Now, because I think that it's both silly and pointless to make a mountain out of the molehill of some file footage run on the Hannity talk show (when the title of the article falsely claimed to have caught "FOX NEWS" in a deceit!), you wish to imply that I have no integrity!?
You poor pathetic, insignificant tit. Best make real sure that all the deck chairs are where the rulebook says they should be as the ship slips under the waves, you chicken-snot, slunk-faced drooler.
Thanks for a much-needed laugh, you pitiable tit.
Let's look at the fact (I know you hate to look at the facts; when it's so much more fun to attack the messenger). The fact is that footage from one event, was falsely presented to the public as being tied to a different event. That is a fact, it's easily verified.
I'm not the one who is defending a lie, you are. You are not only defending a lie; you are attacking a person who is denouncing the lie.
Isn't the policy of attacking the messenger the first play in the Democratic rule book? If you can't defend the message; attack the messenger, right? I don't have to imply that you have no integrity - you outright state that in each of your posts.
Now, you are obviously not a very smart person. A person with a dim intellect thinks that attacking a person wins an arguement, so in the interest of trying to enlighten a troll; I have taken the effort to look up the word 'Integrity' for you; it has 3 syllables, so you probably can't say it without moving your mouth.
1. adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.
2. the state of being whole, entire, or undiminished: to preserve the integrity of the empire.
3. a sound, unimpaired, or perfect condition: the integrity of a ship's hull.
So, without asking someone else, can you guess which of these definitions applies? Somehow, I doubt it. Do I need to look up the definition of 'honesty' for you too?