Rubin lies about Rand not being able to support Christie if he were the GOP nominee

[Brett85]

hxxp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/08/14/chris-christie-doesnt-need-sarah-palin/#comments

Rubin claims that Rand wouldn't support Christie if Christie were the GOP nominee in 2016, even though Rand has actually said the exact opposite, that he would support Christie if he were the GOP nominee in 2016. It was Ron who said that he wouldn't support Christie if he were the GOP nominee in 2016. Will Rubin issue a correction on this? I doubt it. Her hatred for Rand seems to be so irrational that she doesn't care about facts.

"Then Paul echoed his father’s lack of party fidelity by saying he wouldn’t support Christie if he were the nominee (Hillary Clinton is preferable?). This not only reminded us that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, but it also makes Paul seem petty and irrational."

 

[neoreactionary]

This is actually pretty huge. If we contact the editor at WashPost and demand that they issue a retraction, we could embarrass her in a fairly serious way. Anyone want to get on that?

 

[Brett85]

This is actually pretty huge. If we contact the editor at WashPost and demand that they issue a retraction, we could embarrass her in a fairly serious way. Anyone want to get on that?

I tried to send an email to Rubin, but it wouldn't work for some reason. I don't know how to contact the Washpost editor.

 

[neoreactionary]

I tried to send an email to Rubin, but it wouldn't work for some reason. I don't know how to contact the Washpost editor.

[email protected]

I just sent in a complaint calling attention to the error, would be helpful if others did as well.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

[email protected]

I just sent in a complaint calling attention to the error, would be helpful if others did as well.

Sent mine. Man it would be sweet to have her called out. I called for a retraction and a public apology just to add some insult to injury.

 

[neoreactionary]

Sent mine. Man it would be sweet to have her called out. I called for a retraction and a public apology just to add some insult to injury.

Excellent, I did something similar. "Fox News might be able to get away with such sloppy reporting, but the Post should be held to a higher standard," "journalistic integrity," etc.

 

[V3n]

Does anyone have a link or source of where Rand Paul says that he will support Christi if he were to be the nominee?

(I don't doubt it, I'd just like to source it in my e-mail)

 

[Cleaner44]

Twiiter and Facebook can be very useful for calling them out too.

@washingtonpost
@PostOpinions
@JRubinBlogger
https://www.facebook.com/washingtonpostopinions


Here is her likely motive for lying about Rand...

From her Twitter bio:
lawyer and friend of @Israel.

 

[Cleaner44]

hxxp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/08/14/chris-christie-doesnt-need-sarah-palin/#comments

Rubin claims that Rand wouldn't support Christie if Christie were the GOP nominee in 2016, even though Rand has actually said the exact opposite, that he would support Christie if he were the GOP nominee in 2016. It was Ron who said that he wouldn't support Christie if he were the GOP nominee in 2016. Will Rubin issue a correction on this? I doubt it. Her hatred for Rand seems to be so irrational that she doesn't care about facts.

"Then Paul echoed his father’s lack of party fidelity by saying he wouldn’t support Christie if he were the nominee (Hillary Clinton is preferable?). This not only reminded us that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, but it also makes Paul seem petty and irrational."

Do you have any source for Rand saying he would support Christie if he were the nominee?

 

[libertyplz]

Do you have any source for Rand saying he would support Christie if he were the nominee?

Yea right here:


Relevant info at 2:15

 

[krugminator]

What is insane is how confidently wrong these people are. They are so smarmy. Rand does like 5 interviews a day speaking off the cuff and they pick apart every word he says trying to make him look bad.

People like Rubin have all day to research one blog post in an area that they are supposed to be experts in. And they still get things compulsively wrong.

 

[PSYOP]

hxxp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/08/14/chris-christie-doesnt-need-sarah-palin/#comments

Rubin claims that Rand wouldn't support Christie if Christie were the GOP nominee in 2016, even though Rand has actually said the exact opposite, that he would support Christie if he were the GOP nominee in 2016. It was Ron who said that he wouldn't support Christie if he were the GOP nominee in 2016. Will Rubin issue a correction on this? I doubt it. Her hatred for Rand seems to be so irrational that she doesn't care about facts.

"Then Paul echoed his father’s lack of party fidelity by saying he wouldn’t support Christie if he were the nominee (Hillary Clinton is preferable?). This not only reminded us that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, but it also makes Paul seem petty and irrational."

Rand said he'd support Christie in 2016....?

 

[matt0611]

Rand said he'd support Christie in 2016....?

Rand said he would support Christie if he were the Republican nominee.

 

[ctiger2]

Rubin would make a great politician. She's got the lying down pat. Now she'd just need to work on fear mongering, nazi spying and overall destruction of our liberty with the creation of a police state all the while enriching herself via the banking cartel and preserving her own liberty via passing legislation that only applies to everyone but her (the politician), just like Obamacare.

 

[WD-NY]

Twitter and Facebook can be very useful for calling them out too.
@PostOpinions
@JRubinBlogger

This.

If you want to call her (or any other journalist/blogger) out, the best venue is twitter.

twitter.com/JRubinBlogger

Best approach is probably to (politely) ask her for a link to where Rand said he would not support Christie if he won.

Also, last I checked, the only Republicans openly suggesting that they'll vote for Hillary if a Republican they don't like (re: Rand) wins the nomination = RHINO NeoCons like McCain & Peter King

 

[Mitchell2]

[email protected]

I just sent in a complaint calling attention to the error, would be helpful if others did as well.

Sent a email, but we're going to need alot of people to complain for them to do anything

 

[whoisjohngalt]

Sent an email and commented on the article.

 

[whoisjohngalt]

Someone must have seen my comment because now it's been removed and there is a Correction posted at the top.

 

[radiofriendly]

This is actually pretty huge. If we contact the editor at WashPost and demand that they issue a retraction, we could embarrass her in a fairly serious way. Anyone want to get on that?

They have issued a correction--well done everyone!

Correction: An earlier version of this post incorrectly said that Rand Paul said he would not vote for Chris Christie if Christie were the GOP presidential nominee in 2016. This post has been updated.

 

[JCDenton0451]

hxxp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/08/14/chris-christie-doesnt-need-sarah-palin/#comments

Rubin claims that Rand wouldn't support Christie if Christie were the GOP nominee in 2016, even though Rand has actually said the exact opposite, that he would support Christie if he were the GOP nominee in 2016. It was Ron who said that he wouldn't support Christie if he were the GOP nominee in 2016. Will Rubin issue a correction on this? I doubt it. Her hatred for Rand seems to be so irrational that she doesn't care about facts.

Her hatred of Rand is perfectly rational: remember Rubin puts Israel first. She obviously sees Rand as a threat to the neoconservative (Zionist) influence in the Republican party. I hope she is right.