1. #2221
    Quote Originally Posted by Tijuana View Post
    So which is it though? Is Trump too cozy with Russia, or he is going to start a war by provoking them? Your article seems to reference both conspiracy theories.
    what conspiracy theories?

  2. #2222
    Quote Originally Posted by Vital View Post
    You don't have to take his word for it, just look at the facts (particularly around Rick Wilson) and ask yourself what is most likely.
    You mean the stuff that has nothing to do with Rick Wilson whatsoever? The stuff from CNN and Buzzfeed have nothing to do with him. Rick Wilson has made a ton of tweets calling the dumbass from 4chan nothing but an idiot as he was not the leak to CNN or Buzzfeed. So the only one that was trolled by 4chan was you and every other poster in this thread thinking it was 4chan that did this.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkeon View Post
    People still trying to reason with the hatred echo-chamber? :P
    Nope. We gave up on Trump a long time ago.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    None of this makes any sense, And I would like anyone to attempt to make any sense of it

    Ok the claim is the Russians gave this compromising information to this ex MI6 private investigator hired by never Trumpers then by the DNC for opposition research (dig up dirt on Trump) and that information was obtained during the summer of last year

    here is the question

    why in the hell would the Russians do that if it was Trump who they wanted to win the presidency?
    So they can control him? Duh.
    Master List of Why Trump is a Misogynist, Racist, Fascist, Homophobic Criminal:
    https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrump...se_megathread/

  3. #2223
    Quote Originally Posted by Orbitus View Post
    You mean the stuff that has nothing to do with Rick Wilson whatsoever? The stuff from CNN and Buzzfeed have nothing to do with him. Rick Wilson has made a ton of tweets calling the dumbass from 4chan nothing but an idiot as he was not the leak to CNN or Buzzfeed. So the only one that was trolled by 4chan was you and every other poster in this thread thinking it was 4chan that did this.
    Today's irony: people accusing others of believing a 4chan hoax, on the basis of a 4chan hoax.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    None of this makes any sense, And I would like anyone to attempt to make any sense of it

    Ok the claim is the Russians gave this compromising information to this ex MI6 private investigator hired by never Trumpers then by the DNC for opposition research (dig up dirt on Trump) and that information was obtained during the summer of last year

    here is the question

    why in the hell would the Russians do that if it was Trump who they wanted to win the presidency?
    Well if you took a minute to actually read it, you'd realise that according to the memos the Russians were collecting this information long before the election, allegedly for the same reason Putin likes having leverage on everyone rich or powerful. And "the Russians" didn't give the information to the MI6 investigator, he used proxies and contacts in Russia to gather these allegations.

    Not that there's any contradiction here anyway, obviously if you have a patsy you want leverage on him.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Gen4Glock21 View Post
    CNN got the information from Buzzfeed who broke the story.
    The memos have been known to various news agencies for months, they didn't disclose it until the leaks from the Presidents' intelligence briefings because they were sensitive and unproven (aside from a Mother Jones article that alleged their existence). At that point CNN disclosed their existence and some details but didn't actually publish the memos. Buzzfeed then published them, which other news agencies criticised them for. Here's the Buzzfeed article in question, I believe:

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/kenbensinge...w14#.yae0A7dYL

    The NY times has a pretty solid account of the chain of events:

    After the election, the memos, still being supplemented by his inquiries, became one of Washington’s worst-kept secrets, as reporters — including from The New York Times — scrambled to confirm or disprove them.

    Word also reached Capitol Hill. Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, heard about the dossier and obtained a copy in December from David J. Kramer, a former top State Department official who works for the McCain Institute at Arizona State University. Mr. McCain passed the information to James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director.

    Remarkably for Washington, many reporters for competing news organizations had the salacious and damning memos, but they did not leak, because their contents could not be confirmed. (Mother Jones magazine was an exception, publishing a story on Oct. 31 that described the dossier, its origin and significance, while omitting the titillating details.) That changed only this week, after the heads of the C.I.A., the F.B.I. and the National Security Agency added a summary of the memos, along with information gathered from other intelligence sources, to their report on the Russian cyberattack on the election.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/u...elligence.html

    One of the reasons they were in the intelligence brief in the first place is because they were common knowledge and the intelligence agencies wanted to brief both Presidents on their existence and the fact that their veracity was not yet known, presumably so they were prepared if anything leaked. Which it immediately did, allegedly from multiple sources.

    Personally I suspect the intelligence community is paying back Trump for talking a load of hot shit about Russia not being behind the hacks on Twitter.
    Last edited by Mormolyce; 2017-01-13 at 10:24 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  4. #2224
    Quote Originally Posted by Ralgarog View Post
    You seem to be uninformed. CNN is reporting on a story that Buzzfeed broke. There are two (technically three) stories happening in parallel here. But i don't expect someone who's research went back as far, "This makes trump look bad? Then its true."

    Also, You need to prove that something is true, not that something is false. You can never prove a negative. You can't prove that there is no physics defying purple unicorn having an orgy with moon men on Europa.

    You people are fucking insane.
    Actually, you are the one who is uninformed. CNN initially reported on a story that they broke, that's why it is called an exclusive. The story they broke is about a memo that was passed out during a briefing to Obama (and Biden) and Trump. That memo is not the document that Buzzfeed posted. They reported that intelligence officials briefed the men about possible attempts by Russia to control Trump with defamatory information. They specifically stated that the information Buzzfeed released could not be verified.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tijuana View Post
    I agree. According to the standard being set by posters here, everything is true until it's disproven. There is a term for that, where you expect others to provide sources that refute your own unsourced claim, but I forget what it is.

    By this logic, nobody can prove that I can't fly. Ergo, I can in fact fly.
    Of course you agree with him, and you are both still wrong. You are basing your opinion off of facts that have been proven to be wrong many times over. You are choosing to refuse to believe what was posted for you to see. You refuse to admit that the facts you tried to state were proven to be false. Things have been provided, you are flat out lying... again. You are being completely disingenuous, and you fucking know it. If you don't stop lying, I will gladly post every lie for everyone to see, again.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    None of this makes any sense, And I would like anyone to attempt to make any sense of it

    Ok the claim is the Russians gave this compromising information to this ex MI6 private investigator hired by never Trumpers then by the DNC for opposition research (dig up dirt on Trump) and that information was obtained during the summer of last year

    here is the question

    why in the hell would the Russians do that if it was Trump who they wanted to win the presidency?
    They never said the Russians gave him that information, did they? You seem to have your facts way off. By the way, you never told me if you were outraged by those unverified media reports I linked to you. I guess you don't want to admit to your hypocrisy Here they are again, unverified media reports that YOU POSTED:

    http://www.mediaite.com/election-201...sed-cia-names/

    http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/repo...-email-server/

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...linton-emails/

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/former-ci...erally-lethal/

    You whined about CNN posting an article about the existence of an unverified document. You did the exact same thing, multiple times, from multiple sources.

    That makes you a hypocrite. I love that you dodged and ran away, because you know it.

  5. #2225
    Quote Originally Posted by Tijuana View Post
    So which is it though? Is Trump too cozy with Russia, or he is going to start a war by provoking them? Your article seems to reference both conspiracy theories.
    That's a conspiracy? You are really trying, aren't you.

  6. #2226
    Quote Originally Posted by Orbitus View Post



    So they can control him? Duh.
    then why would they give it away before he was elected ? so to keep form being elected so they couldn't control him
    that deserves a double Duh Duh

  7. #2227
    Quote Originally Posted by Tijuana View Post
    I would argue the opposite, this time. IMHO, the smart people in the room are those who see this hit piece from CNN for what it is, not the thinly veiled technicality that separates it from the Buzzfeed story.

    Trump does this all time as well. How many times have you heard this sort of thing: "I won't say she is a terrible person. Other people are saying she is terrible, but I won't insult her. I mean, I could insult her, and say she is terrible, but I won't do that".

    What CNN just did, is EXACTLY the same as that. They spent a whole day saying on TV that they don't have proof about this story but, holy cow if it's true it would be such big news so, lets have a ratings bonanza at the expense of our own credibility.
    Then please share with us what is false about it.

    On that note, please also share with us the things you tried to pass off as facts, but were complete bullshit.

    You made claims that the briefing was months ago, it was last week.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politi...sia/index.html

    It's literally in the first sentence.

    You made claims that journalists had Q level clearances. That is actually something for Department of Energy personnel, and was listed in the cartoon, Archer.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_clearance

    Please find anywhere that journalists are supposed to have security clearances. I have looked, and I cannot find it anywhere on the internet. I also see no reason why they would have them, since the entire point of a clearance is to be around classified information. That is exactly why you WOULD NOT have journalists with clearances.

    You claim the header of the memo had "disinformation" on it. Classified headers would never list something like that, it's for other, very specific information.

    http://www.cdse.edu/documents/cdse/M...nformation.pdf

    These are outright falsehoods that you were pushing, yet you want to try and say others are ignoring facts. You claimed you were not lying, and if there was an error, you were simply wrong (although you never admitted to actually being wrong). By continuing to justify those falsehoods, you have chosen to lie.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    then why would they give it away before he was elected ? so to keep form being elected so they couldn't control him
    that deserves a double Duh Duh
    Why do you refuse to answer my question? You asked for examples, and I provided them multiple times. It looks like you are simply going to tacitly admit to your hypocrisy via silence. I love the irony of someone who whines about "fake news" while wallowing in his own willful ignorance and lies.

  8. #2228
    Quote Originally Posted by darenyon View Post
    ................


    You don't need a private investigator or secret dossiers to see that trump's closet is overflowing with skeletons.

    - - - Updated - - -


    i am willing to accept payments bimonthly.
    I don't know how many times I need to keep posting this? I guess as many times as you Trump haters keep ignoring it

    "Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period," the senior official said.
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/tr...alings-n705586

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    Then please share with us what is false about it.

    On that note, please also share with us the things you tried to pass off as facts, but were complete bullshit.

    You made claims that the briefing was months ago, it was last week.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politi...sia/index.html

    It's literally in the first sentence.

    You made claims that journalists had Q level clearances. That is actually something for Department of Energy personnel, and was listed in the cartoon, Archer.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_clearance

    Please find anywhere that journalists are supposed to have security clearances. I have looked, and I cannot find it anywhere on the internet. I also see no reason why they would have them, since the entire point of a clearance is to be around classified information. That is exactly why you WOULD NOT have journalists with clearances.

    You claim the header of the memo had "disinformation" on it. Classified headers would never list something like that, it's for other, very specific information.

    http://www.cdse.edu/documents/cdse/M...nformation.pdf

    These are outright falsehoods that you were pushing, yet you want to try and say others are ignoring facts. You claimed you were not lying, and if there was an error, you were simply wrong (although you never admitted to actually being wrong). By continuing to justify those falsehoods, you have chosen to lie.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Why do you refuse to answer my question? You asked for examples, and I provided them multiple times. It looks like you are simply going to tacitly admit to your hypocrisy via silence. I love the irony of someone who whines about "fake news" while wallowing in his own willful ignorance and lies.
    and how many times does it need to be posted what was false about the CNN article I know I have done it at least a half of dozen times

    and this is why I wont waste my time answering any of your questions you will just ignore it if you don't like the answer
    Last edited by Vyxn; 2017-01-13 at 12:03 PM.

  9. #2229
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    I don't know how many times I need to keep posting this? I guess as many times as you Trump haters keep ignoring it

    "Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period," the senior official said.
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/tr...alings-n705586

    - - - Updated - - -



    and how many times does it need to be posted what was false about the CNN article I know I have done it at least a half of dozen times

    and this is why I wont waste my time answering any of your questions you will just ignore it if you don't like the answer
    What was false? What part of the CNN article was false? I would like some actual evidence, thanks. The reported about a memo, that has been confirmed to exist. They reported about a briefing, which absolutely occurred. Even Biden admits to both. What did they say was actually false? CNN never said the documents mentioned in the memo are true. In fact, they specifically stated that they could not determine if the documents are genuine.

    You still never answered my question... it's been two days of you dodging it. Stop being a coward, and admit to your hypocrisy. You've been claiming to be outraged by this, yet you love to post unverified reports.
    Last edited by Machismo; 2017-01-13 at 12:13 PM.

  10. #2230
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    What was false? What part of the CNN article was false? I would like some actual evidence, thanks. The reported about a memo, that has been confirmed to exist. They reported about a briefing, which absolutely occurred. Even Biden admits to both. What did they say was actually false? CNN never said the documents mentioned in the memo are true. In fact, they specifically stated that they could not determine if the documents are genuine.

    You still never answered my question... it's been two days of you dodging it. Stop being a coward, and admit to your hypocrisy. You've been claiming to be outraged by this, yet you love to post unverified reports.

    CNN lied about Trump being presented with those memos and the reason way

    CNN makes this claim from their head line

    Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politi...sia/index.html

    but the truth is this

    Donald Trump Wasn’t Told About Unverified Russia Dossier, Official Says


    "Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period," the senior official said.
    According to the senior official, the two-page summary about the unsubstantiated material made available to the briefers was to provide context, should they need it, to draw the distinction for Trump between analyzed intelligence and unvetted "disinformation."
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/tr...alings-n705586

    Just in CNNs headline alone they lied twice one that Trump was presented the memos and two it wasn't because the Intel officials was warning Trump he has been compromised by Russia. the Intel officials brought but not presented the two-page summary it was to give Trump an example of unvetted "disinformation."

  11. #2231
    So Flynn may have violated the Logan Act. Typically not enforced but if proven, could open the case up a bit. Link here.

    Basically, Trump's security adviser, Michael Flynn, is accused by a senior official of having phoned the Russian ambassador frequently the day Obama expelled the 35 diplomats and announced harsher sanctions on Russia. Could be nothing, but considered suspicious given Flynn's already noted and blatant ties with Russia and if he were found to be convincing them that they would be overturned under Trump and to just ride the wave, it would violate the Logan Act and bring unquestionable evidence of Russian ties to the forefront.

    To note, the Logan Act is a policy that is normally unenforced due to the difficulty of enforcement but prohibits any civilians from negotiating deals, especially foreign, on the government's behalf without approval. Given Trump was still presidential elect at the time it happened (Dec 28,) and not the president, his camp wouldn't yet be vetted federal officers and the law could be enforced if proven.
    Last edited by Bullettime; 2017-01-13 at 12:34 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    From my perspective it is an uncle who was is a "simple" slat of the earth person, who has religous beliefs I may or may not fully agree with, but who in the end of the day wants to go hope, kiss his wife, and kids, and enjoy their company.
    Connal defending child molestation

  12. #2232
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    I don't know how many times I need to keep posting this? I guess as many times as you Trump haters keep ignoring it

    "Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period," the senior official said.
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/tr...alings-n705586

    - - - Updated - - -



    and how many times does it need to be posted what was false about the CNN article I know I have done it at least a half of dozen times

    and this is why I wont waste my time answering any of your questions you will just ignore it if you don't like the answer

    I ma confused...Are we trusting same agencies that lied about whole hacking thing? I guess I should check with you guys?

  13. #2233
    Forgot about the nitty griddy, the reason why this was published so be clear and this article on the slate words it perfectly

    If not please stop being a fanboy.

    Yet the dossier did come out eventually, and it’s interesting to reflect on how and why it happened—and whether it was inevitable. It happened via a series of steps by various actors, each of whom relied on the actions of those before them to justify their own decisions. BuzzFeed presumably published it in part because CNN was reporting on it. CNN was reporting on it because intelligence officials had briefed Trump on it. Intelligence officials briefed Trump on it because senior congressional leaders were passing it around. Senior congressional leaders may have been passing it around in part because Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid alluded to it in a letter blasting FBI Director James Comey for publicizing information harmful to Hillary Clinton but not publicizing the dirt on Trump. Each act lowered the bar for those who followed to act on information that they knew might or might not be true.
    http://www.slate.com/articles/techno...ia_and_no.html

    So lets say that they didn't report Trump on it and CNN was mistaken about that, the fact of the mater is the stupid thing was something people have been reading and talking about it behind the scenes for months so by that it became a story about by itself even if it's proved to be wrong.

    Difference between fake news and this? Fake news starts out as total BS and gets published without a second though and starts leading a ''life'' after it's get published,.
    This story already got a life before it was published, it was circulating for months. The idea that every story that gets published needs to be true or be called fake news is ridiculous, the right-wing does that because otherwise their would be no way to justify all of the crap that comes out of right wing media (which is allot)

  14. #2234
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    CNN lied about Trump being presented with those memos and the reason way

    CNN makes this claim from their head line

    Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politi...sia/index.html

    but the truth is this

    Donald Trump Wasn’t Told About Unverified Russia Dossier, Official Says


    "Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period," the senior official said.
    According to the senior official, the two-page summary about the unsubstantiated material made available to the briefers was to provide context, should they need it, to draw the distinction for Trump between analyzed intelligence and unvetted "disinformation."
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/tr...alings-n705586

    Just in CNNs headline alone they lied twice one that Trump was presented the memos and two it wasn't because the Intel officials was warning Trump he has been compromised by Russia. the Intel officials brought but not presented the two-page summary it was to give Trump an example of unvetted "disinformation."
    You literally just posted something that did not back up your claim. CNN reported that he was briefed along with Obama. Biden confirmed that he and Obama got the memo in that briefing, so that actually corroborates what CNN reported. In order for it to be a lie, you have to show they knowingly stated false information. You have not done that.

    Trump clearly knew something, because he tweeted about the leak, that you people don't seem to believe actually hapened.

    You also never responded whether you were outraged about those other reports about unverified information. It clearly didn't bother you, since you posted them. Yes, that process you are a hypocrite. Thanks for playing.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post
    I don't know how many times I need to keep posting this? I guess as many times as you Trump haters keep ignoring it

    "Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period," the senior official said.
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/tr...alings-n705586

    - - - Updated - - -



    and how many times does it need to be posted what was false about the CNN article I know I have done it at least a half of dozen times

    and this is why I wont waste my time answering any of your questions you will just ignore it if you don't like the answer
    Thanks for finally admitting g your hypocrisy. You also said you would answer, if I provided I provifed them, yet you refused to answer. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a blatant hypocrite is also a liar.
    Last edited by Machismo; 2017-01-13 at 01:19 PM.

  15. #2235
    Quote Originally Posted by ati87 View Post
    Forgot about the nitty griddy, the reason why this was published so be clear and this article on the slate words it perfectly

    If not please stop being a fanboy.



    http://www.slate.com/articles/techno...ia_and_no.html

    So lets say that they didn't report Trump on it and CNN was mistaken about that, the fact of the mater is the stupid thing was something people have been reading and talking about it behind the scenes for months so by that it became a story about by itself even if it's proved to be wrong.

    Difference between fake news and this? Fake news starts out as total BS and gets published without a second though and starts leading a ''life'' after it's get published,.
    This story already got a life before it was published, it was circulating for months. The idea that every story that gets published needs to be true or be called fake news is ridiculous, the right-wing does that because otherwise their would be no way to justify all of the crap that comes out of right wing media (which is allot)
    Yeah...technically the exact accusations were mentioned back in like August. Evan McMullin even used it as part of his campaign. Kurt Eichenwald even backed it up with his sources and he's ridiculously credible for a journalist.

    It's just now making headlines because there's a formal dossier on it confirmed to exist by McCain, the intelligence community, Biden, Obama, and the FBI is even saying they briefed Trump on it.

    Does that make it true? No. But despite Buzzfeed's shenanigans, CNN wasn't even claiming it was true. They reported on the existence of a suspicious dossier provided by a previously credible source, and its supposed contents, that was making its rounds in the intelligence community and was considered concerning enough by McCain to submit to the FBI a pending an investigation, to brief members of the White House and Trump on its existence and claims. They outright noted that the claims were not yet substantiated.
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    From my perspective it is an uncle who was is a "simple" slat of the earth person, who has religous beliefs I may or may not fully agree with, but who in the end of the day wants to go hope, kiss his wife, and kids, and enjoy their company.
    Connal defending child molestation

  16. #2236
    Legendary! TZucchini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Wish it was Canada
    Posts
    6,989
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyxn View Post

    Donald Trump Wasn’t Told About Unverified Russia Dossier, Official Says


    "Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period," the senior official said.
    According to the senior official, the two-page summary about the unsubstantiated material made available to the briefers was to provide context, should they need it, to draw the distinction for Trump between analyzed intelligence and unvetted "disinformation."
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/tr...alings-n705586

    Just in CNNs headline alone they lied twice one that Trump was presented the memos and two it wasn't because the Intel officials was warning Trump he has been compromised by Russia. the Intel officials brought but not presented the two-page summary it was to give Trump an example of unvetted "disinformation."
    CNN's reporting has not changed. In fact just yesterday, they again verified with multiple sources that Comey and Trump discussed the 2 page memo.

    Multiple US officials briefed on the matter told CNN on Thursday that FBI Director James Comey and Trump had a brief one-on-one conversation at last Friday's intelligence briefing.

    It's during that pull aside that Comey briefed the President-elect on the two-page synopsis of the claims about Trump and Russia. All four intelligence chiefs had decided that Comey would be the one who would handle the sensitive discussion with the President-elect.

    The discussion was described by the sources as cordial.
    Eat yo vegetables

  17. #2237
    Dreadlord
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    836
    Funny thing is 113 pages about stuff thats not true, alot of this is all those butt hurt by the loss still cant get over it and it gives them something to cry about, blame, whatever.. all it does is take away from other news thats not fake and needs to be discussed.

  18. #2238
    Quote Originally Posted by nacixems View Post
    Funny thing is 113 pages about stuff thats not true, alot of this is all those butt hurt by the loss still cant get over it and it gives them something to cry about, blame, whatever.. all it does is take away from other news thats not fake and needs to be discussed.
    The republican congress are butthurt losers?

  19. #2239
    Quote Originally Posted by nacixems View Post
    Funny thing is 113 pages about stuff thats not true, alot of this is all those butt hurt by the loss still cant get over it and it gives them something to cry about, blame, whatever.. all it does is take away from other news thats not fake and needs to be discussed.
    Except it's a few Republican congressmen pushing this the hardest.

    And if anyone starts calling McCain, Graham, and Paul RINOs because for daring to speak out against the god emperor on this topic I'll fucking laugh in their face. edit: Hell even Rubio ripped into Tillerson over Putin.
    Last edited by Bullettime; 2017-01-13 at 01:33 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    From my perspective it is an uncle who was is a "simple" slat of the earth person, who has religous beliefs I may or may not fully agree with, but who in the end of the day wants to go hope, kiss his wife, and kids, and enjoy their company.
    Connal defending child molestation

  20. #2240
    Trump is a purveyor of fake news. He kept the Obama birth certificate fake news going for years. Perhaps you don't trust the IC but Trump certainly can't be trusted either -- he is fake news and thrives with it.

    The developing information about Christopher Steele may shed some additional light on these claims of incriminating evidence of Trump's perversions (which, to some extent have been previewed by reports of related things during the campaign) if he'll come out of hiding for interviews or provide some way to verify (or not) the information in that document.



    Quote Originally Posted by Zenfoldor View Post
    My 2 cents. Document published by Buzzfeed was fake news.

    Briefing happened, but the 2 page synopsis was never presented to Trump, having been filtered out before the brief. The news reported that it was presented to Trump by CNN, was also fake news(this being the primary Fake News CNN is arguably guilty of distributing).

    Claims that president-elect was briefed on dossier which alleged Russia held a smear file on him are not true, intelligence officials reveal. In fact, NBC News reported, the intelligence chiefs at the meeting were given a two-page summary but Trump was only given an oral briefing.

    President-elect goes on offense over leaked report which was investigated by FBI that Russian spies had file of compromising information on him.

    Document was reportedly drawn up by ex-British spy paid by Trump's political enemies and includes allegation of secret film of degrading sex acts.

    Furious Trump calls it 'fake news' and slams intelligence agencies for allowing 'fake news to 'leak' into public'.

    He denies any involvement in Russia saying: 'I have nothing to do with Russia - no deals, no loans, no nothing'.

    Kremlin joins in condemnation of report calling it 'complete fabrication and utter nonsense'.

    Reports of the document's existence surfaced on CNN on evening before Trump holds major press conference and confirmation hearing for his top diplomat.

    John McCain - handed the report to the FBI.

    New York Times and Washington Post were both handed documents months ago but could not verify them.

    Buzzfeed published it in full on Tuesday with no further evidence than NYT and WaPO had months ago.

    Buzzfeed admits the documents are unverified and contain clear errors - but published it anyway. Exactly the same justification as National Enquirer.

    Liberal trolls claim
    1. Hypocrisy for republicans being upset over fake news, when pizzagate happened.
    2. Story is not fake

    Repub trolls claim
    1. Story is fake news
    2. Comparing this story to pizzagate is fair since both are fake news.

    In reality, this is fake news, since it can't be substantiated in any way and will likely not be investigated to the extent necessary to prove anything. Evidence of misdeeds would indeed be very hard to find, otherwise blackmail wouldn't be possible so claiming things you think and can't prove(and have no evidence of) is not real news, it is editorializing, which is a form of fake news. Pizzagate is a very similar example of this in the recent past. If there are those investigating this or pizzagate who come up with any evidence, we can re-examine the validity, but odds are nil.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •