Yes, and that perception is so important, you were crediting this lying website with the election win long before I told you about them on this thread, right?
You wouldn’t just happen to be adopting that line now, to try and make some excuse for your continuing to defend them as a source?
I’m sure you can show us plenty of posts where you credited them with turning the tide of the election before this thread, right?
>>defend them as a source
No, I’m pointing out the FACT that you and the “Filtering” MSM labeling them as a “hoax” (using only your own definition of “hoax”) site does not negate the plethora of information elsewhere that supports the observation that human trafficking and perversion are among the fruits rendered by Hillary Clinton, the pathologically lying email/evidence destroyer, and her ISIL funding associates.