I do. Because you have no right to pontificate on the validity of an article you haven’t read.
This isn’t difficult.
Toilet wine - you are automatically assuming any article by CNN is crap. Er go, you’re full of shit by assuming something they wrote is crap even though you never read it.
As a result, go away. Fuck off. Toilet wine.
Of course I do…Who the fuck are you to tell me rights I have, cunt? Also, how many GSC threads do you respond with “Gateway Pundit nice source” type comment? So why are you allowed to do it and I’m not you fucking cunt?? O-W-N-E-D
You can literally tell in first response here that I am giving an opinion on CNN, not Alex Jones. So to “own” me (which you are incapable of in any one your bullshit, drawn out arguments because you are are a borderline, overly emotional retard) you would have to be able to provide proof that I really do read CNN or something like that or even that CNN isn’t Mother Goose…Which would be quite a fruitless endeavor for you. .
Got it you lost little dick-riding puppy?
ou are automatically assuming any article by CNN is crap.
Yup, sure do. They’ve proven this to be the case for a long time now. Very consistent.
I mean. I hear your point but they kind of spent the last 6 years tarnishing their own credibility.
Just the other day they invited Jeffrey Tubin back on the air as a commentator. This guy jerked off on air on their telecast.
They were wrong about everything Trump. And not just wrong, purposefully wrong and wittingly
Sure. I suppose you can make a comment on an article you haven’t read. But that would disqualify you from the validity to that opinion, in addition to being fucking stupid, which you are.
And for the record, I read all those GWP articles, toilet wine. So I can comment on them. And I comment on the fact they aren’t “articles” because they include phrases like “WE GOT ‘EM.”
So then give me your opinion on him and I’ll tell you how that relates to the article you refuse to read. Toilet wine.
So again, you’re automatically siding with Jones.
Er go, owned.
Pretty sure they aren’t wrong about his BS fraud claims as well as his intention to illegally remain in power.
1st off…I highly doubt you do. Secondly, doesn’t matter bratty cunt. You literally do the same thing I just did, over and over again “Gateway Pundit Nice Source”
So then give me your opinion on him and I’ll tell you how that relates to the article you refuse to read. Toilet wine.
Why does my opinion matter to you so much, dickrider? I don’t know much about Jones, but the very little I do know is that he is too far right for me.
So again, you’re automatically siding with Jones.
No…I’m clearly not. But you can keep cluttering the message board you fucking cunt. Just like how you do by attacking everyone on this board who doesn’t give a fuck about this Russia/Ukraine war by saying they somehow support Putin. You are so fucking lost, and so emotional…I can just see you screaming at the top of your lungs “Putin supporter!!!”…"Stand with Ukraine!!! And someone looking at you like…Ummm calm down Nancy, I literally just told you I don’t give a shit about Ukraine or Russia
Pretty sure they aren’t wrong about his BS fraud claims as well as his intention to illegally remain in power.
Hahahaha…Comedy central.
Yet you believe the guy who got his law license taken away for being dishonest and was on camera trying to nail and underage girl
I have much more a right to comment on an article. Do you know why? Because I read it.
It doesn’t. But if you’re going to contribute to a thread, perhaps 1) read the fucking article and 2) offer an opinion on it.
Or 3), fuck off. Toilet wine.
You got that right, you poor uninformed fuck. Like Trump, you think it’s true if you believe it. Lack of research be damned.
He was just trying to tuck his shirt in. While laying down. 
Nope…My comment wasn’t about the article. It was about CNN.
Or 3), fuck off. Toilet wine.
Nah, go fuck your piece of shit filthy whore mother tough guy.
My only comment here is that no one should be subject to the torture of reading a CNN article. Torture.
We know. Trust me, we know.
What? You sound like someone is forcing you to do so.
I’m assuming you mean Rudy? Maybe the greatest prosecutor of our lifetime. Perhaps the greatest Mayor of our lifetime to boot.
The disbarment was purely political.
The underage girl thing not even sure what you’re talking about. If you’re referencing the Borat thing, that wasn’t an underage girl. Not even close.
But keep deflecting. The thread is t about Mayor Giuliani.
To be sure, he could have ran for president after 9/11 and could have won.
But over the years, he’s gone insane. Complete slime ball.
Funny thing is - while it’ll never happen, if Rudy were to at some point publicly break with trump and/or criticize him in anyway, to you he’ll become a disloyal POS rat.
From what he knew, she was. She told him she was 16. He went through the entire process, ON CAMERA, thinking she was 16 and then trying to get into her pants.
Rudy is a pedophile.
This is “to catch a predator” stuff - when they trick a pedo into showing up at a house where one isn’t really there, only to catch them on camera based upon their intention.
You have a tendency to celebrate and favor the worst humans one might possibly find.
Shows a lot about you as a person
Chris Hansen to Rudy: Why don’t you have a seat. Just sit right over there.
What are you doing here? 
So if you know then why are you still swinging from my nuts about it?
It’s he same thing you do when you come in and say “Gateway Pundit nice source”
IF you do read it…Which I don’t fucking care…Many of the times the GP comment is your only response and contribution to the thread. Same thing here, moron.
Because you’re trying to discredit an article, having not read it?
No, that can’t be it.
The difference is that i actually read the article before making up my mind.
It’s because “many time” - to use your words, the “article” reads more like an opinion piece with all this “gotcha” language.
If you cared to read the Jones article, you’d see it doesn’t do that,
Toilet wine.
I did it based on the source…Just like you did. Just because I discredit it doesn’t mean you have to agree with me. It also doesn’t mean I may not agree with the article or something within the article. For instance CNN could write an article entitled “the Sky is Blue”…Obviously I’d agree with it. Still not reading the mfer.
The difference is that i actually read the article before making up my mind.
Why would I believe a liar like you? I mean…I’m sure you read some of them, I doubt you read them all. But anyone file this under “non-pertinent”…Because many of the times you simply say “Gateway Pundit nice source”…And don’t comment on what is in the article at all. Same thing I just did…Get it cunt?
If you cared to read the Jones article, you’d see it doesn’t do that,
I don’t read CNN articles…Already explained this. And that’s what I stated in the very first response to this thread. And you of course turned it into a soap opera. You’re basically a broad…So funny to watch and expose.
I read the article before dismissing it. That’s the difference.
Again - Jones has said Sandy Hook was a false flag. He’s admitted he said this and has admitted it is not. The article addresses this. Because CNN wrote it, that part isn’t true anymore?
That’s your logic.
I do read them all. But let’s assume that I did only read some……still on better ground than you are….who doesn’t read them at all.
Oh there is definitely exposure here. You - for being so tragically stupid that you can just assume a story is bunk without reading it.
It doesn’t matter…And again…Me reading the article has nothing to do with my statement. If I was commenting on the article it obv would. This is not rocket science, bratty cunt.
Because CNN wrote it, that part isn’t true anymore?
Again I don’t care…They could be correct (probably by chance)…I’m just not reading it. I was commenting on the source, not the article…Just like you do.
I do read them all. But let’s assume that I did only read some……still on better ground than you are….who doesn’t read them at all.
the ground we are on doesn’t matter. Many times you don’t elaborate at all either…So we are making the same commentary.
It absolutely matters. Reading a story to understand it helps form one’s opinion.
Not that you know what any of that means.
One who comments on the source is in much better standing to do so after reading the article first.
We literally aren’t. But you aren’t smart enough to understand that.