Oh wait, it's from The Guardian.
The same paper that reported Trump "defended Putin" until the Radio Times noted:
“The fact is that, in the interview (which you can watch in its entirety here), neither man mentions Putin’s name once, let alone “defends” him. Nobody who’d seen the brief interview (it’s only 9 minutes long) could possibly make that mistake. So either the Guardian writers/editors are publishing stories about videos they have not even bothered to watch, or they are simply straight lying….
… Either is ethically indefensible for a “proper” news outlet.”
And did the guardian bother apologizing ?
Of course not. The Guardian does everything possible to smear people and destroy lives.
So, let's look at the wording of the guardian article the leftwits are howling about here today shall we:
"...
A deeply flawed and potentially corrupt land purchase by the New South Wales government has prompted an investigation of 20 similar property acquisitions, an inquiry has heard.
"
Hmm, so the whining left is assured that 'potentially corrupt' is in fact, corrupt. Hmm,
then that would mean 820 dead from covid in Vic compared to 56 in NSW is factual and undeniable because there is no use of the wishy-washy 'maybe' terms
potential or
potentially.
Yeah, I wouldn't quote from the guardian if I were you fellas as it has proven that it lacks credibility as a source of fact in favor of a leftist agenda.
