So About This Russian Bounty Thing
-
@jon-nyc said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
That’s one possibility. The other is his (non) reaction worried the intelligence community enough that they started leaking it.
That's utter bull shit and I refuse to believe you're not smart enough to know it.
-
@Loki said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
It’s been out there for over a year. Put up the real evidence. I’ll be right there with you. Enough with innuendo.
Do you think both NYT and AP are making this up out of whole cloth, and Bolton is lying through his teeth agreeing with them?
That was a question for Loki, not Larry.
-
-
@jon-nyc said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
@Loki said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
It’s been out there for over a year. Put up the real evidence. I’ll be right there with you. Enough with innuendo.
Do you think both NYT and AP are making this up out of whole cloth, and Bolton is lying through his teeth agreeing with them?
That was a question for Loki, not Larry.
No. I think intelligence gathering is art and not science and there is no clear evidence Often. We’ve already seen the quality of uranium yellow cake evidence in Iraq and Soleimani posing an imminent threat both topics the NYT has covered at length.
Now suddenly the NYT found the smoking gun just like so many failed stories over the last four years that no one follows up on because of the next week’s innuendo. Let’s see it NYT or just admit it is one of many scenarios. Just show us your goods.
-
@Loki Intelligence gathering is anything but an art. Diagnosing what you've got and who to give it to is the art.
How you can make such a wide-sweeping statement as in your last paragraph above is amazing. No one follows up on? No one? How is it you know stories are not followed up on? Much less for a reason like "next week's innuendo"? What goods are you looking for, precisely?
-
@Catseye3 said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
@Loki Intelligence gathering is anything but an art. Diagnosing what you've got and who to give it to is the art.
How you can make such a wide-sweeping statement as in your last paragraph above is amazing. No one follows up on? No one? How is it you know stories are not followed up on? Much less for a reason like "next week's innuendo"? What goods are you looking for, precisely?
Actualoy, he's talking about a very familiar pattern...
-
@Catseye3 said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
@Loki Intelligence gathering is anything but an art. Diagnosing what you've got and who to give it to is the art.
How you can make such a wide-sweeping statement as in your last paragraph above is amazing. No one follows up on? No one? How is it you know stories are not followed up on? Much less for a reason like "next week's innuendo"? What goods are you looking for, precisely?
Verifiable and credible information. The Pentagon and NSA have both said they haven’t seen it. As far all the things that the media has said over the last four years that wasn’t true, I don’t know where to start. But how about mentally unfit, fascist and Russian agent for starters? 15 million immigrants to be deported, golden showers, Mueller investigation....
-
Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka
-
@Mik said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
I think that is entirely possible, given the track record.
Given the track record, it is more probable that the NYT and the AP report the truth, Bolton tells the truth, that Trump didn’t pay attention as to not remember or is lying.
-
@Axtremus said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
@Mik said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
I think that is entirely possible, given the track record.
Given the track record, it is more probable that the NYT and the AP report the truth, Bolton tells the truth, that Trump didn’t pay attention as to not remember or is lying.
You can place your trust in the NYT if you wish. It's a fact that they have run with multiple stories in the last few years, that would not have stood scrutiny by a first year journalism student. It is also a fact that the paper is no longer as much concerned with unbiased reporting, as biased reporting. The paper not only reports what it feels is the news, but may go so far as to manufacture news. And it is also a fact that the staff of the paper has now determined its editorial page need not strive for any opinions that do not fit the staff's desired narrative.
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@Jolly said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
@Axtremus said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
@Mik said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
I think that is entirely possible, given the track record.
Given the track record, it is more probable that the NYT and the AP report the truth, Bolton tells the truth, that Trump didn’t pay attention as to not remember or is lying.
You can place your trust in the NYT if you wish. It's a fact that they have run with multiple stories in the last few years, that would not have stood scrutiny by a first year journalism student. It is also a fact that the paper is no longer as much concerned with unbiased reporting, as biased reporting. The paper not only reports what it feels is the news, but may go so far as to manufacture news. And it is also a fact that the staff of the paper has now determined its editorial page need not strive for any opinions that do not fit the staff's desired narrative.
Wherever feasible and where I have the interest, I try to look up the original sources and gather news on the same event from multiple publications, so placing trust in any one publication is just your red herring, not an issue at all.
If something ever comes down to either trusting the NYT or trusting whatever comes out of Trump’s mouth/twit/press secretary/communications director/spokesperson, the NYT is certainly the more trustworthy party, given the track record.
-
@Axtremus said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
@Mik said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
I think that is entirely possible, given the track record.
Given the track record, it is more probable that the NYT and the AP report the truth, Bolton tells the truth, that Trump didn’t pay attention as to not remember or is lying.
This another perfect example of how the Left tells a lie, then lies about the lie, and then uses the second lie as proof the first lie is true - and then the gullible fools on the Left swallow it whole.
You and Jon have both claimed this was reported by both the NYT and the AP. That's a lie. The AP did NOT report this story. It reported on what Biden said ABOUT the story reported by the NYT. The NYT claims they got this information from an "anonymous source"... which is where all their "news stories" come from, and every single one of their "news stories" that have come from "anonymous sources" have turned out to be untrue.
The Russians have stated it's not true. The Taliban has stated it's not true. The Pentagon has said it's not true. Yet you leftwing morons ignore all that. You ignore the fact that no proof can be found whatsoever to back up the story, and like the gullible fools you are, buy into a lie that only the NYT and it's "anonymous sources" tell.
Sadly, you fools are allowed to vote...
-
If something ever comes down to either trusting the NYT or trusting whatever comes out of Trump’s mouth/twit/press secretary/communications director/spokesperson, the NYT is certainly the more trustworthy party, given the track record.
The NYT is known for their lies reported as news coming through "anonymous sources". The only people who still believe the NYT is a trustworthy source these days are total morons.
-
-
@Larry said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
You and Jon have both claimed this was reported by both the NYT and the AP. That's a lie. The AP did NOT report this story. It reported on what Biden said ABOUT the story reported by the NYT.
https://apnews.com/425e43fa0ffdd6e126c5171653ec47d1
The Russians have stated it's not true.
Oh, well why didn’t you tell me? They would definitely know if they paid bounties for dead US soldiers. So if they say it didn’t happen, it didn’t happen.
Never mind then.
-
@Loki said in So About This Russian Bounty Thing:
I’m telling you Bolton’s book is a dud and he is trying to pump life into it with this story. The NYT hate Bolton more than life itself but are willing stooges in this story line.
Didn't Bolton say that he advised POTUS about the bounty, and then say he didn't know anything about it?
