First I'm hearing of this group.

Most seem to be Libertarians masquerading as liberals or Dems when it suits them to.

I saw a bunch of people supporting one candidate and warning that the other was a bad choice. But "misogynist left"?

Do you, as they say, have a link? Did they something like "women shouldn't be prez" or some such?

Assholes here insulted and stalked feminists? Most of those people departed for JPR. They were vile. Many of them were forum perma-hosts and they ONLY spoke up to leave sexist and racist posts here. It was disgusting and the Manny cult went full tilt with that shit before their asses got kicked out.

Throw up a link. And demonstrate that the misogynists are members of the left.

Participated in discussions about it for a couple of years here. It flew over your head- including many here defending a member for sexually Harrassing another member. Including people defending c@nt used to describe HRC. How luckyfor you.

I'm not throwing up links to get a hide- I was alert stalked for a couple of years by those assholes. I don't give a damn whether you believe me. Why should I?

I asked for links.

And I got it that you don't give a damn.

Sounds like you missed a whole lot.... Or ignored it.

Some of them are women.

Either we cut the vitriol or we wind up like the republican party.

You're saying current members, I said ex members. Funny you claim to not know the what if the situation- but suddenly know the who.

Bull shit.


We're not allowing the misogyny here any longer. Get over it.

But do keep playing your little games.

But to clear, there are people who currently do not seem to be posting here, but rather on JPR only, who also are women.

misogynists for some reason? Of course they are! That's pretty much common knowledge. Maybe you need to find links- to studies on the issue.

But it's fair to say some people have political differences, and that it may not be possible to attribute that to a mental defect.

I'm going to suggest maybe you do some independent study as I cannot deal with this third bit of nonsense.
It appears that you'd love to - again- put words in my mouth that I didn't say. What's THAT about? It's not very honest of you.

I would not attribute someone having a political difference with me to misogyny (mental, or a better term, emotional defect).

Plus, I'd bet those who are misogynists would never vote for any Democrat.

But no. Being a woman or calling yourself a Dem doesn't actually exclude you from being a misogynist. They come in all shapes colors occupations unfortunately. They are not all Libertarians or GOP, and some Libertarians and GOP members are not misogynists.

So numerous are your misconceptions, you do need lots of independent study, and it's not my job to educate you.
Good luck with that!

then release it

Thank you, applegrove!

I need to go back to school, apparently.

It claimed Blumenthal, the Trump bogeyman of the moment, had said Hillary had things to answer for over Benghazi. But Blumenthal didn't say it, and the real author had not come to that conclusion anyway - it just took one section to try to make it look that way.

It's the kind of move you find trolls making on Discussionist, and you can feel good about smacking down. When it's done by state-run news, it's propaganda.

So if Trump misreads an email that was supposedly hacked by Russia, Trump's claim is Russian propaganda?

I'm not following the faulty logic.

Wikileaks released Podesta's hacked email, in full. One of those was an email from Blumenthal, which quoted, in full, the Newsweek article. Here it is:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/2038

Are you with me so far?

Sputnik News, the Russian state news org, then took a couple of paragraphs from that, and claimed what was in the Newsweek article was actually Blumenthal's own words and opinions. You can still see the cached Sputnik News page here:

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:F6xU57lYXkAJ:https://sputniknews.com/world/201610101046200602-hillary-benghazi-wikileaks-podesta-emails/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

No mention of Newsweek or Eichenwald at all. It's highly misleading. It's not just a reporting of the out-of-context words from Eichenwald's article, either - it ends:

the next debate and then Hillary can reinforce Trump's inability to get things right and how this is such a the huge lie.

This is further proof that he is unfit for public service.