IMO,
1: is a non sequitor. There's at lease one missing logical argument which explains WHY A implies B.
2: could be a hasty generalization, if and only if you assume that everything from that source is WRONG automatically. If you simply no longer put any trust in a source due to past experience, I wouldn't call that a fallacy at all.
3: assuming 1 and 2 are fallacies, without being able to state why, is probably an argument from silence fallacy.
BTW, if anyone knows any liberals, could you ask them for me if I was born a man but identify as a woman, do I get to have an opinion on abortion?