Spying?
-
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
-
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
We're all treating this as something more than a random person making an accusation. Maybe we're all deluded, but our priors about Mr Carlson and what he has to lose if this is made up, are a form of evidence.
It’s his word Horace. Have the whistleblower talk to someone and I am fine with a full investigation.
Jesus, you really want an MSM journalist to pull this shit with ZERO evidence?
I don't think there's a reasonable chance he's just making it up. Stronger chance he's deluded or being intentionally misled, stronger chance still that there's something to the story. Something that falls short of him being an intelligence target per se, but which is still interesting. I'm glad Mr Paul wrote the letter, and I hope the NSA responds.
And if they don’t it’s a conspiracy. Woo hooo. The simplest way for this to come to a head would be for the whistleblower to talk to someone. But you know the rational and reasonable thing to do doesn’t matter anymore.
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
We're all treating this as something more than a random person making an accusation. Maybe we're all deluded, but our priors about Mr Carlson and what he has to lose if this is made up, are a form of evidence.
It’s his word Horace. Have the whistleblower talk to someone and I am fine with a full investigation.
Jesus, you really want an MSM journalist to pull this shit with ZERO evidence?
I don't think there's a reasonable chance he's just making it up. Stronger chance he's deluded or being intentionally misled, stronger chance still that there's something to the story. Something that falls short of him being an intelligence target per se, but which is still interesting. I'm glad Mr Paul wrote the letter, and I hope the NSA responds.
And if they don’t it’s a conspiracy. Woo hooo. The simplest way for this to come to a head would be for the whistleblower to talk to someone. But you know the rational and reasonable thing to do doesn’t matter anymore.
Is anybody saying that the whistleblower shouldn't? If you would like to treat the absence of the whistleblower coming out to someone other than Carlson as evidence that Carlson is making this up, that's fine. It does tip the scales slightly towards that. Not nearly enough to make me think it's the most likely situation. You give substantial credence to the notion that Carlson concocted this as a publicity stunt. I do not.
-
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
If he has written evidence, why isn't he showing it to us?
I'm not saying he doesn't, but if he has it, why all the drama?
I was only joking
-
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
If he has written evidence, why isn't he showing it to us?
I'm not saying he doesn't, but if he has it, why all the drama?
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
If he has written evidence, why isn't he showing it to us?
I'm not saying he doesn't, but if he has it, why all the drama?
I personally think he heard something but not much at all. I don’t think he made it up. Heck maybe the whistleblower doesn’t want to be identified and Tucker doesn’t even know who it is. Lots of possibilities here but investigations and getting the NSA or the FBI or the DOJ or whoever to comment just because would be really really bad. They could spend their entire lives just responding to those requests and then the100 questions that come after per request.
I know it’s TuCa and he’s a fave here but it were Maddow well then there would be hell to pay.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
If he has written evidence, why isn't he showing it to us?
I'm not saying he doesn't, but if he has it, why all the drama?
I personally think he heard something but not much at all. I don’t think he made it up. Heck maybe the whistleblower doesn’t want to be identified and Tucker doesn’t even know who it is. Lots of possibilities here but investigations and getting the NSA or the FBI or the DOJ or whoever to comment just because would be really really bad. They could spend their entire lives just responding to those requests and then the100 questions that come after per request.
I know it’s TuCa and he’s a fave here but it were Maddow well then there would be hell to pay.
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
If he has written evidence, why isn't he showing it to us?
I'm not saying he doesn't, but if he has it, why all the drama?
I personally think he heard something but not much at all. I don’t think he made it up. Heck maybe the whistleblower doesn’t want to be identified and Tucker doesn’t even know who it is. Lots of possibilities here but investigations and getting the NSA or the FBI or the DOJ or whoever to comment just because would be really really bad. They could spend their entire lives just responding to those requests and then the100 questions that come after per request.
I know it’s TuCa and he’s a fave here but it were Maddow well then there would be hell to pay.
I would be interested in such an allegation from any prominent MSM talking head. Is there any precedent you have in mind that was tribally ignored by the right?
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
If he has written evidence, why isn't he showing it to us?
I'm not saying he doesn't, but if he has it, why all the drama?
I personally think he heard something but not much at all. I don’t think he made it up. Heck maybe the whistleblower doesn’t want to be identified and Tucker doesn’t even know who it is. Lots of possibilities here but investigations and getting the NSA or the FBI or the DOJ or whoever to comment just because would be really really bad. They could spend their entire lives just responding to those requests and then the100 questions that come after per request.
I know it’s TuCa and he’s a fave here but it were Maddow well then there would be hell to pay.
I would be interested in such an allegation from any prominent MSM talking head. Is there any precedent you have in mind that was tribally ignored by the right?
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
The NSA was eager to respond when this story first broke, with their non-denial denial. "Mr Carlson has never been an intelligence target". Will they be as eager to respond to Mr Paul's four questions? If not, why not? I bet they will not answer those questions, at least not without an investigation.
Of course, recent history shows us, as Mr Paul notes, that it is far, far from an "implausible conspiracy theory" that the NSA might employ people with security clearance and political axes to grind, and without the requisite honor as human beings to not grind those axes.
When pop culture welcomes such tribal righteousness with open arms, who can blame them? They are only human, operating as humans always have, and always will. That's why they need to be held in check. I respect Mr Paul's attempt to do so.
So every fishing expedition must be responded to?
This thread is full of wordy words….and no evidence.
Let me repeat…NO evidence. He said he/she said. Seriously. Kafkaesque to demand so much with no evidence to be followed up on.
Mr. Carlson clearly has verbal and written evidence.
Repeating over and over that he doesn’t won’t change that.
If he has written evidence, why isn't he showing it to us?
I'm not saying he doesn't, but if he has it, why all the drama?
I personally think he heard something but not much at all. I don’t think he made it up. Heck maybe the whistleblower doesn’t want to be identified and Tucker doesn’t even know who it is. Lots of possibilities here but investigations and getting the NSA or the FBI or the DOJ or whoever to comment just because would be really really bad. They could spend their entire lives just responding to those requests and then the100 questions that come after per request.
I know it’s TuCa and he’s a fave here but it were Maddow well then there would be hell to pay.
I would be interested in such an allegation from any prominent MSM talking head. Is there any precedent you have in mind that was tribally ignored by the right?
I would too except that there literally is no evidence. Why can’t we ask TuCa for some help here?
Part of me wants the NSA to respond but the bigger part of me wants to understand first why TuCa and Fox are holding back.
I’m tired of drama and conspiracies. If you got something get it out and enough already (!) with the innuendo. It’s like we taught people to be too clever, too rhetorical and too insinuating and forgot about basic facts, reasoning and civility.
-
Nobody could ever accuse me of being a cynic, but I don't suppose this whole thing is hurting his viewing figures.
-
Y'all, this ain't rocket surgery.
- The tip is most likely verbal.
- Carlson does not want to burn his source.
I have no doubt at all that Carson's emails were pulled. They were, after all, to a foreign head of state. The question is really A) Was he unmasked? This seems likely, given a plethora of past cases. B) Was this intelligence to be weaponized and leaked?
About the only thing I'm actually curious about is B.
-
Y'all, this ain't rocket surgery.
- The tip is most likely verbal.
- Carlson does not want to burn his source.
I have no doubt at all that Carson's emails were pulled. They were, after all, to a foreign head of state. The question is really A) Was he unmasked? This seems likely, given a plethora of past cases. B) Was this intelligence to be weaponized and leaked?
About the only thing I'm actually curious about is B.
Y'all, this ain't rocket surgery.
- The tip is most likely verbal.
- Carlson does not want to burn his source.
I have no doubt at all that Carson's emails were pulled. They were, after all, to a foreign head of state. The question is really A) Was he unmasked? This seems likely, given a plethora of past cases. B) Was this intelligence to be weaponized and leaked?
About the only thing I'm actually curious about is B.
I'm having fun with all this of course but I generally agree with the above.
-
Tucker is furious with his employer, FOX, for not backing him up on the “spying” thing.
I suppose the two parties are not aligned. Maybe FOX is fair and balanced after all.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/11/media/tucker-carlson-fox-news/index.html
-
Tucker is furious with his employer, FOX, for not backing him up on the “spying” thing.
I suppose the two parties are not aligned. Maybe FOX is fair and balanced after all.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/11/media/tucker-carlson-fox-news/index.html
Tucker is furious with his employer, FOX, for not backing him up on the “spying” thing.
I suppose the two parties are not aligned. Maybe FOX is fair and balanced after all.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/11/media/tucker-carlson-fox-news/index.html
This is right in the story:
In a text to a CNN reporter Sunday night, Carlson called the allegation that he is angry with Fox executives “absurd.”
“I’m not mad at anyone at Fox,” he said. “If I was, I’d say so. I’m mad at you for lying relentlessly. What a loathsome person you are. Please print that.”
And yet you state the claim as if it were fact. A bit of gossip from an unnamed source about an alleged drama at Fox, that likely couldn't even be proven one way or the other.
-
Tucker is furious with his employer, FOX, for not backing him up on the “spying” thing.
I suppose the two parties are not aligned. Maybe FOX is fair and balanced after all.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/11/media/tucker-carlson-fox-news/index.html
This is right in the story:
In a text to a CNN reporter Sunday night, Carlson called the allegation that he is angry with Fox executives “absurd.”
“I’m not mad at anyone at Fox,” he said. “If I was, I’d say so. I’m mad at you for lying relentlessly. What a loathsome person you are. Please print that.”
And yet you state the claim as if it were fact. A bit of gossip from an unnamed source about an alleged drama at Fox, that likely couldn't even be proven one way or the other.
Tucker is furious with his employer, FOX, for not backing him up on the “spying” thing.
I suppose the two parties are not aligned. Maybe FOX is fair and balanced after all.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/11/media/tucker-carlson-fox-news/index.html
This is right in the story:
In a text to a CNN reporter Sunday night, Carlson called the allegation that he is angry with Fox executives “absurd.”
“I’m not mad at anyone at Fox,” he said. “If I was, I’d say so. I’m mad at you for lying relentlessly. What a loathsome person you are. Please print that.”
And yet you state the claim as if it were fact. A bit of gossip from an unnamed source about an alleged drama at Fox, that likely couldn't even be proven one way or the other.
And yet Fox stays on the sidelines. It’s a canary in the coal mine but one is free to not hear it.
The one thing I find fascinating about events these days is that people are so willing to overlook the obvious, almost as if it is a false flag and find some alternative hypothetical darker intent. But heck we do live in the age of conspiracies. Not sure any smart person saw that coming as a reaction to science, at least not since the Enlightenment.
-
Tucker is furious with his employer, FOX, for not backing him up on the “spying” thing.
I suppose the two parties are not aligned. Maybe FOX is fair and balanced after all.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/11/media/tucker-carlson-fox-news/index.html
This is right in the story:
In a text to a CNN reporter Sunday night, Carlson called the allegation that he is angry with Fox executives “absurd.”
“I’m not mad at anyone at Fox,” he said. “If I was, I’d say so. I’m mad at you for lying relentlessly. What a loathsome person you are. Please print that.”
And yet you state the claim as if it were fact. A bit of gossip from an unnamed source about an alleged drama at Fox, that likely couldn't even be proven one way or the other.
And yet Fox stays on the sidelines. It’s a canary in the coal mine but one is free to not hear it.
The one thing I find fascinating about events these days is that people are so willing to overlook the obvious, almost as if it is a false flag and find some alternative hypothetical darker intent. But heck we do live in the age of conspiracies. Not sure any smart person saw that coming as a reaction to science, at least not since the Enlightenment.
Tucker is furious with his employer, FOX, for not backing him up on the “spying” thing.
I suppose the two parties are not aligned. Maybe FOX is fair and balanced after all.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/11/media/tucker-carlson-fox-news/index.html
This is right in the story:
In a text to a CNN reporter Sunday night, Carlson called the allegation that he is angry with Fox executives “absurd.”
“I’m not mad at anyone at Fox,” he said. “If I was, I’d say so. I’m mad at you for lying relentlessly. What a loathsome person you are. Please print that.”
And yet you state the claim as if it were fact. A bit of gossip from an unnamed source about an alleged drama at Fox, that likely couldn't even be proven one way or the other.
And yet Fox stays on the sidelines. It’s a canary in the coal mine but one is free to not hear it.
The one thing I find fascinating about events these days is that people are so willing to overlook the obvious, almost as if it is a false flag and find some alternative hypothetical darker intent. But heck we do live in the age of conspiracies. Not sure any smart person saw that coming as a reaction to science, at least not since the Enlightenment.
Horace stomped your rumor. Please have the grace to admit defeat and move on to your next point.
-
Loki considers himself to have established beyond any shadow of a doubt his own objectivity in all things political. Thus when he becomes righteously indignant over politically charged issues, it is the indignance of objectivity - and he does not countenance the existence of any reasonable opposition to that. That is, of course, how all righteousness works. That's what that emotion does to the human mind.
-
Loki considers himself to have established beyond any shadow of a doubt his own objectivity in all things political. Thus when he becomes righteously indignant over politically charged issues, it is the indignance of objectivity - and he does not countenance the existence of any reasonable opposition to that. That is, of course, how all righteousness works. That's what that emotion does to the human mind.
Loki considers himself to have established beyond any shadow of a doubt his own objectivity in all things political. Thus when he becomes righteously indignant over politically charged issues, it is the indignancy of objectivity - and he does not countenance the existence of any reasonable opposition to that. That is, of course, how all righteousness works. That's what that emotion does to the human mind.
I’ve provided very reasonable approaches to understanding the nature of TuCa’s allegations. Unfortunately TuCa only makes allegations with no evidence at all and even his employer won’t back him up. How I am on thin ice is really quite fascinating. TuCa and many here demand a response from the NSA, but quizzingly make no such demand of the employer.
I would submit demanding the NSA respond when his employer won’t more aptly fits righteousness.
Somehow this unknown whistleblower who no one has ever talked to and emails that have never been shared are more important than sources that CNN is standing behind. I suspect more to come from this…TuCa, next move is yours.
-
I think it's very possible that either the NSA or Tucker Carlson are completely full of shit regarding this story.
You guys are very quick to believe the media when it suits you. I know, I know, Tucker isn't part of the dreadful media that make shit up all the time. He's a Truth Teller.
I don't trust the government or Tucker.
-
I think it's very possible that either the NSA or Tucker Carlson are completely full of shit regarding this story.
You guys are very quick to believe the media when it suits you. I know, I know, Tucker isn't part of the dreadful media that make shit up all the time. He's a Truth Teller.
I don't trust the government or Tucker.
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I think it's very possible that either the NSA or Tucker Carlson are completely full of shit regarding this story.
You guys are very quick to believe the media when it suits you. I know, I know, Tucker isn't part of the dreadful media that make shit up all the time. He's a Truth Teller.
I don't trust the government or Tucker.
Which is fine. But Tucker is talking about something that has happened multiple times over the past few years, to multiple people, generally of the same political bent.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I think it's very possible that either the NSA or Tucker Carlson are completely full of shit regarding this story.
You guys are very quick to believe the media when it suits you. I know, I know, Tucker isn't part of the dreadful media that make shit up all the time. He's a Truth Teller.
I don't trust the government or Tucker.
Which is fine. But Tucker is talking about something that has happened multiple times over the past few years, to multiple people, generally of the same political bent.
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I think it's very possible that either the NSA or Tucker Carlson are completely full of shit regarding this story.
You guys are very quick to believe the media when it suits you. I know, I know, Tucker isn't part of the dreadful media that make shit up all the time. He's a Truth Teller.
I don't trust the government or Tucker.
Which is fine. But Tucker is talking about something that has happened multiple times over the past few years, to multiple people, generally of the same political bent.
I agree 100% with what you said. Now if only his employer would back him up or some evidence is shared I’m on board for the ride.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Spying?:
I think it's very possible that either the NSA or Tucker Carlson are completely full of shit regarding this story.
You guys are very quick to believe the media when it suits you. I know, I know, Tucker isn't part of the dreadful media that make shit up all the time. He's a Truth Teller.
I don't trust the government or Tucker.
Which is fine. But Tucker is talking about something that has happened multiple times over the past few years, to multiple people, generally of the same political bent.
I agree 100% with what you said. Now if only his employer would back him up or some evidence is shared I’m on board for the ride.
Now if only his employer would back him
You're obviously convinced that Fox's silence on the matter lends credence to one being skeptical of TuCa's comments.
I'm not sure that's a valid criticism.
If you say something, and your boss is silent on the issue, does that make your statement false? Because that's what you're implying, but not really saying.
-
Now if only his employer would back him
You're obviously convinced that Fox's silence on the matter lends credence to one being skeptical of TuCa's comments.
I'm not sure that's a valid criticism.
If you say something, and your boss is silent on the issue, does that make your statement false? Because that's what you're implying, but not really saying.
Now if only his employer would back him
You're obviously convinced that Fox's silence on the matter lends credence to one being skeptical of TuCa's comments.
I'm not sure that's a valid criticism.
If you say something, and your boss is silent on the issue, does that make your statement false? Because that's what you're implying, but not really saying.
I just think TuCa is reaching and FOX hasn’t seen enough to run with a story.
