It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wikileaks Founder Puts fear on the Face of Anderson Cooper...Here Comes the Reveal

page: 2
61
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere


Watch the look on Cooper's face as Wikileaks founder breaks his heart.


hate to say it, i saw no change in coopers face at all, it stayed the same old ugly scowl he always has.
from the title of the thread, i was hoping for a jaw hanging open, then a stammering defense of her from cooper.
there was nothing even close.
very disappointed.

two thumbs down.

edit on 5-8-2016 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



Gin

posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Cooper needs to loosen up a bit and be more like the Queen.


edit on 5-8-2016 by Gin because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Gin

Those animated pixels are invoking a physical response from my gut and I fear I may regurgitate. I don't know if your a demon or a genius.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Gin

you know sometimes i wonder when she does all those faces if shes high.
you know sometimes old folks act weird when under the influence.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Gin

Why is that .GIF of Hillary so disturbing to me ?



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

Yes fairly well, thank you for that explanation


-Alee



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Gin

you know sometimes i wonder when she does all those faces if shes high.
you know sometimes old folks act weird when under the influence.


I got the impression that she may be doing that to clear doubt about if she actually had a seizure in the past, because maybe the one on the video a few weeks ago was one.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: efabian

originally posted by: NerdGoddess
The thing that bothers me and that I don't understand about this is, if you have such damning evidence, why wait? If I'm missing a good reason for holding off, please someone, explain it to me, because as I see it now, it appears that its all for self glory and attention.

IMO if someone has such evidence, keeping it until a certain time is not only dangerous its irresponsible. This kind of information should have been made public instantly.

Again, if there's a good reason that I'm just missing, I'd love for it to be explained to me.

Thanks..

-Alee


Obviously you don't understand the strategy behind halting the release until it is too late for the DNC to recover before the election.(or do you?) Think about it like a time sensitive blow... too soon and they will recover, do it at the precise moment and they are done.

Strategy 101.

I've seen most left leaning people in this site playing that "if he has the information he should release it NOW" card. With that said, it is clear that the left understands and is worried about information coming out when it is too late to replace the candidate or deflect. Given that the information is harmful enough, of course.



No i did not understand which is why i stated that in my original comment lol. I understand very little about why people do the things they do when it comes to politics. I asked the question hoping for an answer, and Ahabstar was quick to give me a simple explanation that makes sense to me.


So in hindsight... I believe you know very well the implications behind your supposed "question" and are pushing the narrative to see if pressure makes WikiLeaks release the information early enough to save the election for the DNC. Personally, I doubt they will blow this strategic advantage.



No, I didn't, but thank you for giving me more credit than I deserve. Snarky stuff like that is why i hardly bother to ask anything related to politics.

-Alee

edit on 8/5/2016 by NerdGoddess because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: whyamIhere

I hope something get's out soon. In my mind, I'd love to see a new article a day about some indictable incident she's done.



The rumor is she was running guns through Benghazi.

Apparently she was running guns to what turned out to be Isis.

This is only a rumor. So, there's that.



Which is just going to end up as another "oh gosh darned that crazy Hillary" moment. Even though she and POTUS have been slapping Trump on foreign policy and other things the press will come to poor girls recue, that intentions were good but guys were bad guys.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Same as Russia. We got this and we got that, put up or shut up.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: NerdGoddess

My apologies, the political climate is a little charged in this topic. I misinterpreted your intention I guess and neglected to verify your posting history due to morning laziness.

One has a few mixups now and then.


The reaction is mainly due to the strong propaganda in past threads from a few members here in ATS.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

It's interesting how Clinton enablers in the media see the exposing of her corruption as an attack on her, rather than someone being exposed for criminal wrongdoing and so forth. I would like to see CNN among others, burned to the ground because of this.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: efabian

I understand, it can get messy around here lol.

Thanks though for still explaining what the deal was with that.

-Alee



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 09:11 AM
link   
If you type in anonymous in the ATS search area, the first video in line is of Hillary claiming nothing in server but personal emails between bill and her, shouldn't she be called out for lying to public or some such?



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere


Anytime Anderson Pooper, Wolf Blister, or Van Jones are uncomfortable and frightened for Hillary is a refreshing change from their smug arrogance, and GOP hatred. After all, CNN = Clinton News Network.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: NerdGoddess
The thing that bothers me and that I don't understand about this is, if you have such damning evidence, why wait? If I'm missing a good reason for holding off, please someone, explain it to me, because as I see it now, it appears that its all for self glory and attention.


You may have enough answers by now, but the basic idea is that a "reveal" has a fixed window of opportunity to be effective. It can be represented by a curve that starts out small after the reveal happens, then gradually escalates as people move from, "Could this be true?" to a growing realization that it IS true, then a gradual petering off of the curve as the "news cycle" moves on. There's also the issue of a response. It usually takes any organization a little while to compose a believable "plausible deniability" meme that supporters can fall back upon.

I would guess there is scientific evidence about this sort of thing that would lead to a "best" time to reveal before the election--assuming the reason to reveal at all is to derail it. Some of these issues can take months or even years to come to a conclusion. For example, Watergate took a very long time from reveal to resignation. The Clinton impeachment also took months. In this case the revealers are working with a very short time frame, so the point of revelation has to be carefully controlled.

I don't know that they actually have anything. We've been disappointed before. Guess we just have to wait and see.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Gin

you know sometimes i wonder when she does all those faces if shes high.
you know sometimes old folks act weird when under the influence.



More and more "old" folks are turning to illegal substances like Mary Jane as a pain killer. I think some would be shocked to know that those hippies in the 60's and 70's are todays grandparents......

Anyone got a match?




posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

I cannot wait for the next leak. I wonder how much information people need to see the true criminality of what is going on. It is almost like there is too much corruption and criminal behavior that the brainwashed masses are immune to it and just fall back to the left right paradigm like a safety net.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I'm sure CNN and Anderson Cooper-Vanderbilt are fine putting someone on air who has real dirt on their chosen one. That makes total sense. And by the way, there was no grimace or reveal of anything other than a bunch of people trying to manipulate us all.



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: NerdGoddess
The thing that bothers me and that I don't understand about this is, if you have such damning evidence, why wait? If I'm missing a good reason for holding off, please someone, explain it to me, because as I see it now, it appears that its all for self glory and attention.

IMO if someone has such evidence, keeping it until a certain time is not only dangerous its irresponsible. This kind of information should have been made public instantly.

Again, if there's a good reason that I'm just missing, I'd love for it to be explained to me.

Thanks..

-Alee


I thought about that too! I think they are waiting until closer to November so what ever wikileak revelations are they are fresh and Hillary has little to no time to recover, lie, spin, etc. Just a thought.



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join