Your beloved reddit is with her

Got distracted screaming about jews.

Reddit is absolutely a collection of circle jerk clubs, but when someone asserts that it's all one sided, they look like especially whiny and tender guys who can't stand that other opinions exist. These sites do have a lot of radicalised content, but both sides make the front page. The 'problem' is that orange Jesus is losing popularity and these sites have been reflecting that in recent days

Originally posted by BackFire
Got distracted screaming about jews.

😂

The 'problem' is that orange Jesus is losing popularity and these sites reflect that

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
Reddit is absolutely a collection of circle jerk clubs, but when someone asserts that it's all one sided, they look like especially whiny and tender guys who can't stand that other opinions exist. These sites do have a lot of radicalised content, but both sides make the front page.

pick one.

Originally posted by Robtard
Define: "other things"

Isn't rehab free over there? Stop being drunky the clown and sort your shit out m8

Address your own hypocrisy before you criticise others. Thanks for putting me on ignore btw.

I still read your posts. I just want nothing to do with your creepy PM's

Like explaining how wikileaks is real? Kys.

not authenticated. that matters to people who don't think with their emotional investments calling the shots.

So if they are not authenticated why is the press reporting on them as fact? Why did they also say it's illegal to read them?😂

It's shit like this that scares me.

Ms. Clinton has 32,000 followers on her page, and Trump has 240,000. What is wrong with you people?

What do you mean?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
believe it or not, text can be doctored. And unauthenticated evidence is just self referencing proof which may or may not have been altered or even fabricated. Kinda like the bible

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
What do you mean?

Reddit isnt my beloved.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
activist sites are not " the press". Sorry if I don't buy unauthenticated emails and right wing newsgroups as gospel.

I'm pretty sure that post was not in reference to these emails.

Empty posturing. Now comes Breitbart links, yes?

Im curious what thread that post came from and what the subject was.

I'm not chasing your tennis balls. If you have proof that the press acknowledged authentication post it as a reply, instead of the vague reference to the time you were already proven right.