Note they immediately claim it was too small to impact the race -- and yet they've been claiming for two years that a hundred thousand or so dollars spent on FaceBook ads in the five billion dollar plus 2016 Presidential race was nigh decisive and an assault on our very democracy.
But this $100,000? Pish-posh. 'Tis nothing.
...They're now claiming that this was purely a scientific experiment and that they did not intend to hurt Roy Moore's campaign or depress Republican turnout or excite Democrat turnout.
I guess that's just a bonus coincidence that it worked out so nicely for them.
Then, Ace takes a look
at how the New York Times reported this expenditure of $100,000 in confessed false flag operation in a race costing $51 million, versus how it reported about the same amount being spent to influence a five billion dollar plus presidential election
It is time to go to the comments section to see how Ace's commenters reacted to this story.
It's almost as if the dems accuse others of doing exactly what they are doing. Weird that.
Posted by: Bosk
Just because you're dead shouldn't mean your votes won't still be counted.
#DeadLivesMatter
Posted by: Speaker Nazi Pelousi
"accuse the other side of that which you are guilty" -- Goebbels
Posted by: Wontsubmit
Not mentioned: the legality of the Democrat's secret effort to influence a national election.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy
"doing research"
Isn't that the defense that pedophiles always use to explain the photos on their computers to the fbi?
Posted by: Gentlemen, This is democracy manifest
No comments:
Post a Comment