Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) found herself trying to play lexicographer Wednesday, claiming she lost the primary because of rigging against her.
Porter on Super Tuesday lost the primary election The late Dianne Feinstein’s U.S. Senate seat. Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff and Republican Rep. Steve Garvey were the top two candidates in the open primary, each receiving over 30% of the vote. Mr. Porter came in third place with 13.9% of the vote.
Porter reacted to her embarrassing loss by claiming that billionaires spent millions of dollars “to rig this election.” She suggested that’s why she lost.
This outrageous claim, for which Porter offered not a shred of evidence, was widely ridiculed by Republicans, Democrats, and the media.
But that didn’t stop Porter from trying.
Instead of having a slice of his humble pie, Porter tried to play a game of semantics and defend his claims about a “rigged” election.
In a subsequent statement, she said: Said:
“Fraudible manipulation” means manipulated by fraudulent means. Several billionaires spent more than $10 million of his money on attack ads against me, including ads that were rated “false” by independent fact-checkers. It is a fraudulent means of manipulating results. I said “set by billionaires,” but our politics is – in fact – manipulated by huge dark funds. Defending democracy means calling it out loud.
There are two problems with Porter’s statement.
First of all, the word “rigged” Technically It means “to manipulate or control, usually by deceptive or dishonest means” or “to arrange in advance to obtain a desired result.” According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary. But Porter makes her statement rigged because the election was never rigged. No one manipulated or controlled it by deceptive means, no one modified it in advance for a certain outcome.
Nothing illegal happened that caused Porter to lose by 20 points. That was her accomplishment.
Second, Porter is not honest. The “independent fact-checker” she mentioned was the Sacramento Bee. And the fact check she mentioned It does not end with a verdict of “falsehood.” The Bee said the assessment was “mostly incorrect” because the ad in question was “misleading”. The ad claimed that “Big Pharma,” “Big Oil,” and “Big Banks” were supporting Porter’s campaign.
In fact, honey bees are used by pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, and banks. supported Porter. However, the court ruled that this statement was “mostly false” because the bank serves Asian Americans, while oil and pharmaceutical companies are not part of industry lobbying groups. .
No doubt, it may have been “rigged” in Porter’s favor.
Do you like Blaze News? Avoid censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get articles like this delivered straight to your inbox. Register here!
