clearly a facade; much like Trump claiming he was a Dem: it was what he felt was needed at the moment, before ultimately revealing his true colors.

#78 | Posted by Danforth at 2020-11-22 11:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- I'm not sure why you obsess over the economic policies employed by the National Socialists..

The ONLY socialism they ever employed was towards what Hitler called the genetically pure wealthy industrialists.

They never, ever employed socialism towards the masses of people whom Hitler despised.

I'm sure why you keep bringing this fake boogey man of socialism up; the same reason the Leader of your Party kept trying to pin it on Biden.

You are just as obvious, and just as laughable.

#79 | Posted by Corky at 2020-11-22 01:39 PM | Reply

I'm so glad every thread that QAnonBomber posts on turns into a debate about his idol, Hitler.

It's amazing to see the lengths some people go to to defend their heroes.

#80 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-11-22 01:59 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort