No Punishments for Rolling Stone Hoax

Even before embarrassing themselves with the University of Virginia rape story, Rolling Stone was no one’s idea of riveting journalism. Still, one might have hoped that even this out-of-touch liberal rag would understand that this debacle demanded a firing or two. But even after releasing a report that concluded the UVA story suffered from failures at nearly every step in the process, the magazine has said there will be no punishments handed out. No firings. No suspensions. Life goes on.

Of course, a lie in service of the liberal agenda isn’t really a lie, is it? How many reporters and editors have been fired for their lies on the Michael Brown shooting? How many have been fired for propagating false information about global warming? Looking back on it, one can only wonder why NBC decided to suspend Brian Williams. If his lie had helped further the liberal agenda in some way, they would have doubtlessly swept it under the rug.

According to the Rolling Stone report, carried out by the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, the magazine ignored “basic, even routine journalistic practice” when writing up the rape story. In her first real attempt to confront this public embarrassment, writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely apologized to the magazine, the readers, her colleagues, and victims of sexual assault. She did not, notably, apologize to the victims of her irresponsible journalism: the fraternity she wrongfully accused. Of course not. Why would a good liberal like her ever apologize to a fraternity, of all things? Doubtlessly, both Erdely and Rolling Stone feel as though the frat got exactly what they deserved simply for existing.

Rolling Stone’s publisher, Jann Wenner, said that managing editor Will Dana and the article’s editor, Sean Woods, would remain happily employed. Even more hilariously, Wenner said that Erdely would continue to write for the magazine. He laid the blame for the article at the feet of the anonymous “Jackie,” the supposed victim who has all but disappeared in the wake of the hoax. In other words, if you come up with a story that hits all the liberal action buttons, you too can fool everyone at this joke of a magazine.

The crew at Rolling Stone have excused themselves for their trespasses by saying they cut corners in an attempt to protect the victim. And in a way, this admission speaks to a growing problem in America that could have disastrous implications that go well beyond the pages of a magazine.

These liberals have decided that it’s no longer okay to question certain things. If an unarmed black man was shot by police, it’s not okay to ask what that man might have been doing in the run-up to the confrontation. If a woman says she was raped, it’s not okay to ask whether anyone else can verify her story. If a homosexual says that a bakery refused to serve him, it’s not okay to wonder whether it really makes sense to extend “discrimination” to cover something as intangible as sexual orientation. This leads to a uniformity of thought where we’re more interested in activism than facts. And if it turns out, after a few months, that there were no facts to support the story, we’ll just move on the next thing. The next batch of lies. The next agenda.

Oh look, President Obama is making Republicans mad again! Let’s cover that. No, not what he’s actually doing, silly. Let’s just cover what these loony Republicans are saying about it, and let’s make it obvious that they should be mocked. Put Erdely on it. We don’t want anyone asking any uncomfortable questions.

About Admin


  1. I wouldn’t expect the Liberal Media to punish itself for promoting its own propaganda with gusto.
    I would expect Rolling Stones to win an Oscar for their performance, or perhaps a Pulitzer for its efforts, like 0bama did.

    Key positions in the Government, Media, Schools, Unions, and our Judicial system have been taken over by Liberal Progressives. The Fox is watching the hen house here.

    It will be up to We the People to punish Rolling Stone and the liberal media.
    If we do not hold them accountable now, they will take bolder steps in the future.

    I suggest boycotts.

    • You !#$%^&^*() Republicans, you think hitting them in their pocketbook is going to work? They aren’t capitalist swine, they’re above all that, with ‘intentions of their sisters & brethren’ (oops, I meant PC siblings) being more important than ‘unintended consequences of their actions’ (got caught). They can thrive (or at least get bailed out or move into their parent’s basement) if they have no income. Go Ahead, but I’ve been boycotting that rag for many,many years and they don’t seem to notice.

      • Yes, boycotts work.

        They use my money to support their propaganda. If we did not purchase their magazines, or the products that pay for ads in those magazines, they would not have a FREE platform to spread their propaganda.

        When I buy their products, when I support the advertisers that pay ads that support their magazines, TV shows, movies, etc, a portion of my own money goes towards paying for the magazine. Unfortunately that monetary tie between the companies that run ads and the offending magazine brings the companies into the mix.

        Fortunately the companies have plenty of other places to place their ads.

        A boycott and freedom of choice is pure capitalism.

      • You have to take it personal, like they do…..Look at the reputations of the people they have destroyed….and they were innocent….Go after them on a personal level. EXPOSE them..guarantee if you look hard enough, you will find all kinds of things on these scumbags.

      • Another brain washed moron with a head full of donkey turds spews his load of idiocy.

      • I have to go with Gnowark here, although I disagree with some of his post. Rolling Stone RAG-a-zine IS a capitalist venture. If it didn’t make money it would have gone bye-bye many years ago. Don’t let the Hippie-dippie, good-vibes, love, dope, and rock and roll façade fool you. As for a boycott, I have never paid one thin penny toward Rolling Turd RAG, but they don’t seem to miss or need my support. I am not a fan of boycotts and here’s why: You have to have a significant number of people on board and participating. You’ll never get enough people to boycott anything when we can’t even agree on Christmas greetings. Yes, I’ll continue to not buy Rolling RAG, and they’ll continue to not care, but I won’t kid myself. I know that my “Nay” vote is merely a mouse fart in the breeze. The only thing that will kill Rolling Stone and all these other rags is when the public wakes up and starts demanding accuracy in journalism. Unfortunately, as evidenced by the last two presidential election cycles, we as a people are either too apathetic or too devoid of intellect to do that. Those of us who have NOT been dumbed down will continue to get our news from reliable sources (hint: not THIS rag!). The dumbed down among us will continue to support this rag. As P.T. Barnum famously said, “There’s a sucker born every minute.”

  2. It is a continued sign of the moral deterioration in America. It comes mainly from our government and the liberal press. Sadly neither seem to know the difference between lying and telling the truth any more. Who do we have today that has the backbone to hold these people accountable for their actions? What all these people don’t understand is that they will eventually be held accountable but by then it will be too late for them.

  3. Just what did you expect from liberal pot smokers?They can say what ever they want and then given a free pass for it.This is the liberal left wing way.Screw you and we get off scott free.This is why this country is spinning around the bowl rim ready to go under just as they want.When the country goes under just what are the liberals going to tell the blacks when the checks don’t cash?I’ll tell you we will have bars on windows and baracaded doors to deal with the looting.

  4. The hypocrisy from this article is jaw dropping ! The story that Rolling Stone published was poorly researched – but was certainly not ‘a hoax’. Nor was it in any way a politically partisan mistake. And considering the enormous number of issues that it reports on and puts into the mainstream – this kind of shoddy reporting is actually very rare. I would be interested to hear of any other issue they have reported on which has been totally debunked with real evidence.

    • disqus_C6fGXmCFNc

      Another braindead demonrat!!!

      • Typical answer from a brain dead Teabagger. Morton asked if you have any other issues they have reported on which it was debunked. All you got is name calling. Such a POS you are you low life rightie.

        • Progressive, tax the rich scumbag! I just posted how you frauds and your fraud, lying media tell lie after lie. Now you’ll spew Fox News out of your mealy mouth, sissy, arse. Do you have a “tingle running up your leg”. Go drive your Prius to a Global warming riot, er, meeting. Jack off.!

          • Hey Lame for Brains. I was talking about Rolling Stone. Anyway, we all know Fox lies all the time. They even went to court to keep there god given right to keep lying. What media are you talking about?There is no liberal media. Its all owned by big corporations who have there own interest {money}. Even MSNBC can hardly bring themselves to discuss subjects like Climate change and the TPP.As far as taxing the filthy rich, ether you are one, or just another stupid imbecile carrying water for them. As far as jack off, better turn on Fox. Megan Kelly might be showing some crotch anytime now.

    • It was a dramatic account from the early stage of the Iraq War, one that placed NBC News anchor Brian
      Williams aboard a U.S. military helicopter that had drawn enemy fire. The story was told repeatedly by Williams and NBC. And it wasn’t true.

      Attorneys representing Tannerite Sports filed suit against NBC Universal News Group (NBCU) and Lexington, KY-based WLEX Communications for libel and slander for allegedly defamatory print and video reports from NBC News national investigative correspondent Jeff Rossen.

      No Punishments for Rolling Stone Hoax…………..Want more Horton, turn on MSNBC!

    • The fact that any publication with the resources that Rolling Stone has put out an article without a summary check on the background information in the article is troubling. No it isn’t the New York Times, and it does have a reputation for covering more controversial topics, but fact checking anything they put out is good journalism. One article can damage their credibility on those articles were done the right way. There is a right and a wrong way to do journalism. Fast – delivered in a timely manner, Accurate – are the facts all correct and do they support the article in question, Concise- to the point enough that they do not lose the audience before making the point, and True… Is the premise of the article honest and does it negatively effect the subject of investigation with false information?

      • Yes, your point is indisputable, but disproportionate. This was clearly poor journalism where the system of checks failed. However, in an age where news is instantaneous it is hardly surprising that something like this would happen. For that reason I believe that Rolling Stone will be judged in the sum of all of their reporting – which has been generally outstanding.

        • For all the instantaneous information transmission capabilities, the defense that it isn’t surprising is not an adequate defense. This articles is very much a part of the sum of it’s reporting. The liability for the damage it has caused those mentioned in this article is definitely in the realm of grossly negligent. In this world of viral spread of misinformation, the responsibility for accurate articulation and dispensation of news is of greater consequence than it has ever been. As the primary point of misinformation in this particular instance, they have the primary responsibility to make sure that information that they proliferate into the world is accurate in its facts and true in it’s statements. One article makes other articles questionable. If they let it slide that one writer failed to do this, and the editorial staff who decides which articles and how much of that content is published, then they have failed in taking responsibility for the consequences of that writing in regards to the people they have written this article about. Lawsuits have been filed over less, and in this case may be what it takes to negate at least part of the damage done to the reputation of both the university, and the fraternity mentioned in said article. How many top notch students will go to another university, or not join that fraternity because of this article?

        • One single corporate sponsor, one advertiser, one full tuition, caused by this article is monetary damage. It is the civil liability of Rolling Stone magazine, to pay for damages caused by the neglect of the staff of the magazine, and I for one would love to see that court case. It could be what we used to call a good old fashioned barn burner. I would love to see the Supreme Court take on just what is the responsibility of the press in regards to damages to the reputation and income base of those who are misrepresented by the press agents in question. While the idea of a free press that is unhindered in reporting facts is extremely important, the idea that the press is also responsible for damage done to innocent parties as a result of misinforming it’s audience is also an important idea. The more authoritative the press agent, the greater the level of damage and hence responsibility for a full and accurate review prior to publication. While no one in their right mind finds the “National Enquirer” to be an authoritative news agent (We all know that is a gossip rag, nothing more), Rolling Stone is a different matter. People believe what they print. There is enough negative press to go around without manufactured negative for the purpose of making a buck. The reputation of that paper for reliable news makes this article more damaging.

  5. Accountability will finally come one day, when justice and liberty cease to turn a blind eye. Then, and only then will the criminal element that plagues our government have to answer for all of their wrongdoings.

    • i just don’t buy it… although i wish it were true but i don’t buy it. Bush jr’s record was criminal in many respects with his attacking others without clear provocation and the patriot act and so much more… and now he is just painting pictures of his dog pulling in many hundreds of thousands per year for scratching his ass. Reagan’s arms deals with terrorists and revolutionaries was also criminal… but everyone is scott free. Now don’t get me wrong, the demos have done their fair share too… and they all get off scott free. Just look at those top 1% of the 1% who ran our nation’s economy and that of the world into the toilet in the last several years… i heard only ONE person ever went to jail. While we are at it, look at the vatican and their evil doings before this pope arrived (PBS special on this is shocking). Absolute Power has a hard time relinquishing itself…. to others more deserving. Sadly, accountability in this nation is no better than many run-down countries led by corruption elsewhere.

      • That is a totally TRUE statement. When dealing with human nature in a position of power, it will seldom correct or necessitate itself. The unfortunate summation is, our once great nation is in for a very bumpy ride in the near future. If we do not begin acting vigilant, we will fail as the birthplace of liberty and justice.

      • Congress Demanded the right to vote on the Iraq invasion (Hillary Clinton was one of them) and then voted FOR it. So get off the Bush kick. Barrack hasn’t asked congress to use drones all over North Africa and the Middle East. Afghanistan was proven to be the country supporting Bin Laden while he planned and carried out the 9-11 attacks. And ISIS has been proven that they are using those chemical weapons that “supposedly” didn’t exist in Iraq !.

        • true… but not sure of your point. Bush pushed hard to invade iraq … damn the facts was their posture. congress was weak and mostly leaderless. hillary ain’t no saint. but bush waged a war… shock and awe. obama taking out individual high priced targets with relatively surgical strikes does not catalyze the congressional oversight machine… those strikes (whether or not one agrees with bombing individual high value people identified as terrorists from a drone**) is not the same as full on decade-long ground invasion. ** by the way, why are not the conservative right applauding obama for the drones as the ONE thing they actually support? that one always baffled me.

          sure, helping the poor… equal rights for all… marriage equality… woman’s right to choose… environmental protections… okay… the right bashes obama relentlessly… and, at least, THAT makes sense.

          But for the hawkish right to bash him for hunting down terrorists and taking out bin laden… what the hell is that about?

          my only explanation: the polarization of our nation is complete. nothing obama does, not matter how closely aligned with conservative values, is acceptable.

          i just wonder why….

          • More idiocy from the same left winger moronic propaganda spewer that “hates BUSH”. Obama deserves all he gets. Now go sniff Obama FARTS and ask for another helping.

          • PAM!!! So glad to read you again. i thought you had given up on me. i am trying to hook you up with a guy named Paul Reiner. you both will be bosom buddies… i just know it. i told him you were a touch crack to nut (i mean, nut to crack) but seriously… you two would have such a grand time together. look him up and don’t forget to invite me to the wedding (I’ll be the one in the pinko donkey costume).

          • He asked me a logical question that I replied too with a truthful answer. Don’t denigrate him for being curious – please.

          • Equal rights for all? Until you start squishing my fundamental rights, by forcing your thoughts on others and expecting them to think like you do. Woman’s right to choose? How about they get to choose after receiving all pertinent information and options, and let’s not even get into discussion of oversight of those facilities (safe legal and rare has 3 components, not just being legal), environmental protections? How about we start using some common sense when it comes to environmental law and practices. No fencing off the creek in the backyard because a cow might defecate on the ground.
            Helping the poor? By building more homeless shelters and subsidized housing because the house the working poor can afford is too small to meet HOA criteria? By not giving any oversight to SNAP participants who sell their benefits at a 50% exchange rate? By saying that drug testing for those living on our money should be a given? You had to earn that money for those people to receive it. Do you want it going to the children of those families or do you want it going to feed someone’s drug habit? In psychiatric terms that would be called “enabling”
            All of us need to ask where are the supporting facts, the background information. It isn’t just the liberal left that needs to support their points with background fact an analysis. Some of them might need to re-evaluate their positions and a detailed fact check might change a few opinions.
            As far as the right bashing Obama for his handling of Bin Laden’s assassination? It was Seal Team Six who should get that credit. Obama had zero political choice but to allow that mission. It would have been outright political suicide for anyone to be able to say, “we had Bin Laden in our sights, and were not allowed to complete our objective.” Most of us do have an issue with the fact that Seal Team Six was not given credit where credit was due. They hunted him down and they completed their mission.

          • Clinton tried to balance the budget by cutting funding to the US intel. services. Bush had the lousy intel that Clinton left him. Three different times the CIA begged Clinton to let them take out Bin Laden. Clinton was to busy with Monica to give them permission. Google it.

          • google didn’t work that well then… but he was googling monica… i wrote him a letter back then (seriously) saying that if he ever found an intern under his desk and was wondering what to do… he could call me anytime on my dime… and i would save his presidency. he never called… what a shame.

          • In reply to your last sentence- Barrack told republicans on his first day in office (quote) “You can ride along – but you got to sit in the back” (unquote) ! THAT WAS A DIRECT INSULT TO EVERY WHITE VOTER IN THE UNITED STATES ! And I will never forget it. And hope I never see him thru a rifle scope.

          • whether you see in in a scope is up to you. advice: don’t tempt yourself… dump all your scopes. interesting quote. here is the larger context so far as i know it:

            President Obama visited Rhode Island where unemployment is stuck at 11.5%.

            He said Republicans had driven the economy into a ditch and then stood by and criticized while Democrats pulled it out. Now that progress has been made, he said, “we can’t have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.”

            changes the tone a bit when placed into the fuller context. stupid thing to say… but he felt he had a point to make. but what is most interesting is that you are equating republicans with “white voter”… i happen to agree… the vast majority of republicans are white and a lot of those folks (more than 50% are male). look at this group writing here.. mostly white males… older if i guess correctly. i think that is at the core of a LOT of republican discontent about obama… older white males are still struggling with a half-black president who is an intellectual (whether or not he is street smart). i know that claim i make is a cliche by now… but watch people on this site… push them far enough (as i do) and sooner or later the race card is played: many white folks struggle with obama as much or more for his color than his policies alone. (let’s see what reaction i get from this one…. PAM DUNN… where are you!!??)

          • How about releasing 5 terrorists?

      • And then we get a load of LIBERAL BULLSHYTE along with “Blame Bush” he was worse ad a “cri=minal” too.
        What utter BULL and nonsensical spewing from a far left winger moron that probably worships at Obama and Hillary’s feet.
        Go get stuffed you leftist idiot.

        • Hi, Pam. A little suggestion here: Rather than just dole out insults and invective, why don’t you answer PayTheMan’s points? Even one single point? That, I’m sure, would be far more useful and productive.

          P.S. – Saint Ronald Reagan sold arms to Iran. To pay for an illegal war in Central America. Whatever names you choose to call me will not change that fact.

          • How many leftist acts of deceit do YOU want! When ya have nothing, blame events that happened decades ago. His majesty Oblame-o, Cough, Fast and Furious, cough.

          • Heh. Fast and Furious? Here’s the Wikipedia entry concerning that and the other programs that preceded it:
            “”Gunwalking”, or “letting guns walk”, was a tactic of the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), which ran a series ofsting operations[2][3] between 2006[4] and 2011[2][5] in the Tucson and Phoenix area where the ATF “purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers, hoping to track the guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders and arrest them.”[”

            I don’t suppose you recall who was President in 2006, do you?

          • From the same WIKI….”The Jacob Chambers Case began in October 2009 and eventually became
            known in February 2010 as “Operation Fast and Furious” after agents
            discovered Chambers and the other suspects under investigation belonged
            to a car club.” You do recall who was dictator, er, president then don’t you?

          • I know, I know — any President who you don’t like is a dictator, even if you can’t actually cite a single dictatorial action. Read the entire entry. All those individual programs were part of the same policy. Each instance was given a different name. The collection of operations — three in all, if I recall — began under George W. Bush. Fast and Furious was fully investigated by the most partisan of all people, so I don’t know what point you’re trying to make. You hate Obama; I get it. But he was elected by more than 50% of the voters twice in a row, so you’re just going to have to live with it.

          • It’s just a shame under Obama’s watch, some of our border guards were killed. And of course it doesn’t matter how Oblame-o was elected, how much deceit, dead voters, illegals, coercion.

          • I agree. It’s a shame that people were killed. It’s always a shame when people are killed — for example, when 2,977 people were killed by terrorists on 9/11, or when 168 people were killed in Oklahoma City in 1995 or when 220 Marines were killed in Lebanon in 1983. All those events happened under a President’s watch — no small coincidence, since we always have a President and things always happen. Reagan certainly deserves a lion’s share of the blame for the 1983 incident, since he sent the Marines to Lebanon, but clearly others drew up the plan and executed it. Reagan merely signed off on it.

            Are you going to blame the President for anything that happens on his or her watch? That’s fine, but you’ll have to be consistent. You want to blame Obama for the one border guard who was killed with a gun sold by a Texas gun dealer? Then you’ll have to blame Bush for the deaths on 9/11. Hell, you’ll have to blame Roosevelt for both Pearl Harbor and Omaha Beach.

            People screw up, and often someone dies as a result. Sometimes it’s foreseeable, sometimes it’s not so clear. In the case of Fast and Furious, there was a thorough review of the program, and the resulting changes in procedure ensure that such a thing will never happen again. Even with Benghazi! — no doubt one of your other favorite talking points — the State Department undertook a through and exhaustive review, making over 200 recommendations, every single one of which the Secretary of State at the time — can’t seem to recall her name — accepted and implemented.

            Politics and governing are not sport. The world is not black and white. Nuance exists, gray areas exist. You might try accepting this, rather than dividing the world into Us and Them. I get that you don’t like Obama, I get that your logic is inconsistent and irrational and that you’re not about to wake up in the morning as an open-minded person. But one can always hope.

          • And one could pray that you take off the rose colored glasses when it comes to the party of mis-information. Now go back to the “factivist” website for more.

          • What an articulate, well-thought-out response!

          • Thanx! But coming from you, I had better try harder. Your four paragraph response said, NOTHING!

          • Get over yourself ! The guns sold while Bush was prez had GPS trackers imbedded in them. Barrack and Holder didn’t bother – it was a ruse to enforce stricter gun control laws. And had not TWO BATF agents come forward – it might have worked.

        • Pam you ol’ scurvy navel you… Thought you gave me up for lent. If you and that other dude are too inbred to,find eachother appealing, i might just have to claim you for myself. You got some sauce.

      • All I know is, having lived thru all the administrations from JFK to the present, I felt a LOT safer and my dollar went when Reagan and both Bushes were in office, Clinton was ignored by the rest of the world powers and left us Somalia and the Balkans, Carter was spineless on foreign policy against the Iranians (whoops, they’re at it again 36 years later) and clueless domestically. LBJ left us with a mess in Vietnam, welfare, and low income housing projects, Nixon had Watergate, though what was a scandal then is a minor hiccup in today’s politics. And, oh yeah, Reagan engineered and oversaw THE END OF THE COLD WAR!!!

        • Really interesting as we are roughly the same age. Clearly you are bright and so am i but we see the world and our nation’s roles so differently. We have an amazing country that we can express our likely opposing world views as we are doing now. I feel that clinton, obama and carter were our smartest presidents… And i felt relatively comfortable with them although i also recognize their many foibles. I saw the father bush for the good intentions and potential he had, reagan as a smart manipulator who worked both for and against our best interests… And the younger bush as a facade and bafoon for an evil cheney adminstration. Just a nutshell… But paying my taxes this time,round felt less painful to me than when bush was in office and we were sending our own into a war that served us poorly and straddled us with the isis threat exploiting the vacuum that is our present reality. I see the cheney administration as the most evil and criminal admin we have had in several decades. Good to hear your views too. (Gorbachev was no slacker in the end of the cold war… Reagan had a great asset in gorbachev.).

        • Excellent !!! So many disillusioned such as “pay your taxes” below. He says, “We have an amazing country that we can express our likely opposing world views as we are doing now”. Except in Indiana, Pay? Then he spews, “But paying my taxes this time,round felt less painful to me than when bush was in office”. I very much dislike paying for the takers that the current administration is allowing by giving amnesty to millions. Let’s not mention the other freebee, socialist programs. Then, “the isis threat” that Obama called “J.V”? Reagan also ended the Iranian hostage situation that Carter wasn’t capable of.

      • I know PayTheMan. WWI was Bushes fault, and so was Chernobyl. Why, I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if he, Pres. Reagan, the Pope, and Brian Williams didn’t get their collective heads together and start the Revolutionary War against the nice British back in the day. It’s all a vast, Right Wing conspiracy!!!!

  6. The corrective action in this case will have to come from the courts, where there will probably be redistribution of wealth of the kind that would ordinarily make these people’s mouths water. The best that we can do otherwise is recognize that this rag for superannuated hippies is simply a tendentious collection of lies supporting a radical political agenda, no different from Pravda or Granma or Al Jazeera.

  7. No punishment for all the lies Bill O’Reilly has told. Why does that not bother you?

  8. This was not a hoax, it was poor reporting. There is a difference.

    • It was typical reporting, AND you are right, there is a difference.

    • Really, and how long after Rolling Stones knew the story was false did they finally come out and try to
      weasel out of it? It was a HOAX meant to do harm to the FRAT just because they were men and thus
      were expendable in the war that is being perpetuated on the Campus today.

  9. Michael Dennewitz

    I’ve always said, Wall Street in politics is why we have a little Velcro head in the white house, and all of the demonstrations and hatred is pumped up by the media.. Get rid of BOTH and you have 3/4 of the problem fixed. Then, a very good sniper could fix the rest… :-))

  10. I hope that those that have been hurt by this hoax are prosecuted and Rolling Stone is sued out of existance. They are nothing but another worthless liberal/commie/Nazi/fascist leaning rag anyway and they deserve no credibility. They don’t even deserve to exist.

  11. Rolling Stone magazine sells to Morons. The same Morons that vote Democrat and for Obama. It is simply “Supply and Demand”. The majority of Americans are Morons, thus the need for Liberal Trash media like ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, Etc., Etc. Morons can not “stomach” the truth. Lies and Illusions help them sleep at night.
    Whats’ the fix? Conservatives must make an effort to STOP supporting the Morons. Just that simple.

  12. Can’t boycott don’t look at the rag now. Hope they get sued for a zillion $$ and loss.

  13. Douchebag writers, Douchebag readers. No one outside of the Douchebag establishment even takes these two groups seriously.

    So much for this so-called “rape” story. It holds no more water than the so-called “global warming” hoax. Both are just a bunch of Bovine Scatology, which is what every one of these Libtard Douchebags are full of anyway.

  14. Communists don’t bring retribution against their fellow travelers for advancing the cause but rather tell them to keep up the good work comrade! REVOLUTION will be the SOLUTION!

  15. A rag for the Lib LOSERS …
    Not fit for the garage floor …….

  16. Of course not! Now, ask yourself, why not! This isn’t rocket science!
    The same reason Edward Snowden was crucified for leaking info, but Valerie Jarret sits high and mighty. Come on, we all know she leaked the clinton email story! What’s the difference! Yes, what’s the difference? Once again, this isn’t rocket science!

  17. Shofar threading

    Why surprising. They’re all llibertines.

  18. It’s a liberal rag and I wouldn’t wipe my @ss with it much less read it same douche bags that glorified the Boston Bomber I say go f_ _ k your self’s

  19. I am sick and tired of no accountability from the liberal media, FED UP! Look at the people’s lives they have ruined unjustly. I say we fight fire with fire. Start doing the same exact things they do. I for one, will be working on making those responsible for this FAKE story a living hell. WE HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE! Expose all the embarrassing things we can find on them…I need a few good hackers.

  20. Loaded and stoned magazine should be perforated every 6 inches. It would wipe much easier. You see, thats all it can be used for.

  21. Why pursue facts, when “everybody knows” fraternity members “routinely gang rape women”, just as ” everybody knows”: white people are all racists deep down, intentionally keeping minorities suppressed / white businessmen are all greedy heartless bastards / anyone who owns a gun is a right-wing terrorist / Socialism is really the best system of government / Islam is a peaceful religion, only “extremists” take those passages in the Q’uran about killing infidels seriously / we can reason with Al-Qeada and Isis and persuade them to stop all this violence…….(if only all these people would stop being so picky about those silly facts!!)

  22. Of course not, liberal jackoffs are never held responsible for anything.

  23. Did any aware, thinking person out there really expect the Rolling Stone to be held accountable for spurious charges and false stories? The Left does not relish self-policing, particularly if the story involves “sexism” or “racism”. The Left prefers to let falsehoods hang unchallenged if the lies are Leftist in origin. A lie that serves their purpose is better than facts that do not fit their agenda.

  24. Accountability will finally come one day, when justice and liberty cease to turn a blind eye.AN THEdemoRATS WILL RULE NO MORE!

  25. Of course not, liberals do not get punished for lies, just like Democrap politions, who lie, lie, lie, and lie some more and by the way you can keep your doctor and health care. LIE LIE LIE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *