Wikileaks Drops Bombshell Cia Provided Podesta Emails To Wikileaks Not Russia! [video]

a reply to: Floridagoat

My point still stands. The CIA would not have authority to hack Podesta's emails, unless he were suspected of communicating with terrorists. The FBI would need a warrant to do it, and would scream bloody murder if CIA violated their turf. The bottom line is that it's Infowars: it's made up BS and doesn't belong in this forum.

I'm going to remind you guys one more time about the first rule of Intelligence.

1. There are no rules

2. But, but, but what if ???? ( see rule number one )

Regardless of who done what, the end justifies the means.



Buck

a reply to: flatbush71

Regardless of who done what, the end justifies the means.

Are you implying that Donald Trump is a CIA puppet?

near as i can tell trump is a goldman sachs puppet, he has surrounded the presidency with goldman personnel. vide gary cohn, wikipedia, president GS and parents originating eastern europe, perhaps the Khazar region. Now Lloyd Blankfeins family likely also originated in the Khazar region. So what is the relation between the CIA and the Khazar originating folks???????
and do not forget roy cohn of NYC was Trumps starter in real estate...

a reply to: DJW001

I never implied anything. I would expect, if anything, his administration will somewhat negate many of the more negative aspects of Charlie is Around. That in itself would not be such a terrible thing now ? Would it ?

Bill Casey had a big rep as a house cleaner, I wonder who will carry the dustpan and broom this time around ??

I've got my bags packed and I'm ready to head back to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem at a moments notice (which ever the case maybe).

I really miss the food.
These places are less than 10 minutes from my front door.



Buck

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Do you wonder what would have happened if Clinton would have won? I think the relationship with Russia would have gotten much worse.

WWIII, NYC, LA, Boston..., would be turned glass. Same for the Russian cities. It would be an ELE. We dodged a YUGE bullet, now we are faced with Trump, a loose cannon on deck.

She leaked them to draw attention to herself. Any attention that deflects away from her record, her campaign 'platform', her fake news and crony system of corruption. There is no such thing as 'bad press'. It didn't work, she still lost.

And all y'all still diving down her uhh 'server' to find the truth.

a reply to: soulwaxer

I still thank info wars for the bohemian grove. If anyone thinks that there is zero possibility of gate of pizza should watch the whole bohemian grove video. And it is the only video we have for the grove.

a reply to: HUMBLEONE

What exactly makes him a loose cannon?

I think a more fitting description is uncontrolled.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: seasonal

Unnamed sources. I see. Sounds totally legit.

Fox used anonymous sources for a year reporting on Clintons email server.


At least 95% of what they reported was correct... all from anonymous sources.

I guess you have forgotten ole deepthroat...


No anonymous sources? Then Nixon would probably have served two terms

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: seasonal

Unnamed sources. I see. Sounds totally legit.

You mean like the other unfounded claims of responsibility by the unnamed sources from 17 unidentified intelligence agencies?

a reply to: loam

Infowars. End of discussion.

a reply to: RickinVa

The difference is, Woodward and Bernstein had a pretty solid reputation for being serious journalists.

Alex Jones? Not so much. Remember when unnamed sources close to Hillary and Obama told Alex that they were both literally demons who smelled of sulfur?

www.patheos.com...

a reply to: kaylaluv
Remember when all the poles showed Hillary was a for sure winner, and she was as good as POTUS?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: RickinVa

The difference is, Woodward and Bernstein had a pretty solid reputation for being serious journalists.

Alex Jones? Not so much. Remember when unnamed sources close to Hillary and Obama told Alex that they were both literally demons who smelled of sulfur?

www.patheos.com...

So anonymous sources are okay if you trust the journalists? Moving the goal posts?

How do you determine which journalists are trustworthy? Are they trustworthy simply because they appear on CNN?

a reply to: seasonal

So that's supposed to prove that Alex Jones is correct on everything that he has ever claimed from unnamed sources?

a reply to: RickinVa

How do you determine which journalists are trustworthy?

If the stories they report are at least consistently plausible. Jones's are not.

a reply to: RickinVa

Well I would think they were a little more trustworthy if they didn't claim that Hillary was literally a demon because unnamed sources told them. I would think they were a little more trustworthy if they didn't claim that Sandy Hook was all fake, or that a tornado in Oklahoma was generated by the government, or that the government is putting stuff in juice boxes to make kids all gay for population control, among many, many other insane claims.

No, I don't think someone like that is very trustworthy.

Once again, the only source for the claim of the hacking not being done by Russia besides "unnamed" sources is Sputnik, a known Russian propaganda outlet and state owned News agency.

Really people, this isn't rocket science.