Donald Trump engaged in 'perverted sexual acts' monitored by Russia intelligence, report says

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Only it's all fake based on a hoax originating on 4chan to troll the media.

a reply to: Greggers

Keep up buddy. 4chan users have cached material pre-dating when this showed up with the Media and naming the source it went to. On top of that, Jake Tapper's report is unraveling before our eyes and he had to come on a show to do a retraction (he avoided the golden showers portion).

It's obvious this entire document was a hoax.

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: WhyDidIJoin
a reply to: xuenchen

Oh man, hook line and sinker!!!! This is a 4Chan HOAX

This has been discussed in this thread already. It does not appear to be a 4Chan hoax, at least not conclusively, and certainly not in its entirety.

The primary allegations come from a former intelligence operator and do NOT involve hookers or sex or peeing.

But that is the confusing part.

If the original report did not include those things, then how did it end up getting added to it? The intelligence agencies apparently met with Trump and Obama about these allegations.

So are you suggesting the we the people should take the media and intelligence agencies word on Russia, despite the fact that when they do release some of their evidence it is proven to be false. But we should trust them without any evidence on all of their other claims.

It makes no sense. If part of this document is proven to be false, I am not going to believe the rest of it.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Only it's all fake based on a hoax originating on 4chan to troll the media.

No, it's not.

This has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread already.

Not trying to be argumentative, merely setting the record straight.

www.mediaite.com...

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: WhyDidIJoin
a reply to: xuenchen

Oh man, hook line and sinker!!!! This is a 4Chan HOAX

This has been discussed in this thread already. It does not appear to be a 4Chan hoax, at least not conclusively, and certainly not in its entirety.

The primary allegations come from a former intelligence operator and do NOT involve hookers or sex or peeing.

But that is the confusing part.

If the original report did not include those things, then how did it end up getting added to it? The intelligence agencies apparently met with Trump and Obama about these allegations.

So are you suggesting the we the people should take the media and intelligence agencies word on Russia, despite the fact that when they do release some of their evidence it is proven to be false. But we should trust them without any evidence on all of their other claims.

It makes no sense. If part of this document is proven to be false, I am not going to believe the rest of it.

First, none of it has been proven to be false.

Just like none of it has been proven to be true.

Furthermore, neither the CIA nor CNN or any other media outlet that I'm aware of has claimed the allegations to be true.

The story is that the CIA thought it was worthy of sharing with the President and President Elect.

Anyone who has followed the UFO forums around here knows our intelligence agencies have a habit of collecting every relevant piece of intelligence and filing it away for safe keeping, whether it's true or not. Evidently they thought this was worth sharing in the Presidential briefing, perhaps because of the potential for blackmail.

a reply to: Greggers

Look how mediate spells "sources". No ethics, no editors...good god journalism is dead.

The intelligence community also knows his cources and considers them”credible”

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Greggers

Look how mediate spells "sources". No ethics, no editors...good god journalism is dead.

The intelligence community also knows his cources and considers them”credible”

That sort of stuff pops up in print newspapers these days, and it's part of internet articles as a matter of course. It's certainly true that editing is dead.

a reply to: Greggers

Sorry, you are wrong and so is everyone else grasping at this straw. 4chan has the cached threads which I posted previously. Their threads are identical to what we see in the report and are from SEVERAL MONTHS AGO.

We also know Jake Tapper is now recanting his report.

It's so obvious this was a media troll job.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Greggers

Sorry, you are wrong and so is everyone else grasping at this straw. 4chan has the cached threads which I posted previously. Their threads are identical to what we see in the report and are from SEVERAL MONTHS AGO.

We also know Jake Tapper is now recanting his report.

It's so obvious this was a media troll job.

Can you provide me a link to your posting of these cached 4chan threads?

My question is , how does one present a document to the president of the united states with spelling errors in it? My boss gives me # for poorly worded emails for christ sake

originally posted by: Greggers
First, none of it has been proven to be false.

Just like none of it has been proven to be true.

You just engaged in the biggest logical fallacy and you know it. It is false until proven true, that's how it works. These are wild claims and wild claims require proof. Since there is no proof, and since the claims appear to have a source with the retarded right wing base of 4 chan, then this whole document should have been considered a hoax. It appears every other major news organization turned this document down.

Edit: And let's not forget, or you keep avoiding it, Jake Tapper has already retracted his story, which wasn't even about the golden showers. It was another part of the document, and it turns out that was also completely false.

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: WhyDidIJoin
a reply to: xuenchen

Oh man, hook line and sinker!!!! This is a 4Chan HOAX

This has been discussed in this thread already. It does not appear to be a 4Chan hoax, at least not conclusively, and certainly not in its entirety.

The primary allegations come from a former intelligence operator and do NOT involve hookers or sex or peeing.

But that is the confusing part.

If the original report did not include those things, then how did it end up getting added to it? The intelligence agencies apparently met with Trump and Obama about these allegations.

So are you suggesting the we the people should take the media and intelligence agencies word on Russia, despite the fact that when they do release some of their evidence it is proven to be false. But we should trust them without any evidence on all of their other claims.

It makes no sense. If part of this document is proven to be false, I am not going to believe the rest of it.

First, none of it has been proven to be false.

Just like none of it has been proven to be true.

Furthermore, neither the CIA nor CNN or any other media outlet that I'm aware of has claimed the allegations to be true.

The story is that the CIA thought it was worthy of sharing with the President and President Elect.

Anyone who has followed the UFO forums around here knows our intelligence agencies have a habit of collecting every relevant piece of intelligence and filing it away for safe keeping, whether it's true or not. Evidently they thought this was worth sharing in the Presidential briefing, perhaps because of the potential for blackmail.

Well Cohen says he was never in Prague and his passport proves that, and most outlets are admitting that seems accurate.

So it seems that that part of the dossier is false.

So how can we trust the rest of the dossier?

a reply to: Greggers

Can you actually click my name and search my posts? Don't be lazy guy. (Honestly, I expect nothing less from you right now though...)

Source

Your link uses one image of the cache, but there are literally hundreds on this topic. That source only uses about 5 or 6 I think.

originally posted by: raymundoko

originally posted by: Greggers
First, none of it has been proven to be false.

Just like none of it has been proven to be true.

You just engaged in the biggest logical fallacy and you know it. It is false until proven true, that's how it works.

The previous poster specifically referenced part of the document having been proven FALSE.

I was pointing out that none of it had been proven false.

Because we were specifically discussing whether part of the document can definitively be traced back to the 4Chain hoax.

If it can be traced back (as you claim), then it would indeed have been proven to be false.

However, I was not then (and am not yet now --- although I'm asking for your links to verify it for myself) aware that the hoax has been proven.

Of COURSE the standard for proving someone's guilt still involves innocent until proven guilty.

a reply to: Grambler

For some reason I wager these stories will avoid the moniker "fake news".

a reply to: xuenchen
Mark Dice has more on this story. Rumor has it 4chan trolled buzzfeed and buzzfeed took the bait.

Donald Trump 'Golden Showers' with Hookers Hoax Debunked

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Greggers

Can you actually click my name and search my posts?

It's easier for you to reference a thread you're familiar with than for me to find it.

Don't be lazy guy. (Honestly, I expect nothing less from you right now though...)

Don't be an asshole. I've said repeatedly in this thread that I doubt the allegations are true. Why you have such a low opinion of my exchanges here clearly says more about your own bias. Don't hold me responsible for your own psychological problems.

Source

Your link uses one image of the cache, but there are literally hundreds on this topic. That source only uses about 5 or 6 I think.

Thank you. I will review.

a reply to: MysticPearl

The source is an ex Mi6 agent who handed this info over to John McCain. McCain then handed it over to the FBI months ago.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Grambler

For some reason I wager these stories will avoid the moniker "fake news".

Well, if the dossier was not summarized in a two page addendum shared with the President and indeed is just a direct troll job from 4Chan to CNN without the CIA being an intermediary, then it IS fake news and should be labeled as such.

However, if the report is a CIA report and was summarized and shared with the President, then technically what CNN is saying is true.

a reply to: Greggers

Let's be clear. My bias is anti trump. My bias is also anti ignorance. It's obvious how many people, especially those who are vocally anti trump here, latched onto this as true. It really hurts everyone's credibility.

I am sorry I was an a hole to you, you are correct it was unwarranted. I am just getting tired of having to deny ignorance and end up looking like a Trump supporter because ATS political posters have decided to just go full retard.