Exclusive: Russian Bank Docs Show How Putin Laundered Money to Hillary & Podesta

originally posted by: DJW001

I would love to. Please provide a link to a source other than Infowars.

Funny, I checked CNN and couldn't find it. I'm just following the links and checking for myself. That's what I personally try to do before commenting with one-liners. You don't?

Looks like there's something to it. Even, bigly, maybe.

Here's some from the New York Times if that helps:

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

The only thing more disgusting than the Clinton's, is the people that voted for them. I knew from the beginning they were total crooks, and was never foolish enough to vote for them.

This is yet another newly discovered, of the many countless crimes they have committed. Like a sick soap opera, but you can't turn the tv off.

Here's the deal...

Unless we can get another source - other than AJ's "Info Wars" - this thread is at risk of being tossed into the dreaded ATS Hoax Bin.

This wouldn't be the first time IW came up with some ridiculous B.S. and, while I'd not be surprised it has a chance of being true (NOTHING mega political people do surprises me), it's not from a credible source and it's way over the top based on what's understood at this moment in history.

So, that leaves us with it's click bait for ad revenue, utter B.S. (and click bait for ad revenue), or fantasy (and click bait for ad revenue).

Either way stinks unless, of course, it's proven to be a genuine "thing"...

a reply to: The GUT

Yes, I know about the uranium deal. Infowars seems to be trying to turn it into something else. I refuse to click on links to Infowars. If you were wise, you would do the same.

originally posted by: Springer
Here's the deal...

Unless we can get another source - other than AJ's "Info Wars" - this thread is at risk of being tossed into the dreaded ATS Hoax Bin.

This wouldn't be the first time IW came up with some ridiculous B.S. and, while I'd not be surprised it has a chance of being true (NOTHING mega political people do surprises me), it's not from a credible source and it's way over the top based on what's understood at this moment in history.

So, that leaves us with it's click bait for ad revenue, utter B.S. (and click bait for ad revenue), or fantasy (and click bait for ad revenue).

Either way stinks unless, of course, it's proven to be a genuine "thing"...

Well, Springer, the New York Times article seems to back at least some of it. Does that make it worth investigating further?

And what does, "it's way over the top based on what's understood at this moment in history," mean exactly?

a reply to: Springer

So Curt Weldon isn't credible?

The MSM and the rest of the hyper liberal media doesn't do click baity titles bent on profits?

It doesn't fall in line with what's known at this point in history?

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
There were several thread on this during the end of the election cycle:

John Podesta’s Payoff for Helping Hillary Give American Military Technology to Russia’s Putin

FBI, DOJ launch Probe into Firm of Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta

John Podesta Owned 75,000 Shares in Putin-Connected Energy Company

Podesta Joule BoD resignation doesn't fit with this email.....ties with Putin DIRECTLY

Hillary’s Campaign Mgr. Sat on Board that Bagged $35M from Putin-Connected Russian Govt Fund

Post by Vasa Croe in Wikileaks 11 thread

All of this is why I just had to give a hearty belly laugh anytime people wanted to try and tar Trump with 'ahh, evil Russians.'

originally posted by: Springer
Here's the deal...

Unless we can get another source - other than AJ's "Info Wars" - this thread is at risk of being tossed into the dreaded ATS Hoax Bin.

This wouldn't be the first time IW came up with some ridiculous B.S. and, while I'd not be surprised it has a chance of being true (NOTHING mega political people do surprises me), it's not from a credible source and it's way over the top based on what's understood at this moment in history.

So, that leaves us with it's click bait for ad revenue, utter B.S. (and click bait for ad revenue), or fantasy (and click bait for ad revenue).

Either way stinks unless, of course, it's proven to be a genuine "thing"...

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The MSM and the rest of the hyper liberal media doesn't do click baity titles bent on profits?

A good headline will draw readers. If the content is false or misleading, it is clickbait.

a reply to: DJW001

So we can hoax bin all those, "Trump is in bed with the Russians" headlines?

Hillary seems to have been in bed with a lot of Johns so-to-speak.

a reply to: Tempter

I'm a little busy Einstein... But I will now, thanks for the heads up. ;-)

originally posted by: The GUT
a reply to: DJW001

So we can hoax bin all those, "Trump is in bed with the Russians" headlines?

Hillary seems to have been in bed with a lot of Johns so-to-speak.

Nope. Fair is fair. Hillary helped the Russians during Obama's "reset." Now we need to keep an eye on Trump's "reset."

originally posted by: Springer


Either way stinks unless, of course, it's proven to be a genuine "thing"...

Funny I don't see you posting these concerns when its ridiculous claims against Trump. Strange that.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

No Weldon isn't another source in this one... He's parroting what AJ et-al are saying.

Look, I wish it were true, but if it can't stand up to scrutiny it just doesn't cut it.

Now, before everyone goes crazy, I'm not saying it doesn't stand up, I'm just saying we need more than AJ and a bunch of what amounts to re-tweets and re-purposing of a story.

We need real credible sources (ANYTHING OTHER than IW and AJ would work for me) who can show THIS is fact..

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Springer


Either way stinks unless, of course, it's proven to be a genuine "thing"...

Funny I don't see you posting these concerns when its ridiculous claims against Trump. Strange that.

Springer allows a great deal of latitude. Think of all the "fake news" stories about Hillary Clinton that were never moved to [HOAX!] where they belonged.

a reply to: DJW001

And the MSM and rest of the hyper liberal online press never does any of that now do they?

originally posted by: Springer
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

No Weldon isn't another source in this one... He's parroting what AJ et-al are saying.

Look, I wish it were true, but if it can't stand up to scrutiny it just doesn't cut it.

Now, before everyone goes crazy, I'm not saying it doesn't stand up, I'm just saying we need more than AJ and a bunch of what amounts to re-tweets and re-purposing of a story.

We need real credible sources (ANYTHING OTHER than IW and AJ would work for me) who can show THIS is fact..

You know what I have to say about this situation....

a reply to: DJW001

Think of all the "fake news" stories about Hillary Clinton that wee never moved to [HOAX!] where they belonged.

So why jump in on this one so quickly ? Why not clean house on the ones you say belong in the Hoax bin .