# Liberty Movement > Liberty Campaigns >  Gary Johnson: "What is Aleppo?"

## RonPaulFanInGA

https://twitter.com/Morning_Joe/stat...51435477762048




> @mikebarnicle: What would you do, if you were elected, about Aleppo? 
> @GovGaryJohnson: And what is Aleppo?


Gary Johnson just made a fool of himself on _Morning Joe_, and it's already the top trend on Twitter.

Edit, NBC article: http://www.nbcnews.com/card/gary-joh...aleppo-n644731

----------


## undergroundrr

Ouch. Could be his Glenn Beck/Debra Medina moment.

----------


## presence

interviewer caught him out of context without introducing the topic.  What is a *lepo*?  wut?


Low Exercise Price Option ???


want a real gaffe? 

ask clinton or trump what they think about von Mises

----------


## undergroundrr

I haven't watched it.  Did he actually give a cogent answer after clarification?  Or did they just sit there and go "Dude, you don't know what Aleppo is? What a dolt."  

This is perfect timing for a smear campaign.  He could be right on the cusp of a breakthrough if he doesn't get hamstrung.

----------


## Jesse James

> I haven't watched it.  Did he actually give a cogent answer after clarification?  Or did they just sit there and go "Dude, you don't know what Aleppo is? What a dolt."  
> 
> This is perfect timing for a smear campaign.  He could be right on the cusp of a breakthrough if he doesn't get hamstrung.


they said "really?" and then explained it.. somewhat

----------


## specsaregood

> Did he actually give a cogent answer after clarification?


He gave some hippy love non answer, answer.



> "OK, got it, got it," Johnson said, cutting him off. He added: "With regard to Syria I do think it's a mess. mess. I think that the only way that we deal with Syria is to join hands with Russia to diplomatically bring that at an end." 
> 
> "It's just a mess," he said.

----------


## undergroundrr

> He gave some hippy love non answer, answer.


Not sure what that has to do with hippy love.  What he didn't say is "send troops."  It belies the idea that he's anxious to get into humanitarian wars.

----------


## RJ Liberty

I'm not sure why it matters that he didn't know the name of a city in Syria. I didn't know the name, either, and I'm a geography buff.

----------


## CaptUSA

> interviewer caught him out of context without introducing the topic.  What is a *leppo*?  wut?


Yeah, a tube would be helpful.  It could be as simple as a train of thought change and a miscommunication between interviewer and interviewee.  

But I wouldn't be surprised either way.  Johnson likes to use big thick crayons - every time he tries to use anything more detailed, he stumbles all over himself.

----------


## juleswin

> I'm not sure why it matters that he didn't know the name of a city in Syria. I didn't know the name, either, and I'm a geography buff.


This, its not like he didn't know what Syria is, its a freaking city in a country that we have no business interfering in. Anybody who thinks this is a deficiency is someone who has already made up his/her mind on not voting for him.

----------


## euphemia

Was he sober during the interview?

----------


## Nils Dacke

> I haven't watched it.  Did he actually give a cogent answer after clarification?  Or did they just sit there and go "Dude, you don't know what Aleppo is? What a dolt."  
> 
> This is perfect timing for a smear campaign.  He could be right on the cusp of a breakthrough if he doesn't get hamstrung.


Maybe a transcript could be of use to the thread anyway if the link goes dead or old, here's what they said:

Mike Barnacle: What would you do, if you were elected, about Aleppo? [Pronouncing it with heavy emphasis on the initial A, almost like he was saying "a leppo". Is that a common way to pronounce it in some accents of American English?]
Johnson: About?
Barnacle: Aleppo.
Johnson: And what is Aleppo?
Barnacle: You're kidding?
Johnson: No.
Barnacle: Aleppo is in Syria, it's the epicenter of the refugee crisis ...
Johnson (interrupting): Ok. Got it. Got it. Well, with regard to Syria I do think that it's a mess, I think that the only way that we deal with Syria is to join hands with Russia to diplomatically bring that to an end. But when we've aligned ourselves with.. when we've supported the opposition, the Free Syrian Army is also coupled with the islamists, and then the fact that we are also supporting the kurds, and... This is just a mess. This is the result of regime change, that we end up supporting, and inevitable these regime changes has led to a less safe world.

***

I don't think this would've been as much of a gaffe if Johnson had a bit more charisma. With his body language often signaling "I'm a bit goofy and lost", in a situation like this it's just devastating. The way he says "Ok, got it. Got it" sound more to me like an "Oh, okay, I just learnt something" than a "Right, ofcourse I know what Aleppo is, I just blanked out / misheard / whatever for a second." If he'd been a bit more aplomb, I think he could've saved the situation just fine. It's sad how mere personality plays such crucial role in politics, even though I'm no ardent supporter of Johnson this just isn't the way a campaign should have to go down - or atleast take a somewhat substantial blow at a far from perfect time.

----------


## wizardwatson

> Barnacle: Aleppo is in Syria, it's the epicenter of the refugee crisis ...


Wonder if they are nailed down on these talking points.  Syria War is "the epicenter of the refugee crisis".  

Why is the crisis the refugees and not the war?  People are being blown up and shot and killed.  The war is the crisis.  Refugees are a collateral problem.

Anyway, expected I guess.

Just weird that he insinuates that Aleppo is the center of refugee crisis and not center of the war.

----------


## juleswin

There are already two stories on this on yahoo.com first page and both articles used a goofy pic of Gary Johnson on it. This smells like a hit job to me.

----------


## undergroundrr

Yeah, the "You're kidding?" sounds like an expression of condescension. Maybe the interviewer was out for blood.

The MSM has latched onto this hard. That's all that matters at this point.  

WaPo - "It would be easy to describe Gary Johnson's appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on Thursday as having doomed his third-party candidacy for president were it not for the fact that his candidacy was already doomed."
NYT "...could rock his insurgent candidacy when he could not answer a basic question about the crisis in Aleppo, Syria."
Slate "very good for a third-party candidate. That may change after an interview on MSNBC's Morning Joe today in which Johnson earnestly admits to have no idea what the city of Aleppo, Syria is."
Time - "The presidential candidate revealed his unfamiliarity with the city... Soon after, #WhatisAleppo began trending on Twitter "
CBS, US News, Fox, Washington Times, LA Times, RCP, ABC News, Daily Beast, etc. etc. etc.

It's odd that a third party candidate's gaffe makes the front pages of Yahoo News and Google News.

I suppose some here would say, "If the MSM has it out for this guy so bad, he must be doing something right."

Politico has the most balanced article - 



> Johnson's campaign released a formal statement later Thursday morning where the Libertarian nominee said he "blanked."
> "Yes, I understand the dynamics of the Syrian conflict — I talk about them every day. But hit with “What about Aleppo?”, I immediately was thinking about an acronym, not the Syrian conflict. I blanked. It happens, and it will happen again during the course of this campaign," Johnson said in the statement. "Can I name every city in Syria? No. Should I have identified Aleppo? Yes. Do I understand its significance? Yes."

----------


## euphemia

> I'm not sure why it matters that he didn't know the name of a city in Syria. I didn't know the name, either, and I'm a geography buff.


It matters because Johnson is a candidate for President of the United States being interviewed as such.  The context of the interview says he needs to be up to speed on geography and current events.  He only has about 20 seconds to convince people he is worthy of the job.

----------


## Chieppa1

In Joe's defense, he is used to interviewing Ron Paul when it comes to the libertarian viewpoint. What a $#@!ing idiot.

----------


## RJ Liberty

> It matters because Johnson is a candidate for President of the United States being interviewed as such.  The context of the interview says he needs to be up to speed on geography and current events.  He only has about 20 seconds to convince people he is worthy of the job.


We can all agree that the President of the United States should be "up to speed" on geography, but not knowing the name of a city in Syria certainly wouldn't prove someone's not "up to speed" on geography; Aleppo's not the capital of Syria, nor is it the largest city in that country. In point of fact, most Americans can't identify more than a few US states on a map, and certainly don't know where Aleppo is. In terms of your assertion about current events, I've had many political conversations over the past two years, and _never once_ has anyone brought up Aleppo, though we certainly have talked about the wars in the Middle East, including Syria.

A quick search of your posts here indicates you've never mentioned Aleppo. Why is it suddenly so important to you that the POTUS knows all about Aleppo? Nevermind; I already know. You were the one talking about how eloquent and "gracious" Melania Trump's plagiarized speech was. Barf.

----------


## specsaregood

> In terms of your assertion about current events, I've had many political conversations over the past two years, and _never once_ has anyone brought up Aleppo, though we certainly have talked about the wars in the Middle East, including Syria.
> 
> A quick search of your posts here indicates you've never mentioned Aleppo. Why is it suddenly so important to you that the POTUS knows all about Aleppo? Nevermind; I already know. You were the one talking about how eloquent and "gracious" Melania Trump's plagiarized speech was. Barf.


And yet Aleppo is mentioned in over 25 different threads here on rpfs just in the past month and 5 of them in the thread title alone.  maybe GJ should read rpfs more often.

----------


## euphemia

Because your candidate doesn't measure up, please don't turn this into an attack on me.  I read about Aleppo in the news and I'm not running for anything.  A man who is being interviewed as a candidate for President should expect a question about Aleppo and the question of refugees.  It is relevant to US domestic and foreign policy because Obama has committed US resources to the issue.  In fact, he boasts that he is ahead of the target he set for the numbers to be admitted here.

I don't comment on every single thread here.  If it has degenerated into a who sucks more argument or if someone has already made the points I consider important, then I generally don't post.  I don't have the luxury to be on the internet all day every day.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Gary admits he didn't know the name of the city. It is a gotcha question though. Even if you know something about Aleppo, there was no context. The "interviewer" was obviously prepared to jump on him. The leftists are attacking Johnson as they don't want him taking any votes from comrade Hillary.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

I also did not know who, what, or where "Aleppo" is or was until this thread.

----------


## Madison320

Yeah, Johnson is terrible. Vote for Trump instead. He wants to build a giant wall, increase govt spending, keep interest rates low, raise the minimum wage, continue the war on drugs, etc, etc.

----------


## Madison320

> I also did not know who, what, or where "Aleppo" is or was until this thread.


I would've guessed it was a town in Italy.

----------


## silverhandorder

> We can all agree that the President of the United States should be "up to speed" on geography, but not knowing the name of a city in Syria certainly wouldn't prove someone's not "up to speed" on geography; Aleppo's not the capital of Syria, nor is it the largest city in that country. In point of fact, most Americans can't identify more than a few US states on a map, and certainly don't know where Aleppo is. In terms of your assertion about current events, I've had many political conversations over the past two years, and _never once_ has anyone brought up Aleppo, though we certainly have talked about the wars in the Middle East, including Syria.
> 
> A quick search of your posts here indicates you've never mentioned Aleppo. Why is it suddenly so important to you that the POTUS knows all about Aleppo? Nevermind; I already know. You were the one talking about how eloquent and "gracious" Melania Trump's plagiarized speech was. Barf.


We will see how it looks after this blows over. It could be that Garry attracts so little support that that won't even show up.

----------


## euphemia

Gary Johnson is a horrible candidate.  He's not a Libertarian.  He's not ready for this, and I'm afraid he knows it.  Right now, he is where Donald Trump was last summer.  Not a clue, a bit bewildered, and no coherent message.  Trump has improved his presentation somewhat, if not the message, but I don't see Johnson doing anything to get better.  The opportunity was there for Libertarians, and they totally fumbled.

----------


## undergroundrr

> It matters because Johnson is a candidate for President of the United States being interviewed as such.  The context of the interview says he needs to be up to speed on geography and current events.  He only has about 20 seconds to convince people he is worthy of the job.


Although I don't love the spirit in which it's written, you're absolutely right.

Nazi cakes and all the rest of the things people complain about here have no bearing on electability, but this is a little different.

I don't think he could afford anything that would make people take him less seriously.  He's a serious threat (in fact, the only threat) to Hillary and the MSM has shown today that they will hammer him if he gives them an opening.  We'll see how resilient he is.

----------


## specsaregood

> Yeah, Johnson is terrible. Vote for Trump instead. He wants to build a giant wall, increase govt spending, keep interest rates low, raise the minimum wage, continue the war on drugs, etc, etc.


That seems to be the mantra for the GJ supporter, a non-vote for Johnson == a vote for trump.  nonsense.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

I was very familiar with Aleppo, yet at the same time, I didn't know the latest day to day details on the fighting there. Who has a plan for Aleppo? Those douchebags on MSNBC have no plan, and they know that no politician has a plan, and if a politician offers a plan, it could be easily ripped apart. 

It was a gotcha question, with no good answer. Unfortunately for Gary, it worked out perfectly, probably better than expected, and to their absolute delight.

----------


## euphemia

Truly, in a television age, sound bytes matter. Johnson has precious little time to grab attention and say something people will remember.  Johnson sounds like a lightweight and doesn't seem to be taking his candidacy seriously.

Rand had this same point, but it was more because it takes him so long to get to the point.  The first sentence has to be a strong statement with about three bullet points under that.

----------


## EBounding

Yeah, I'll admit it.  If you asked me, "what would you do about Aleppo?"  without mentioning Syria, I wouldn't know what to say either.  Shame on me perhaps, but I'm also not running for president.  I don't expect the candidates to be experts, but they should have enough knowledge to make decisions.

----------


## undergroundrr

> Brain fart turned into hit piece.
> 
> America!


+rep

----------


## euphemia

You can keep saying that, but it doesn't change the fact that Darrell Castle is the best candidate for President, and it doesn't change the fact that Johnson doesn't know what he's doing.  The CP is as noninterventionist as they can be.  Castle would bring our military home immediately and he would not engage in any kind of war unless we are attacked directly.

The Constitution Party was founded by a lot of fundamentalist Christians, but they attract a lot of people on the other end of the spectrum because they are bsically a liberty movement.  If they had an influx of liberty thinkers who also brought some liberty dollars and some help, I suspect their platform would change quite a bit.

----------


## Madison320

> You can keep saying that, but it doesn't change the fact that Darrell Castle is the best candidate for President, and it doesn't change the fact that Johnson doesn't know what he's doing.  The CP is as noninterventionist as they can be.  Castle would bring our military home immediately and he would not engage in any kind of war unless we are attacked directly.
> 
> The Constitution Party was founded by a lot of fundamentalist Christians, but they attract a lot of people on the other end of the spectrum because they are bsically a liberty movement.  If they had an influx of liberty thinkers who also brought some liberty dollars and some help, I suspect their platform would change quite a bit.


Do you think the Constitution Party's official platform is better (more libertarian) than the Libertarian Party's official platform?

----------


## euphemia

I think their platform suits my life very well.  That's what I can say.  

I definitely think the Constitution Party gives us serious, constitutionally-minded candidates.  The Libertarian Party fails in that regard.  Since Ron Paul, they have not had any kind of electable candidate.

----------


## bunklocoempire

Let's see what the allowable discussion is...

a quick search for "Aleppo" in the U.S. Federal Googlement data base reveals...

*USA Today:  Gary Johnson swings and misses on Syria, asking 'What is Aleppo?'

The New York Times:  'What Is Aleppo?' Gary Johnson Asks in an Interview Stumble*


Nicely played.  Two "news paper" "headlines" pop up, allowing my mind to quickly take in theatrics while keeping the heart of the issue obfuscated as I go on with my daily life.  One of those "headlines", a total misdirection/lie.  Gary did not 'miss' on Syria. 

 Nice one, U.S. Federal Googlement.  Way to go, live TV psyop-_set the discussion_-players.  A finely tuned b.s. machine.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> I'm sorry but ANYONE who has ANY FREAKING CLUE about what is happening in Syria knows what's happening in Aleppo.  There are a dozen stories about Aleppo on any given news site dealing with foreign policy / war issues...
> 
> I don't give Johnson a pass for this.  He should have known and he didn't.
> 
> I give him credit for his honesty during and after the fact.  He immediately owned up to it.  There was no bull$#@! spin (like people in this thread are trying to do) about "oh I thought he said "A Leppo" or something.... that would have been a Hillary answer.
> 
> Personally I think that is a net positive for him (for me), but for the massive twitter firestorm over the 'flap' I think this really hurts him.


I tried an experiment on a couple of people. Played the question and paused the video. Both responses were basically the same. "What did he say? What's a leppo? Did he say leopard?"

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> This is a blessing in disguise for Johnson. _LP candidates are usually not treated as important enough by the media to have their own flaps._ Apparently somebody at NBC finally noticed Johnson is pulling crucial votes away from Hillary, and is not happy about it. Gary is "too high" in the polls, and has gotten too big for his britches, so it was time to bury him. Notice in the video that host Scarborough immediately piled on (probably having gotten talking points fed to his ear piece). Johnson's important enough to get a news cycle!
> 
> His eventual answer to the question, while clearly showing signs he was caught off-guard, was a sensible expression of how intervention was making a bad situation worse. Rand would have said substantially the same, except more confidently, and without initially appearing uninformed. Perhaps he can make lemonade out of that substance, from the lemon that was his way of presenting it.


"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you...

----------


## angelatc

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...aleppo_is.html

*New York TimesMisidentifies Aleppo Twice in Story About Gary Johnson*

----------


## JohnM

> I tried an experiment on a couple of people. Played the question and paused the video. Both responses were basically the same. "What did he say? What's a leppo? Did he say leopard?"


Exactly.  Not a great moment for Gary, but understandable.  Not impressed with Morning Joe.

The definitive answer, by the way is

----------


## farreri

> That it's being cheered on here at RPF is especially revolting.


There's a lot of fake liberty people here.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> There's a lot of fake liberty people here.


That there are.

----------


## 69360

I think it's funny all this predicting Johnson's campaign is over. He isn't going to win, we all know that. It's not like it really matters much. What are the Clinton and Trump pushers so worried about?

----------


## Ender

*New York Times Misidentifies Aleppo Twice in Story About Gary Johnsons Aleppo Gaffe
*
By Ben Mathis-Lilley

The Times' Gary Johnson/Aleppo story.

Libertarian presidential candidate and former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson went on MSNBC's Morning Joe today and admitted in response to a question about Aleppo, Syria, that he had no idea what "Aleppo" was. This was a pretty big mistake for someone who is likely to get millions of votes in the upcoming presidential election, so the New York Times wrote a story about it. Except that its story misidentified Aleppo.




> But mistakes can happen, as The New York Times proved. A subsequent story titled, What Is Aleppo? Gary Johnson Asks, in an Interview Stumble,' screwed up the same issue, and the first effort to correct it only made it worse.
> 
> First the paper called Aleppo the capital of Islamic State. That's wrong, the black-clad jihadists' stronghold is Raqqa. Then, the story changed Aleppo's descriptor to "the capital of Syria." Wrong again.
> 
> Maybe the Times will find it in its heart to go a little easier on the next candidate who "stumbles."







> J
> @JGreenDC
> 
> The @nytimes, while chiding Gary Johnson for a "surprising lack of foreign policy knowledge," gets basic fact wrong
> 7:52 AM - 8 Sep 2016


ISIS's de facto capital is Raqqa, not Aleppo. Whoops! But the paper realized its mistake pretty quickly and changed the story. 

Here's the problem: Aleppo is not an ISIS stronghold, either. It's a divided city that doesn't have much of an ISIS presence and is the site of heavy ongoing fighting between the Syrian government and other rebels. So the Times had to change its story again.




> @Jamie_Weinstein
> 
> #ProTip: Dont use FP credentials to criticize politician for not knowing what Aleppo is & then say it's ISIS capital
> 6:57 AM - 8 Sep 2016



Ruling: Finally correct.

Meanwhile, a gentleman named Christopher Hill who was the U.S.'s ambassador to Iraq under Obama also made the Raqqa/Aleppo mistake while ostensibly having a laugh at Johnson's expense.

To be clear, I publish this post with full knowledge that, according to the Law of Cascading Condescension, I have made a ghastly factual error of my own somewhere within it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...aleppo_is.html

----------


## JohnM

> Argggg!!!! 
> 
> That's not my point. My point is that I believe the Libertarian Party is "superior" to the Constitution Party "in the long run".


But does it really matter?  You vote for the candidate, not the party.  

To say "Parties mean absolutely nothing" would probably be a slight exaggeration, but only very slight.   People who are libertarian in outlook have run for office in recent years under the banner of the Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, and Constitutionalist Parties.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> I think it's funny all this predicting Johnson's campaign is over. He isn't going to win, we all know that. It's not like it really matters much. What are the Clinton and Trump pushers so worried about?


Johnson getting in the debates

Trump's only asset is that he's only being compared to Hillary, and vice versa.

Put a sane person on stage and even Boobus might start to see the light.

...can't have that.

----------


## farreri

> Exactly.  Not a great moment for Gary, but understandable.  Not impressed with Morning Joe.
> 
> The definitive answer, by the way is


This whole much ado about nothing non-issue sorta reminds me when an interviewer asked a young Justin Beiber if his last name is German for "basketball", but the interviewer's thick accent made Justin think he said "Jew Man" not German.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76CqijPNGSk

----------


## Krugminator2

> The real question was did GJ think he was asked "What is Aleppo?" or "What is a Leppo?" and it's really not a big deal if he thought he was asked Aleppo since it's not part of the U.S. and a place the U.S. should not be involved in, unless we want to screw it up even worse!



The real question is "Who cares?" This is such a nothing issue.  

And it is wildly amusing that Trump supporters are questioning Gary's knowledge. Trump didn't know what Brexit was like 2 weeks before the vote and that is a major issue for his brand of politics.  If someone supports Trump, they forfeit all right to criticize the knowledge of anyone. The only person that a Trump supporter can criticize is Hank Johnson. If you want to criticize the guy who thinks Guam is going to tip over, you can do that. But when you support that jackanapes, you better just smile when Hillary or Johnson makes a gaffe.

----------


## farreri

> The real question is "Who cares?" This is such a nothing issue.


Oh believe me, I know!




> And it is wildly amusing that Trump supporters are questioning Gary's knowledge. Trump didn't know what Brexit was like 2 weeks before the vote and that is a major issue for his brand of politics.


He also didn't know what a nuclear triad when asked during one of the debates, but I think with Gary, he thought he was being asked a different word; a Leppo, not Aleppo.

----------


## kahless

> There's a lot of fake liberty people here.


Since when is Gary Johnson a liberty candidate?  Just because the guy wants to legalize weed does not make him a liberty candidate.  He is about as much a liberty candidate as George Bush.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> with Gary, he thought he was being asked a different word; a Leppo, not Aleppo.


That's the most plausible explanation. It's not as if he's unaware of the Syrian war, or lacks a policy view on it, the question just didn't land because of it's odd phrasing. It'd be like asking somebody "what would do about Mosul?" (as opposed to asking about Iraq), or "what would you do about Kiev?" (as opposed to asking about Ukraine). Doesn't make much sense, since the policy concerns the whole country/conflict, not just one city in it. When has any other candidate ever been asked such a question? I suspect the goal was to produce just the kind of soundbite they did, for the very purpose they're now using it.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Since when is Gary Johnson a liberty candidate?  Just because the guy wants to legalize weed does not make him a liberty candidate.  He is about as much a liberty candidate as George Bush.


Are you claiming that that is Johnson's only pro-liberty position?

You are honestly unaware of any others?

Or, you are aware of others, but are dishonestly ignoring them?

----------


## eleganz

Does the saying, "no such thing as bad press" still apply to his Aleppo thing?

----------


## LibertyEagle

> There's a lot of fake liberty people here.





> That there are.


So very true.

print screen windows 7

----------


## CCTelander

> It's funny (or maybe just depressing) how Trump does this literally on a *daily basis* and it has no effect.



I know, right?

----------


## silverhandorder

I think he was really helped by NYT f@ckup.

----------


## MattRay

It got him more exposure than he had previously and you know what they say, no publicity is bad publicity. I have no problem with this. I already knew Johnson wasn't a rocket scientist, but I think it showed that he at least has his head in the right place. Our government and politicians think far too much about the rest of the world while we're losing freedom and prosperity at a rapid pace. The important thing is that Johnson is committed to a non-interventionist foreign policy, at least understands the policy and seemingly has no intention of playing world police or chess in the world. One negative is that the neocons and 1 party crowd will use this to push the narrative that 3rd party candidates aren't serious or qualified, but it should blow over, especially with the NYT article and Johnson's pretty humble response. It's scandalous to me that you have people like Hillary laughing about this and placing greater importance on parts of the world that don't concern us while continuing her warmongering with Russia all the while she outright refuses to acknowledge our debt, much less our fraudulent, dying fiat currency. That's the real disqualifying thing. Enough of this welfare-warfare state and NWO nonsense.

But better to not know where Aleppo is than to send troops there!

----------


## Ender

> So very true.
> 
> print screen windows 7


Leessee- you posted that 9 times now?

And refused to acknowledge the meaning of hypothetical?

How sweet.

----------


## phill4paul

> I'm not sure why it matters that he didn't know the name of a city in Syria. I didn't know the name, either, and I'm a geography buff.


 Seriously? 

  Ya know? I'm just Joe Schmuck. I'm a handi-man and have had an excellent season that has kept me working 40-50 hr. weeks. I'm 52 so in the summer heat it is the best I can do. Even I, and honestly, every RPF member should have heard of Aleppo.I didn't hear about it in the media. goldenequity has been keeping us up-dated. 

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Aleppo...logo=CT3210127

   If Gary Johnson doesn't recognize the name then it means he either doesn't care or is clueless. 

   I know about Aleppo. I require that a candidate for POTUS does too.

----------


## Ender

> Does the saying, "no such thing as bad press" still apply to his Aleppo thing?


The press was actually wrong on the Aleppo thing too. Printed some wrong statements and were worse off than Johnson.




> But mistakes can happen, as The New York Times proved. A subsequent story titled, ‘What Is Aleppo?’ Gary Johnson Asks, in an Interview Stumble,' screwed up the same issue, and the first effort to correct it only made it worse.
> 
> First the paper called Aleppo the capital of Islamic State. That's wrong, the black-clad jihadists' stronghold is Raqqa. Then, the story changed Aleppo's descriptor to "the capital of Syria." Wrong again.
> 
> Maybe the Times will find it in its heart to go a little easier on the next candidate who "stumbles."

----------


## euphemia

It doesn't matter what position the press takes.  It matters that Gary Johnson went into an interview as a candidate for President of the United States and didn't know, when people talk about his immigration position like he's right.  If he doesn't know we are taking tens of thousands of so-called refugees from Syria, then he has some work to do, and perhaps he should do his homework before he does interviews.  At least read the headlines for that day.

----------


## eleganz

I don't know if GJ really didn't know Aleppo or if it was true that he just thought they were hitting him with a question about an acronym (like he claims in his press release).

Either way, more attention for the third party option, which I'm happy about.

Not knowing about Aleppo has nothing to do with how pure of a libertarian you are.  It might show that you are a libertarian social media activist but seriously if you guys want to use this as a reason to say how un-libertarian GJ is, Jesus take a break.

----------


## farreri

> Since when is Gary Johnson a liberty candidate?  Just because the guy wants to legalize weed does not make him a liberty candidate.  He is about as much a liberty candidate as George Bush.

----------


## Natural Citizen

> It might show that you are a libertarian social media activist but seriously if you guys want to use this as a reason to say how un-libertarian GJ is, Jesus take a break.


I've been kind of quiet on the topic of Johnson lately. Mainly just to let you all have your say uninterrupted.  But if you think for 2 seconds that someone can't make a legit, intelligent, persistent case for why and how he is fundamentally anti-Individual Liberty in scope, you'd do well to be careful what you ask for. You might just get it. And it'll sting. It'll sting bad. And it'll sting relentlessly. And it'll sting in ways that you've never been stung. Think about these things before you make a challenge and an assumption like that of others. Think them through thoroughly.

----------


## phill4paul

> It doesn't matter what position the press takes.  It matters that Gary Johnson went into an interview as a candidate for President of the United States and didn't know, *when people talk about his immigration position like he's right.* If he doesn't know we are taking tens of thousands of so-called refugees from Syria, then he has some work to do, and perhaps he should do his homework before he does interviews.  At least read the headlines for that day.


   His immigration policy is subjective. I don't have a problem with it.

----------


## JK/SEA

> There's a lot of fake liberty people here.



so what have you done for liberty in the last 2 election cycles?

----------


## Son_of_Liberty90

> Gary admits he didn't know the name of the city. It is a gotcha question though. Even if you know something about Aleppo, there was no context. The "interviewer" was obviously prepared to jump on him. The leftists are attacking Johnson as they don't want him taking any votes from comrade Hillary.


Absolutely ZERO context! It came out of nowhere.  And they're all folded arms looking at GJ with stern looks, like waiting for him to mess up.  It was a setup.

What MSM filth.

----------


## JK/SEA

> That there are.


so what have you done for liberty in the last 2 election cycles?...

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> so what have you done for liberty in the last 2 election cycles?...


The usual things - donated, volunteered, talked to friends and family, etc.

But perhaps the most important thing is what I _haven't_ done.

...i.e. actively undermined the liberty movement by promoting charlatans like Trump.

Rule #1: Do no harm

----------


## phill4paul

> The usual things - donated, volunteered, talked to friends and family, etc.
> 
> But perhaps the most important thing is what I _haven't_ done.
> 
> ...i.e. actively undermined the liberty movement by promoting charlatans like Trump.
> 
> Rule #1: Do no harm


  That's better than most and worth a +rep.

----------


## bubbleboy

Crap, now Hillary will get his votes.

----------


## Son_of_Liberty90

> The usual things - donated, volunteered, talked to friends and family, etc.
> 
> But perhaps the most important thing is what I _haven't_ done.
> 
> ...i.e. actively undermined the liberty movement by promoting charlatans like Trump.
> 
> Rule #1: Do no harm


Yet oddly you endorse monarchy and world governments as long as they are the least democratic.  Isn't supporting the third party candidate part of the democratic process?

----------


## Son_of_Liberty90

> Crap, now Hillary will get his votes.


Well there's still Jill Stein.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Yet oddly you endorse monarchy and world governments as long as they are the least democratic.


There's nothing odd about that at all. 

I'm a monarchist because that is the form of government most likely to behave in a libertarian fashion. My support for world government (provided it is non-democratic) is likewise rooted in libertarianism (world government would mean the end of war, which is a major driver of state growth, and horribly unlibertarian in its own right). There's nothing contradictory in holding those views and supporting libertarian politicians - all are motivated by the same goal of advancing libertarianism.

----------


## euphemia

> Put a sane person on stage and even Boobus might start to see the light.
> 
> ...can't have that.


And you won't as long as Johnson is on the stage.  He just gets worse and worse.

----------


## Ender

Most people don't know what Aleppo is. Even the papers and politicians that made fun of him had the wrong info.

I'm not voting for Johnson but I prefer an honest question/mistake like that to a candidate saying he knows more than American generals about ISIS and he has the best plan, the best.

----------


## euphemia

They might have had wrong info regarding Johnson's gaffe, but it has been in the news for a while, and it's not all wrong.

----------


## silverhandorder

> Most people don't know what Aleppo is. Even the papers and politicians that made fun of him had the wrong info.
> 
> I'm not voting for Johnson but I prefer an honest question/mistake like that to a candidate saying he knows more than American generals about ISIS and he has the best plan, the best.


It shows GJ is not serious. The problem with this attack is that it is very light hearted. But it also reinforces the notion that he is not serious.

As much as Trump gets attacked and as much as people try to show him as not serious. None of that sticks. At least with me. I may not represent an avg Joe on the street. But I think I do.

Like the generals comment. You may not like it but it is a serious position.

----------


## Natural Citizen

> I'm a monarchist because that is the form of government most likely to behave in a libertarian fashion.


You have no business speaking on matters of Individual Liberty. None.

In fact,  I was thinking of you specifically when I added that first paragraph to my sig line.

----------


## Son_of_Liberty90

> There's nothing odd about that at all. 
> 
> I'm a monarchist because that is the form of government most likely to behave in a libertarian fashion. My support for world government (provided it is non-democratic) is likewise rooted in libertarianism (world government would mean the end of war, which is a major driver of state growth, and horribly unlibertarian in its own right). There's nothing contradictory in holding those views and supporting libertarian politicians - all are motivated by the same goal of advancing libertarianism.


I'm skeptical whether Mises or Rothbard would endorse such a worldview.

----------


## farreri

> It shows GJ is not serious. The problem with this attack is that it is very light hearted. But it also reinforces the notion that he is not serious.


The candidates who are serious are the one's who frighten me the most.

----------


## Ender

> It shows GJ is not serious. The problem with this attack is that it is very light hearted. But it also reinforces the notion that he is not serious.
> 
> As much as Trump gets attacked and as much as people try to show him as not serious. None of that sticks. At least with me. I may not represent an avg Joe on the street. But I think I do.
> 
> Like the generals comment. You may not like it but it is a serious position.


Actually the generals comment scares the bejibbers outta me. 

And Trump, as I recall, also needs a little help in geography. 




> He once called the Belgian capital city Brussels “a hellhole,” but U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has changed his tune.
> 
> “Belgium is a beautiful city,” Trump said during a rally in Atlanta, Georgia Wednesday.
> 
> It should be noted that Belgium is a country, not a city.


And, BTW, thanks for the reply- your POV is much appreciated.

----------


## Son_of_Liberty90

> The candidates who are serious are the one's who frighten me the most.


Then why were they so damn serious? Did you see their looks and body language? I thought at any minute they would start hissing at GJ. No "lightness" about it.

----------


## P3ter_Griffin

> You have no business speaking on matters of Individual Liberty. None.
> 
> In fact,  I was thinking of you specifically when I added that first paragraph to my sig line.


haha, did you add an Anarchist symbol to your thingy, while you are supportive of coercive taxation and eminent domain?

----------


## P3ter_Griffin

Par for the course for MSM.  Hopefully it doesn't have to much of an impact.

----------


## Natural Citizen

> haha, did you add an Anarchist symbol to your thingy, while you are supportive of coercive taxation and eminent domain?


Show me where I was supportive of any of those things.

And I can put whatever I want on my "thingy."

----------


## P3ter_Griffin

> Show me where I was supportive of any of those things.
> 
> And I can put whatever I want on my "thingy."


How about you just deny those things, if that is the case.  You know what I'm talking about.  Get a $#@!ing hobby.

----------


## Natural Citizen

> How about you just deny those things, if that is the case.  You know what I'm talking about.  Get a $#@!ing hobby.


Put up or shut up, punk. You made a claim. Support it. That's what men do.

I'll wait.

----------


## Son_of_Liberty90

> How about you just deny those things, if that is the case.  You know what I'm talking about.  Get a $#@!ing hobby.


Forcing a confession? That's not very libertarian.

"RENOUNCE THE UNHOLY GOVERNMENT, STATIST!" 

Come on, all in good humor.

----------


## Natural Citizen

> Forcing a confession? That's not very libertarian.
> 
> "RENOUNCE THE UNHOLY GOVERNMENT, STATIST!" 
> 
> Come on, all in good humor.


Leave P3ter_Griffin to me. He's mine.

----------


## P3ter_Griffin

> Put up or shut up, punk. You made a claim. Support it. That's what men do.
> 
> I'll wait.


Hold your breath.

----------


## RJ Liberty

> Most people don't know what Aleppo is. Even the papers and politicians that made fun of him had the wrong info.
> 
> I'm not voting for Johnson but I prefer an honest question/mistake like that to a candidate saying he knows more than American generals about ISIS and he has the best plan, the best.


Absolutely.

----------


## angelatc

> And you won't as long as Johnson is on the stage.  He just gets worse and worse.

----------


## RJ Liberty

> Does the saying, "no such thing as bad press" still apply to his Aleppo thing?


Possibly. There's suddenly been a lot more press coverage of Johnson, and for the first time, he is trending on Google News' front page. His Facebook page has 77,000 new Facebook likes, and the new moneybomb raised 600k overnight.

----------


## CaptUSA

> Possibly. There's suddenly been a lot more press coverage of Johnson, and for the first time, he is trending on Google News' front page. His Facebook page has 77,000 new Facebook likes, and the new moneybomb raised 600k overnight.


Yep.  Unfortunately, this is what drives polls.  It's "mentions".  The content doesn't matter - as long as your name is mentioned by the media.  The more they mention you, the more your poll numbers will go up.  We saw it in 2012 is stark reality.  It explains Trump.  We'll see if Johnson can maintain the attention - I doubt it - but if he can, he will see the same bounce.

----------


## CPUd

Polling released next week would confirm.

----------


## dean.engelhardt

> ..., and the new moneybomb raised 600k overnight.


WOW

----------


## WTLaw

For the record, I have heard of Allepo. I think, if given a written test on the subject, I would be able to identify it as being in Syria.  

But that is with a pencil and paper, sitting down...not an oral exam where the guy pronounces it as if it were an acronym, and asks in an open ended way that would be more appropriately phrased as "what would you do about the crisis in Syria"...

It was obviously a trap, and for the trump people who constantly whine about the media and how unfair it is, they should admit it was so.  

After all, the way they guy asked the question, he asked it as if Aleppo was the center of everything wrong in Syria...he asked it as if it were a familiar home town, where our interests lay, that are somehow superior to our interests in Damascus, or Raqqa, or any other Syrian town....it was a trap, and they knew it.  The only indictment of Johnson at this point is that he has mannerisms that make him an easy mark, whereas some candidates would just vaguely walk into an answer on such a question, Johnson honestly wanted to answer the question so he tried to get his interviewer to give context.

----------


## JohnM

Having had a little time to reflect on this, and I have come to a strange conclusion.

I've watched a few video clips of Johnson in recent months, and it seemed to me that he came over a lot better on this clip, despite the gaffe, than he did on most of the others.  After watching this one, I thought "I could vote for that guy".   Most of the others put me off voting for him.

----------


## JK/SEA

Johnson was asked if he thought it was a 'gotcha' question, and he replied that it was not, and that everything is fair...

----------


## JohnM

> Yep.  Unfortunately, this is what drives polls.  It's "mentions".  The content doesn't matter - as long as your name is mentioned by the media.  The more they mention you, the more your poll numbers will go up.  We saw it in 2012 is stark reality.  It explains Trump.  We'll see if Johnson can maintain the attention - I doubt it - but if he can, he will see the same bounce.


I agree.

People who had never heard of GJ have now heard of him.  Most of them will remember the name and the face, but in 3 or 4 weeks will forget that he said something dumb.  And a lot of those that remember he said something dumb won't care.  

When I was younger and less experienced, I would have expected this to hurt him.  Today, being older and more experienced, I suspect it will help him.

----------


## Madison320

> But does it really matter?  You vote for the candidate, not the party.  
> 
> To say "Parties mean absolutely nothing" would probably be a slight exaggeration, but only very slight.   People who are libertarian in outlook have run for office in recent years under the banner of the Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, and Constitutionalist Parties.


I think having an established party is very important. It's a important part of the election process. Of course it would be a lot better if we didn't have a system that was rigged in favor of 2 parties.

----------


## WTLaw

> Johnson was asked if he thought it was a 'gotcha' question, and he replied that it was not, and that everything is fair...


Bear Bryant once said _“If anything goes bad, I did it. If anything goes semi-good, then we did it. If anything goes real good, then you did it. That’s all it takes to get people to win football games.”


_Same type idea here, I think its nice for Gary to say it wasn't a gotcha question, but it clearly was the intention of the questioner to do that.  He is taking responsibility for missing the question, which is a big gesture because the question was a gotcha.

----------


## JK/SEA

> Bear Bryant once said _“If anything goes bad, I did it. If anything goes semi-good, then we did it. If anything goes real good, then you did it. That’s all it takes to get people to win football games.”
> 
> 
> _Same type idea here, I think its nice for Gary to say it wasn't a gotcha question, but it clearly was the intention of the questioner to do that.  He is taking responsibility for missing the question, which is a big gesture because the question was a gotcha.


for what its worth, and i won't support Johnson, but i agree it was a gotcha question...

----------


## JohnM

> it would be a lot better if we didn't have a system that was rigged in favor of 2 parties.


The system is the problem.  I cannot think of any democratic country in the world which has a system as rigid a 2 party system as the US - though there probably are some.  Even the UK, which has the most rigid 2 party system in Europe, is more open to minor parties than the US system.  

I tend to take the view that having a libertarian party would be good idea in most European countries - but if you are serious about getting result, the way to do things in the US is to work through one of the major parties.    

I always thought it was interesting that Ron Paul returned to the Republican Party.  But even more interesting and important is the fact that he had a much bigger impact in his bid for the Republican nomination in 2008 than he did as the LP nominee in 1988.

----------


## WTLaw

> The system is the problem.  I cannot think of any democratic country in the world which has a system as rigid a 2 party system as the US - though there probably are some.  Even the UK, which has the most rigid 2 party system in Europe, is more open to minor parties than the US system.  
> 
> I tend to take the view that having a libertarian party would be good idea in most European countries - but if you are serious about getting result, the way to do things in the US is to work through one of the major parties.    
> 
> I always thought it was interesting that Ron Paul returned to the Republican Party.  But even more interesting and important is the fact that he had a much bigger impact in his bid for the Republican nomination in 2008 than he did as the LP nominee in 1988.


Ultimately I think the GOP will be the vehicle for libertarianism, but I actually think we can promote that outcome by going outside of the GOP and building up the LP.  Once the LP has a base of votes, and perhaps matching funds, the GOP will have to lean libertarian in order to do battle with the DNC.

----------


## 69360

> Since when is Gary Johnson a liberty candidate?  Just because the guy wants to legalize weed does not make him a liberty candidate.  He is about as much a liberty candidate as George Bush.


Go back and look at W's campaign platform and what he said while running. It really wasn't bad at all considering. It's post 9/11 things changed.

----------


## Madison320

> Go back and look at W's campaign platform and what he said while running. It really wasn't bad at all considering. It's post 9/11 things changed.


Republicans often say the right things about shrinking government, they just never follow thru after they get elected. I highly doubt 9-11 changed that.

----------


## undergroundrr

> I always thought it was interesting that Ron Paul returned to the Republican Party.  But even more interesting and important is the fact that he had a much bigger impact in his bid for the Republican nomination in 2008 than he did as the LP nominee in 1988.


As much as it seems like the same TPTB are taking us through the same rigmarole over and over again, the political landscape really does change over time.  Human interactions are too chaotic to be totally controllable.  Nobody knows when the right time will be for a liberty candidate or a liberty party.  I have faith that every little bit every individual does to make it come to pass is worthwhile.

Ron Paul's success was shocking to me in 2008 and 2012.  The LP's ascendancy is equally shocking to me now.  Sometimes a spark is lighted.

----------


## nikcers



----------


## Xenliad

This "gaffe" has me defending Johnson for probably the first time. Governor Ventura summed it up very well there ^

----------


## RJ Liberty

> 


Nailed it!

----------


## AZJoe

"*What’s worse, momentarily blanking on the name of a foreign city or spearheading a failed CIA-directed regime change that displaced 10 million people and left more than 250,000 dead, many from that city?* ... 

As Clinton enjoys continual passes for causing the worst humanitarian crisis in the world, Gary Johnson is laughed at by the media for a single slip-up. What does it say about American politics when a presidential candidate who’s laid waste to a city through reckless foreign policy can laugh at a third-party candidate ... for briefly forgetting the city’s name? ... 

a humble, ignorant president is preferable to a stubborn, murderous one." 
http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/08/wh...#ixzz4JoZs9El9

----------


## farreri

I don't know what A.L.E.P.P.O. is either.  Arab League of Egypt, Palestine, Pakistan, & Oman?

----------


## Son_of_Liberty90

> There's nothing odd about that at all. 
> 
> I'm a monarchist because that is the form of government most likely to behave in a libertarian fashion. My support for world government (provided it is non-democratic) is likewise rooted in libertarianism (world government would mean the end of war, which is a major driver of state growth, and horribly unlibertarian in its own right). There's nothing contradictory in holding those views and supporting libertarian politicians - all are motivated by the same goal of advancing libertarianism.


I'm really confused how a world government of any kind can be libertarian in any way whatsoever.

How can absolute power be libertarian? Even if it would be possible, it's perpetuation would hinge on the incorruptibility of the absolute ruling power, which history deconstructs time and time again.

----------


## Son_of_Liberty90

This was posted in the youtube video, I think it's great:




> Yes there it goes. If only he lied to congress, the American People, threatened our intelligence apparatus, voted for several failed armed conflicts that killed hundreds of thousands and had a war criminal like Henry Kissinger as a friend and mentor we could forgive his lack of geography knowledge.

----------


## Ender

> "*What’s worse, momentarily blanking on the name of a foreign city or spearheading a failed CIA-directed regime change that displaced 10 million people and left more than 250,000 dead, many from that city?* ... 
> 
> As Clinton enjoys continual passes for causing the worst humanitarian crisis in the world, Gary Johnson is laughed at by the media for a single slip-up. What does it say about American politics when a presidential candidate who’s laid waste to a city through reckless foreign policy can laugh at a third-party candidate ... for briefly forgetting the city’s name? ... 
> 
> a humble, ignorant president is preferable to a stubborn, murderous one." 
> http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/08/wh...#ixzz4JoZs9El9


Agree.

----------


## nikcers

Looks like GJ was right, they made a deal with Russia-. This was probably better then outright saying it though, because then they attack you for being pro Russian.




> "Today the United States and Russia are announcing a plan which we hope  will reduce violence, ease suffering and resume movement toward a  negotiated peace and a political transition in Syria," Kerry said. "We  are announcing an arrangement that we think has the capability of  sticking, but it is dependent on people's choices."


http://bigstory.ap.org/article/0984a...es-syria-talks

----------


## Chieppa1

> Looks like GJ was right, they made a deal with Russia-. This was probably better then outright saying it though, because then they attack you for being pro Russian.
> 
> 
> http://bigstory.ap.org/article/0984a...es-syria-talks


But of course if you read the articles coming out about the deal, you would see that "the details of the deal are secret" and "both sides agreed not to make any documents public". John Kerry admitted, even argued, that one of the major "bedrocks" of the talks was that Russia STOP BOMBING Al Nusra in Syria. Which of course is Al-Qeada, the enemy of the actual American people, which the US Government is backing now.

So I hope Gary Johnson reads the details of this deal, like I hope most libertarians will. Since I consider us the most informed voting bloc, which is again why I expect more out of the "libertarian" running for President.

----------


## Jesse James

> Republicans often say the right things about shrinking government, they just never follow thru after they get elected. I highly doubt 9-11 changed that.


he sounded just like rand paul. do your research

----------


## AZJoe

*The New York Times makes an utter fool of itself; having to retract itself multiple times in its attempt to ridicule Johnson.*
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/09...akes.html#more

In its initial article, NYT wrote, “What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the Syrian city that is *the de facto capital of the Islamic State*.

No. Aleppo is NOT the de facto capital of Islamic State. So NYT  "corrected" their article to read:“What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the Syrian city that is *a stronghold of the Islamic State*."

NYT was wrong again. Aleppo is not a stronghold of the Islamic State. The largest parts of Aleppo and its population, are within Syrian government control. A small portion in the east is under ISIS control. So the NYT "corrected" the article once again to read:“What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in *the war-torn Syrian city*.
Technically correct, but doesn't explain what significance there is to Aleppo. Other cities like Idlib and Raqqa have seen far more casualties. 

Lastly, the NYT shows off its idiocy once again by completely botching its correction note which reads,_An earlier version of this article misidentified the de facto capital of the Islamic State. It is Raqqa, in northern Syria, not Aleppo, the Syrian capital.

_Aleppo is NOT the Syrian capital, Damascus is.

So the NYT, New War Times, once again reveals itself to be utterly incompetent.

Read more: http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/09...akes.html#more

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> *The New York Times makes an utter fool of itself having to retract itself multiple times in its attempt to ridicule Johnson.*
> http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/09...akes.html#more
> 
> In its initial article, NYT wrote, 
> 
> “What is Aleppo?” Mr. Johnson said when asked on MSNBC how, as president, he would address the refugee crisis in the Syrian city that is *the de facto capital of the Islamic State*.
> 
> No. Aleppo is NOT the de facto capital of Islamic State. So NYT  "corrected" their article to read:
> 
> ...


They don't care, they have no shame. They would ridicule him for not knowing how many parrots died during fighting in Hamar.

----------


## phill4paul

Pretty sure Aleppo was one of the "Marx Brothers." I think he was the quite one.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> How can absolute power be libertarian?


What does "absolute power" mean? How am I advocating for "absolute power"?

In any event, see here for a concise summary of the libertarian case for monarchy.

----------


## AZJoe

Aleppo Coverage Show Media in the Bag For Hillary Clinton
http://www.thelibertyconservative.co...llary-clinton/

“Remember when it was revealed that Hillary Clinton didn’t know what “C” stood for on e-mails? … She claimed confidential materials had never been sent over her private server, which was determined to be false. … more than a dozen mobile devices and that her aides regularly destroyed them. E-mails had been destroyed, even relating to Benghazi …

Instead of spending time swarming the Democratic presidential nominee for any of the above topics, scattered outlets briefly touched upon them and focused on distractions. ..

Now the mainstream media is all over Gary Johnson. …  It’s become clear that the bulk of the mainstream media is in the bag for the left. …  Does this explain why Johnson getting caught off guard is an enormous story that many pundits say has proven he’s not qualified to be President? Could the mainstream media possibly make it any clearer who they’re pulling for?” http://www.thelibertyconservative.co...llary-clinton/

----------


## phill4paul



----------


## nikcers

Other politicians weigh in on Aleppo 
We're  all tired of hearing about Johnson's mistake. He got it wrong, but it's  unfair to castigate him for his response without comparing him to other  politicians. I reached out to several other politicians for their  responses. Frankly, I think that Johnson comes off better than any of  the others:

*
Barack Obama: There are no longer any American red lines in Aleppo.  As I promised, I got all American red lines out of the Middle East.*

*Donald Trump: We've got a great hotel there. Best falafel bowls in the Middle East.
*
*Hillary Clinton: Wiped off the map? What, like with a cloth?*

----------


## surf

I don't $#@!ing care if Gary oopsed. he's more anti-war than the republicrat, and that's the most important issue there is today.

I'd like it if he were more military averse and talked about pulling back troops and closing foreign bases. perhaps he'll leave that task for secretary of state, Ron Paul.

----------


## eleganz

Well whatever Aleppo momentum he had was totally destroyed by Hillary's (all)episode today...

Wow strangest election evar..

----------


## dannno

> That's no excuse.  He can read the news, at least.


I congratulate Gary Johnson on not staying up on all the mainstream war propaganda.

----------


## RJ Liberty

Turns out the Aleppo media smear was much ado about nothing. A new poll announced today, from NBC, has Johnson at 11%. The same pollster had Johnson at 11% a month before the Aleppo question. The media failed to cut into Johnson's poll numbers.

----------

