Trump posted at 11:12 ET tonight that he sent the military into California and they "TURNED ON THE WATER"

[maxrandb]

64. Your post highlights the central problem

That article from the times, and the statement from the California Department of Water Resources uses way too many words to say; HE'S A LYING SACK OF SHIT!

Instead of just saying; "He's a lying sack of shit", the Times takes two sentences to say it's a lie, and then 14 paragraphs to explain how his statement could somehow contain some "factual" nuggets.

Call it the "press" example of "alternative facts".

Here is how Maxrandb would respond; "The US military attempted to enter California to turn on our faucets, but they were repelled by residents of California in what some are calling The Battle of Visalia" "There are no reports of casualties as of yet"

Maybe respond to his bullshit with bigger bullshit.

Think about it. If you gave the LA Times my response, would they have the gall to print a story with the headline; "Trump social media claim of using troops to force water flow is refuted by California", or would they just say; "FUCK it, we can't run a story about Donnie Dipshits fucking bullshit with a response like Max's"?

Maybe if the LA Times didn't have to waste time, resources and ink to tell us the "military didn't FUCKING invade California", they would have more resources to cover how AmeriKKKa is being turned into the new Nazi Germany.