Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Horn6721, Dec 13, 2016.
The CIA's intent is to make the agenda for the US. The government (people) have no say.
Yes you established you believe they are unaccountable, but that wasnt the question, are they undermining US interest?
If you consider following the US Constituiton to be in the interest of the US, then of course this interest has been undermined. Can I be more clear?
Jake Tapper now says Senate Intel committee member Diane Feinstein said knew of no FISA warrants granted for surveillance of Trump advisers during campaign.
The NYT in Jan said there were "wiretaps"
This discrepancy was put to the NYT's public editor Liz Spayd. She now admits that the NYT reported wiretapping was not via FISA. Meaning that Trump's people were never under surveillance.
Bottom line -- If Trump had not forced all of this out into the open, the NYT would never have made this admission.
This story is a good example how the NYT writes major fake news without technically writing a lie
They have now been forced to walk back their original tale and now admit those sources they relied upon were about communications that had nothing to do with Trump or the elections. Yet look what they put front page - above the fold on Jan 20
If it was 'unclear' whether these reported communications had anything with Trump or the elections, why did the NYT put it front page - above the fold Jan 20? This question is not rhetorical. There is an answer.
Premise: Organizations that follow the US constitution promote American interest.
Premise: the CIA is an organization and part of the US government.
Translated Premise: The CIA does not follow the US Constitution
Conclusion: The CIA is a US government anti-American organization.
yes, I'll accept your response as you believe, the CIA is an anti American organization.
The NYT has now deleted this header about the wiretaps from its online versions of the article
As far as I can see, the "Trump Colluded With the Russians to Hack the Election" narrative has now been dropped by all of the media.
(Although Maxine Waters is still mumbling about it)
Another highly calculated DT counter-punch that drowned out fake news accusations. Turn their tactics against them and keep them busy playing defense.
The strategy to attack their saviors makes them go batshit defending those they bow to.
It does make it seem his is playing 3D chess while they are playing checkers
I happened to stumble across an editorial today that expresses my thoughts better than I can. Read if you dare.
Photos have emerged of President Trump with a well-known Russian submarine commander
So, after all this, the only people who have been shown to have a verified, tangible connection to a Russia pay-for-influence scheme are Hillary and the Podesta brothers.
Did the libs on board here take the day off? They are quiet today. There has to be some protest somewhere they're attending. I can't keep up with what they're protest from day to day.
Timeline from Daily Wire comparing Russiagate to Watergate through the first 6 months of both
TWO DAYS INTO WATERGATE: On June, 17, 1972, five men were arrested for breaking into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, which was located in the Watergate Complex. A mere two days later the public learned that a GOP Security Aide, a "salaried security coordinator for President Nixon’s reelection committee," was among the five arrested.
TWO DAYS INTO RUSSIAGATE: There is absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing committed by Donald Trump or anyone connected to Trump.
SIX WEEKS INTO WATERGATE: On August 1, the public learned a $25,000 cashier's check "earmarked for President Nixon’s re-election campaign, was deposited in April in a bank account of one of the five men arrested in the break-in[.]"
SIX WEEKS INTO RUSSIAGATE: There is absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing committed by Donald Trump or anyone connected to Trump.
THREE-PLUS MONTHS INTO WATERGATE: On September 29, the public learned that while he was Attorney General, John Mitchell was in charge of a secret account used for espionage against Democrats.
THREE-PLUS MONTHS INTO RUSSIAGATE: There is absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing committed by Donald Trump or anyone connected to Trump.
FOUR MONTHS INTO WATERGATE: The scandal blows wide open and lands right on Nixon's doorstep.
FOUR MONTHS INTO RUSSIAGATE: There is absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing committed by Donald Trump or anyone connected to Trump.
SIX MONTHS INTO WATERGATE: Former-Nixon aides G. Gordon Liddy and James McCord are "convicted of conspiracy, burglary and wiretapping in the Watergate incident."
SIX MONTHS INTO RUSSIAGATE: There is absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing committed by Donald Trump or anyone connected to Donald Trump.
Now let's compare the resources available to the media for Watergate vs. RussiaGate.
One newspaper (The Washington Post), two reporters (Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein) and one anonymous source (Deep Throat).
Now, I don't want to mislead. As the scandal heated up, more news outlets with more resources jumped onboard; more sources came forward. But the pull of the thread that started the unraveling was basically the result of two guys and one anonymous source.
All of the mainstream media and their billions of dollars, hundreds of reporters, countless numbers of anonymous sources, wiretaps of Team Trump phone calls, much of the Intelligence Community, dozens of felonious leaks coming from within the Deep State, and who knows how many federal bureaucrats working in what can only be described as Barry Obama's Shadow Government.
Within two days of the Watergate break-in, the media had already connected a crime to an employee on Nixon's re-election campaign. Within six weeks, the media connected the break-in directly to the president's re-election campaign. Within six months, two officials on Nixon's re-election campaign had already been convicted!
I suggest if it's been a while since you seen then movie "All the President's Men" that you watch it again. It shows how real journalism is suppose to be. Looking at what CNN and all the other MSM producing fake news is just an embarrassment.
FWIW, this action isn't consistent with Russian influence on the US government, and this is a big deal. First, it's a reversal of an almost 30 year trend of reducing our troop levels in Europe. There isn't formal commitment yet, but they wouldn't be planning this if something wasn't in the works. Second, it's not a temporary rotational force like we've seen recently in Eastern Europe but a permanent stationing of troops, which means new facilities and the establishment of a military community. It's a major investment of money and personnel and considered long term action. Third, I could see this as part of an enticement to get NATO countries to boost their defense budgets. Historically, they've mostly followed our lead. When we do more in Europe, they do more. When we do less, they do less.
Two weeks ago the MSM was comparing Russiagate to Watergate...
Today, it didn't even make the Sunday shows.
So much Fake News
Maybe some of you will now realize you are just being used?
That's an interesting app Deez. I ended reading nearly all the behind the headline stories: what a mess everyone is facing.
I am sure Jake Tapper will be all over this --
"People associated with Clinton’s campaign also met with Russian ambassador, according to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman."
"Russian parliament backs investigation into U.S. media"
Who do we think is more honest and trustworthy -- the US media or the Russian Parliament?
from Glenn Greenwald --
"... the overarching issue for the Democratic Party’s base since Trump’s victory has been Russia, often suffocating attention for other issues. This fixation has persisted even though it has no chance to sink the Trump presidency unless it is proven that high levels of the Trump campaign actively colluded with the Kremlin to manipulate the outcome of the U.S. election — a claim for which absolutely no evidence has thus far been presented.
The principal problem for Democrats is that so many media figures and online charlatans are personally benefiting from feeding the base increasingly unhinged, fact-free conspiracies — just as right-wing media polemicists did after both Bill Clinton and Obama were elected — that there are now millions of partisan soldiers absolutely convinced of a Trump/Russia conspiracy for which, at least as of now, there is no evidence. And they are all waiting for the day, which they regard as inevitable and imminent, when this theory will be proven and Trump will be removed.
Key Democratic officials are clearly worried about the expectations that have been purposely stoked and are now trying to tamp them down...."
Lefties are more susceptible to being manipulated than little children
For example, what is the name of this thread?
The CIA has 'meddled' in 81 elections, not including coups or assassinations, since WWII
How ironic that the person who gleefully jumped onto Hornfans to feed the utterly debunked "Obama wiretap" conspiracy is the one saying "Lefties are more susceptible to being manipulated than little children".
One could argue this poster is the King of Hornfans for unfounded conspiracy theories.